The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-21-2025 Agenda City Council Regular Meeting July 21, 2025 - 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers AGENDA CALL TO ORDER LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We would like to acknowledge the Federally Recognized Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the ancestral keepers of the land we are gathered on today. We thank them for their immense contributions to our state and local history, culture, economy, and identity as Washingtonians. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A. The Auburn City Council Meeting scheduled for Monday, July 21, 2025 at 7:00 p.m. will be held in person and virtually. Virtual Participation Link: To view the meeting virtually please click the below link, or call into the meeting at the phone number listed below. The link to the Virtual Meeting is: https://www.youtube.com/user/watchauburn/live/?nomobile=1 To listen to the meeting by phone or Zoom, please call the number below or click the link: Telephone: 253 205 0468 Toll Free: 888 475 4499 Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87046412216 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS, MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS, AND PRESENTATIONS A. Parks and Recreation Month Mayor Backus to proclaim July 2025, as "Parks and Recreation Month" in the City of Auburn APPOINTMENTS A. Auburn Tourism Board City Council to approve the appointments of Jeannie Alexander, Kenia Chavez, Jacob Plancich, and Taj Wallace to the Auburn Tourism Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the appointments of Jeannie Alexander, Page 1 of 374 Kenia Chavez, Jacob Plancich and Taj Wallace to the Auburn Tourism Board for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027.) B. Human Services Committee City Council to approve the appointment of Ashley Samuel to the Human Services Committee for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the appointment of Ashley Samuel to the Human Services Committee for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027.) C. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee City Council to approve the appointment of Ronald Oh to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the appointment of Ronald Oh to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027.) D. Planning Commission City Council to approve the appointment of Ajay Ganesan to the Planning Commission for a three-year term expiring December 31, 2027 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the appointment of Ajan Ganesan to the Planning Commission, for a three-year term to expire December 31, 2027.) AGENDA MODIFICATIONS AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION This is the place on the agenda where the public is invited to speak to the City Council on any issue. A. The public can participate in-person or submit written comments in advance. Participants can submit written comments via mail, fax, or email. All written comments must be received prior to 5:00 p.m. on the day of the scheduled meeting and must be 350 words or less. Please mail written comments to: City of Auburn Attn: Shawn Campbell, City Clerk 25 W Main St Auburn, WA 98001 Please fax written comments to: Attn: Shawn Campbell, City Clerk Fax number: 253-804-3116 Email written comments to: publiccomment@auburnwa.gov If an individual requires accommodation to allow for remote oral comment because of a difficulty attending a meeting of the governing body, the City requests notice of the need for accommodation by 5:00 p.m. on the day of the scheduled meeting. Participants can request accommodation to be able to provide a remote oral comment by contacting the City Clerk’s Office in person, by phone (253) 931-3039, or by email Page 2 of 374 (publiccomment@auburnwa.gov). CORRESPONDENCE COUNCIL AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Council Rules of Procedure Ad Hoc Committee (Baldwin) CONSENT AGENDA All matters listed on the Consent Agenda are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed. A. Minutes from the June 16, 2025, City Council Meeting B. Minutes from the June 23, 2025, Study Session Meeting C. Minutes from the July 14, 2025, Study Session Meeting D. Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated June 18, 2025 which includes voucher numbers 480087 through voucher 480258, in the amount of $7,872,388.17, eighteen electronic fund transfers in the amount of $10,502.03, and one wire transfer in the amount of $728,764.05 E. Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated June 30, 2025 which includes voucher numbers 480259 through voucher 480372, in the amount of $6,081,161.05, twelve electronic fund transfers in the amount of $3,486.91, and three wire transfers in the amount of $982,335.23 F. Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated July 16, 2025 which includes voucher numbers 480373 through voucher 480422, voucher numbers 480424 through voucher 480553, in the amount of $5,293,472.71, seventeen electronic fund transfers in the amount of $25,781.52, and three wire transfers in the amount of $1,143,516.88 G. Claims Voucher (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated July 16, 2025 which includes voucher number 480423 in the amount of $9,035.24 H. Payroll Voucher (Thomas) Payroll check numbers 539699 through 539702 in the amount of $695,017.17, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $2,836,250.89, also a special payroll for late submitted Parks timecards with an electronic deposit transmission in the amount of $15,756.92 for a grand total of $3,547,024.98 for the period covering June 12, 2025, to July 2, 2025 I. Payroll Voucher (Thomas) Payroll check numbers 539703 through 539710 in the amount of $202,668.96, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $3,056,406.67, also a special payroll for a found Parks timecard with an electronic deposit transmission in the amount of $858.32 for a grand total of $3,259,933.95 for the period covering July 3, 2025, to July 16, 2025 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the Consent Agenda.) Page 3 of 374 UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS ORDINANCES A. Ordinance No. 6980 (Gaub) An Ordinance adopting the City’s Amended 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6980.) B. Ordinance No. 6983 (Gaub) An Ordinance amending Sections within Chapter 10.42 of the Auburn City Code related to the use of automated traffic safety cameras to detect traffic violations (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6983.) RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 5840 (Gaub) A Resolution setting a Public Hearing to consider the vacation of City right-of-way located within a portion of the northwest corner of 1st Street NW and B Street NW within the City of Auburn, Washington (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5840.) B. Resolution No. 5844 (Gaub) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into an Agreement with KGCAL Sumner Meadows LLC Related to the Previous Boundary Adjustment with the City of Sumner (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5844.) C. Resolution No. 5846 (Hay) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the King County Regional Interlocal Agreement enabling the City to receive its share of the opioid settlement funds (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5846.) D. Resolution No. 5847 (Gaub) A Resolution adopting the City of Auburn Automated Traffic Safety Camera 2025 Program Expansion Study and Program Overview (Study) and affirming that speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras at the locations recommended in the Study is consistent with State law (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5847.) MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS At this time the Mayor and City Council may report on significant items associated with their appointed positions on federal, state, regional and local organizations. A. From the Council Page 4 of 374 B. From the Mayor ADJOURNMENT Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office and on the City website (http://www.auburnwa.gov). Page 5 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Minutes from the June 16, 2025, City Council Meeting July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: City Council 06-16-2025 Minutes Administrative Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Councilmember: Staff: Page 6 of 374 City Council Regular Meeting June 16, 2025 - 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Backus called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Mayor Backus acknowledged the Federally Recognized Muckleshoot Indian Tribe as the ancestral keepers of the land we are gathered on today. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The City Council Meeting was held in person and virtually. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Backus led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Deputy Mayor Cheryl Rakes, Lisa Stirgus, Clinton Taylor, and Tracy Taylor. Councilmember Hanan Amer attended the meeting virtually via Zoom. Councilmembers Kate Baldwin and Yolanda Trout-Manuel were excused. Mayor Nancy Backus and the following staff members present included: Senior City Staff Attorney Taryn Jones, Chief of Police Mark Caillier, Director of Community Development Jason Krum, Director of Public Works Ingrid Gaub, Director of Parks, Arts, and Recreation Julie Krueger, Director of Risk Management and Human Resources Candis Martinson, Assistant Director of Risk Management and Human Resources Aaron Barber, Director of Human Services Kent Hay, Equity, Engagement, & Outreach Coordinator Keisha Taylor, and Deputy City Clerk Hannah Scholl. Page 7 of 374 ANNOUNCEMENTS, MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS, AND PRESENTATIONS A. Juneteenth Mayor Backus proclaimed June 19, 2025, as "Juneteenth" in the City of Auburn. Coordinator Taylor accepted the proclamation. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS There were no modifications to the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public Hearing for 2026-2031 Transportation Improvement Program (Gaub) A Public Hearing to consider the 2026-2031 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Mayor Backus opened the Public Hearing at 7:05 p.m. Virginia Haugen, Auburn Virginia provided comments for the need for better roads. Mayor Backus closed the Public Hearing at 7:06 p.m. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Written Comments: The City Clerk's Office received written comments from James DeLay, Elder Robert S. "Roman" Montague, and Mark Celich - all of which were forwarded to Mayor and Council for review prior to the meeting. In-Person Comments: David Wright, Tacoma David provided comments regarding Resolution No. 5836. Virginia Haugen, Auburn Virginia provided comments regarding Parks in Auburn, the Postmark Center for the Arts, Resolution No. 5836, protests, and crime. Elder Roman Montague, Auburn Roman provided comments regarding an apartment complex in Auburn, the work they have done within the community of Auburn, and they thanked Mayor and Council for all their support. Page 8 of 374 CORRESPONDENCE There was no correspondence for Council to review. COUNCIL AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Council Rules of Procedure Ad Hoc Committee (Baldwin) Deputy Mayor Rakes, Chair of the Council Rules of Procedure Ad Hoc Committee, reported no new updates. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes from the June 2, 2025, City Council Meeting B. Minutes from the June 9, 2025, Study Session Meeting C. Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated June 4, 2025, which includes voucher numbers 479970 through voucher 480003, and voucher numbers 480005 through voucher 480086 in the amount of $846,391.52, ten electronic fund transfers in the amount of $15,451.37, and three wire transfers in the amount of $903,223.14 D. Claims Voucher (Thomas) Claims Voucher list dated June 4, 2025, which includes voucher number 480004, in the amount of $8,065.11 E. Payroll Voucher (Thomas) Payroll check numbers 539693 through 539698 in the amount of $83,227.15, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $2,924,149.79, for a grand total of $3,007,376.94 for the period covering May 29, 2025, to June 11, 2025 F. Project No. CP1612, Postmark Contract Contingency (Krueger) City Council to approve an increase of $77,000.00 in the total maximum authorized contract amount for Project No. CP1612, Postmark Lower Level Construction Deputy Mayor Rakes moved and Councilmember C. Taylor seconded to approve the consent agenda. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. Page 9 of 374 NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. ORDINANCES A. Ordinance No. 6977 (Krum) An Ordinance relating to the Zoning Code, amending Chapter 18.04, Sections 18.02.067, 18.07.020, 18.23.030, 18.25.020, 18.31.130, 18.31.160, 18.46A.070, 18.52.020, and creating new Section 18.31.165 of the Auburn City Code Councilmember T. Taylor moved and Councilmember Stirgus seconded to approve Ordinance No. 6977. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 RESOLUTIONS A. Resolution No. 5821 (Krum) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an Interlocal Agreement among the participating jurisdictions within the Green River, Duwamish River, and Central Puget Sound Watersheds within the Geographic Planning Area of Water Resources Inventory Area 9 Councilmember Stirgus moved and Councilmember Amer seconded to adopt Resolution No. 5821. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 B. Resolution No. 5833 (Whalen) A Resolution amending the City of Auburn Fee Schedule Councilmember C. Taylor moved and Councilmember T. Taylor seconded to adopt Resolution No. 5833. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 C. Resolution No. 5835 (Gaub) A Resolution approving and adopting the 2026-2031 Transportation Improvement Program of the City of Auburn Councilmember T. Taylor moved and Deputy Mayor Rakes seconded to adopt Resolution No. 5835. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 Page 10 of 374 D. Resolution No. 5836 (Hay) A Resolution authorizing the Authorized Officer to file a Section 108 Loan Guarantee Application to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development to finance the Auburn Resource Center Project Councilmember Amer moved and Councilmember C. Taylor seconded to adopt Resolution No. 5836. Council expressed gratitude to Director Hay and staff for their hard work. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 E. Resolution No. 5837 (Krueger) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of Auburn and the State of Washington Department of Commerce to accept and expend a direct appropriation for development of a new Park in Downtown Auburn Councilmember C. Taylor moved and Councilmember Amer seconded to adopt Resolution No. 5837. Council expressed their gratitude to staff and their excitement for the development of Downtown Auburn. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 F. Resolution No. 5838 (Gaub) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute and administer an agreement accepting a grant from the Federal Highway Administration relating to Project No. CP2505, Lake Tapps Parkway Street Lighting Councilmember T. Taylor moved and Councilmember Amer seconded to adopt Resolution No. 5838. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 G. Resolution No. 5841 (Krueger) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of Auburn and the Cascade Bicycle Club to accept and expend grant funds for the operation of City Bicycle Programs Councilmember C. Taylor moved and Deputy Mayor Rakes seconded to adopt Resolution No. 5841. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 Page 11 of 374 H. Resolution No. 5842 (Krueger) A Resolution creating a Limited-Term Position of Recreation Assistant - Bicycle Programs to assist in the operation of City Bicycle Programs Councilmember C. Taylor moved and Councilmember T. Taylor seconded to adopt Resolution No. 5842. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 CLOSED SESSION Mayor Backus adjourned into a Closed Session at 7:31 p.m. for 20 minutes per RCW 42.30.140(4)(b) to discuss a Collective Bargaining Agreement. Mayor Backus, Councilmembers, Senior City Staff Attorney Jones, Director Martinson, Assistant Director Barber, and Chief Caillier were required to attend. Mayor Backus extended the Closed Session by 10 minutes at 7:51 p.m. Mayor Backus extended the Closed Session by 10 minutes at 8:01 p.m. Mayor Backus reconvened the meeting at 8:13 p.m. A. Resolution No. 5843 (Martinson) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City of Auburn and the Auburn Police Guild for 2025- 2027 Deputy Mayor Rakes moved and Councilmember T. Taylor seconded to adopt Resolution No. 5843. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0 MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS A. From the Council No reports. B. From the Mayor No report. Page 12 of 374 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:17 p.m. APPROVED this 21st day of July 2025. ____________________________ _______________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR Hannah Scholl, Deputy City Clerk Page 13 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Minutes from the June 23, 2025, Study Session Meeting July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: City Council 06-23-2025 Minutes Administrative Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Councilmember: Staff: Page 14 of 374 City Council Study Session Community Wellness SFA June 23, 2025 - 5:30 PM City Hall Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Councilmember Yolanda Trout-Manuel called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The Study Session Meeting was held in person and virtually. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Hanan Amer, Kate Baldwin, Lisa Stirgus, Clinton Taylor, Tracy Taylor, and Yolanda Trout-Manuel. Deputy Mayor Cheryl Rakes was excused. Mayor Nancy Backus attended the meeting virtually via Zoom. The following staff members present included: Senior City Staff Attorney Taryn Jones, Police Commander Brandon Skeen, Assistant Director of Community Development Steven Sturza, Director of Public Works Ingrid Gaub, Assistant Director of Public Works Jacob Sweeting, and Deputy City Clerk Hannah Scholl. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS There were no modifications made to the agenda. ANNOUNCEMENTS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS There were no announcements, reports, or presentations. COMMUNITY WELLNESS DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Presentation by Catherine Hartwell from Public Health - Seattle & King County (Community Health) (15 minutes) Climate and Health Adaptation Mapping Project for Community Determined Solutions (CHAMP-CDS) Page 15 of 374 Catherine Hartwell and Bradley Kramer with Seattle & King County Public Health provided Council with a presentation on the Climate and Health Adaptation Modeling Project (CHAMP) including vulnerable groups, methods, group workshops, themes, and prioritized solutions. They also discussed strategic plans, findings, future opportunities, and next steps. Council discussed vulnerable groups, animals, neighboring jurisdictions, cool kits, heat exposure signs and risks, translation services, social media notifications, wet-bulb temperatures, air quality, mandatory central air conditioning, grant funding, and community gardens. AGENDA ITEMS FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION A. 2024 School Speed Zone Camera Report and Ordinance No. 6983 - ACC 10.42 Automated Traffic Enforcement Code Update (Gaub) (20 Minutes) Director Gaub and Assistant Director Sweeting provided Council with an overview of the 2024 Photo Enforcement Summary including objectives, history, camera locations, camera performance, statistics, revenue tracking, and House Bill 2384. They also provided Council with an overview of Ordinance No. 6983 including Code updates, and next steps. Council discussed school zone speeds, camera beacons, red light cameras, non-school zone areas, camera locations, and traffic studies. Councilmember Trout-Manuel recessed the meeting at 6:45 p.m. for five minutes. She reconvened the meeting at 6:50 p.m. B. Proposed Changes to City Council Rules of Procedure (Council) The Council Rules of Procedure Ad Hoc Committee consists of Councilmember Baldwin as Chair, Deputy Mayor Rakes, and Councilmember C. Taylor. Chair Baldwin provided Council with the proposed changes by the Ad Hoc Committee. A Point of Order was raised by Councilmember Amer regarding Councilmember Trout-Manuel directing her remarks towards her and not the Chair. Councilmember Baldwin stated the Point of Order stands and remarks should be addressed to the Chair. A Point of Order was raised by Councilmember T. Taylor saying that the Council had already clarified the topic and the need to move forward. Councilmember Baldwin stated the Point of Order does not stand, that a Point of Order is to be used when there is a violation of the Council Rules of Procedure. Page 16 of 374 A Point of Order was raised by Councilmember Stirgus regarding the relevance of Councilmember Baldwin's feedback directed towards Councilmember Amer. Councilmember Baldwin clarified that she was answering Councilmember Amer's questions. A Point of Order was raised by Councilmember Trout-Manuel regarding the remarks Councilmember Amer stated. Councilmember Baldwin stated the Point of Order does not stand. She clarified that a Point of Order is to be used when Councilmembers have not adhered to the Council Rules of Procedure, not when a Councilmember disagrees with another Councilmember. Councilmember Baldwin called for a 5-minute recess at 8:07 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Council discussed the proposed edits. The Council Rules of Procedure will come back to a future Study Session meeting for additional discussion. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 8:58 p.m. APPROVED this 21st day of July 2025. _____________________________ _____________________________ CHERYL RAKES, DEPUTY MAYOR Hannah Scholl, Deputy City Clerk Page 17 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Minutes from the July 14, 2025, Study Session Meeting July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: City Council 07-14-2025 Minutes Administrative Recommendation: Background for Motion: Background Summary: Councilmember: Staff: Page 18 of 374 City Council Study Session Finance & Internal Services SFA July 14, 2025 - 5:30 PM City Hall Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Councilmember Kate Baldwin called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The Study Session Meeting was held in person and virtually. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present: Hanan Amer, Kate Baldwin, Lisa Stirgus, Clinton Taylor, Tracy Taylor, and Yolanda Trout-Manuel. Deputy Mayor Cheryl Rakes was excused. Mayor Nancy Backus and the following staff members present included: Assistant Chief of Police Samuel Betz, Director of Public Works Ingrid Gaub, Assistant Director of Public Works Jacob Sweeting, Director of Parks, Arts, and Recreation Julie Krueger, Director of Finance Jamie Thomas, Utilities Engineering Manager Ryan Vondrak, Water Utility Engineer Senait Gebreeysus, and City Clerk Shawn Campbell. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS There were no modifications made to the agenda. ANNOUNCEMENTS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS A. King County Solid Waste Division Long-Term Disposal Presentation (Thomas) (30 Minutes) John Walsh, with King County Solid Waste provided Council with a presentation on the Long-Term Disposal Study including the service areas, operation sites, and the purpose of the Long-Term Disposal Study, items that are beyond the scope of the study, the five options studied, Study Criteria, the three options that are not viable were Refuse-Derived Fuel, Gasification, and Pyrolysis, the two options that were viable are Mass Burn with (Water Exported by Rail) WEBR and WEBR only, and reviewed the next steps in the process. Page 19 of 374 Council discussed community impact on communities along the railroad, the final location if sent by rail, the location of the incinerator in Spokane, other locations they reviewed, importing waste, job elimination and creation, and population growth. FINANCE AND INTERNAL SERVICES DISCUSSION ITEMS A. 1st Quarter 2025 Financial Report (Thomas) (20 minutes) Financial Report through March 31, 2025 Director Thomas provided Council with an overview of the 1st Quarter 2025 Financial Report including the General Fund Revenue and Expenditure Overview, Tax Revenue, Licenses and Permits, Intergovernmental Revenue, charges for services, fines and penalties, interest and investment earnings, expenditures by department, ARPA Fund Update, and Capital Funds including Real Estate Excise Tax revenue. Council discussed Business and Occupation (B&O) Tax Projections for the full year, Collective Bargaining Agreement costs, Manufacturing Tax revenue, and Licenses and Permits types. AGENDA ITEMS FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION A. General Speed Enforcement Locations with Automated Traffic Safety Cameras (Gaub) (30 Minutes) Director Gaub and Assistant Sweeting provided Council with an overview of the Automated Traffic Safety Cameras, including the purpose of the safety cameras, Safety Vision and Goal, crash data, SAFE Systems Approach, School Speed Zone Camera Performance, automated traffic safety camera for general speed enforcement requirements, analysis and location identification process, equity analysis of the top 4 locations, traffic diversions, alternatives to photo enforcement analysis, and the recommended locations and next steps for implementation. Council discussed the process for selection of locations, appreciation of the site selections, ability to change locations or expand the program, and communication with the public. Page 20 of 374 B. Ordinance No. 6980 (Gaub) (15 Minutes) An Ordinance adopting the City’s Amended 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan Councilmember Baldwin adjourned the meeting at 7:14 p.m. for 5 minutes. She reconvened the meeting at 7:19 p.m. Manager Vondrak and Engineer Gebreeyesus provided Council with an overview of the Amended 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan including required edits, edits to the notes for the Braunwood Water Rights, and the City of Algona's request for additional water storage. They also reviewed the analysis used to evaluate the City of Algona's request, the costs of a future Reservoir, and the City of Algona's participation costs. Council discussed the likelihood of the City of Algona participating in the building of a future Reservoir, and the benefit of changing the language for Braunwood Water. C. Discuss Council Support for Auburn School District Bond Levy (Council) The Auburn School District Proposition 1 and Proposition 2 fact sheets were provided to Council. Council discussed the differences between the Proposition before the voters in 2024 which failed, requesting a representative from the Auburn School District to attend a future meeting to present the materials to Council, and previous Capital Projects by the Auburn School District. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 7:42 p.m. APPROVED this 21st day of July 2025. _____________________________ _____________________________ CHERYL RAKES, DEPUTY MAYOR Shawn Campbell, City Clerk Page 21 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated June 18, 2025 which includes voucher numbers 480087 through voucher 480258, in the amount of $7,872,388.17, eighteen electronic fund transfers in the amount of $10,502.03, and one wire transfer in the amount of $728,764.05 July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Finance None Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Claim Vouchers. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Claims voucher list dated June 18, 2025 which includes voucher numbers 480087 through voucher 480258, in the amount of $7,872,388.17, eighteen electronic fund transfers in the amount of $10,502.03 and one wire transfer in the amount of $728,764.05. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Jamie Thomas Page 22 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated June 30, 2025 which includes voucher numbers 480259 through voucher 480372, in the amount of $6,081,161.05, twelve electronic fund transfers in the amount of $3,486.91, and three wire transfers in the amount of $982,335.23 July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Finance None Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Claim Vouchers. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Claims voucher list dated June 30, 2025 which includes voucher numbers 480259 through voucher 480372, in the amount of $6,081,161.05, twelve electronic fund transfers in the amount of $3,486.91 and three wire transfers in the amount of $982,335.23. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Jamie Thomas Page 23 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Claims Vouchers (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated July 16, 2025 which includes voucher numbers 480373 through voucher 480422, voucher numbers 480424 through voucher 480553, in the amount of $5,293,472.71, seventeen electronic fund transfers in the amount of $25,781.52, and three wire transfers in the amount of $1,143,516.88 July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Finance None Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Claim Vouchers. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Claims voucher list dated June 16, 2025 which includes voucher numbers 480373 through voucher 480422, voucher numbers 480424 through voucher 480553, in the amount of $5,293,472.71, seventeen electronic fund transfers in the amount of $25,781.52 and three wire transfers in the amount of $1,143,516.88. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Jamie Thomas Page 24 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Claims Voucher (Thomas) Claims voucher list dated July 16, 2025 which includes voucher number 480423 in the amount of $9,035.24 July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Finance None Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Claim Vouchers. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Claims voucher list dated July 16, 2025 which includes voucher number 480423 in the amount of $9,035.24. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Jamie Thomas Page 25 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Payroll Voucher (Thomas) Payroll check numbers 539699 through 539702 in the amount of $695,017.17, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $2,836,250.89, also a special payroll for late submitted Parks timecards with an electronic deposit transmission in the amount of $15,756.92 for a grand total of $3,547,024.98 for the period covering June 12, 2025, to July 2, 2025 July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Finance None Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Payroll Vouchers. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Payroll check numbers 539699 through 539702 in the amount of $695,017.17, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $2,836,250.89, also a special payroll for late submitted Parks timecards with an electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $15,756.92 for a grand total of $3,547,024.98 for the period covering June 12, 2025 to July 2, 2025. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Jamie Thomas Page 26 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Payroll Voucher (Thomas) Payroll check numbers 539703 through 539710 in the amount of $202,668.96, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $3,056,406.67, also a special payroll for a found Parks timecard with an electronic deposit transmission in the amount of $858.32 for a grand total of $3,259,933.95 for the period covering July 3, 2025, to July 16, 2025 (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve the Consent Agenda.) July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Finance None Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Payroll Vouchers. Background for Motion: Background Summary: Payroll check numbers 539703 through 539710 in the amount of $202,668.96, electronic deposit transmissions in the amount of $3,056,406.67, also a special payroll for a found Parks timecard with an electronic deposit transmission in the amount of $858.32 for a grand total of $3,259,933.95 for the period covering July 3, 2025 to July 16, 2025. Councilmember: Kate Baldwin Staff: Jamie Thomas Page 27 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Ordinance No. 6980 (Gaub) An Ordinance adopting the City’s Amended 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6980.) July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Public Works Ordinance 6980, Exhibit A, Link to Appendices (A-W) Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Ordinance No. 6980. Background for Motion: The 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan (CWP) that was adopted by City Council by way of the City Comprehensive Plan, through Ordinance 6960 on December 16, 2024, requires revisions to referenced tables describing the water right held by the City for the Braunwood satellite water system, as well as updates to the City’s water reservoir storage analysis, following a request from the City of Algona to purchase additional storage to meet their water system planning needs. Ordinance 6980 adopts the amended 2024 CWP prior to it being submitted to the Washington State Department of Health for final approval. Background Summary: On December 16, 2024, City Council adopted the draft 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan (CWP) by way of the City Comprehensive Plan update through approval of Ordinance 6960. The update to the CWP is a state-mandated requirement by the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) to ensure compliance with water system regulations and planning standards. The next phase in the process for the CWP is for it to be submitted to the regulatory agencies, including the DOH, King County, and Pierce County, for final approval. Following adoption of Ordinance 6960, and during preparation of the response letter to be submitted to the regulatory agencies to initiate final approval, it was determined that edits were needed to specific referenced tables in the CWP describing the water right held by the City for the Braunwood satellite water system, clarifying the City’s position on the topic following a CWP review comment that was received from the Department of Ecology. In addition, the City of Algona requested to purchase additional reservoir storage to meet their water system needs. The City of Algona currently owns 280,000 gallons of storage within Auburn’s system. Page 28 of 374 The new request would bring the total to 450,000 gallons. Modifications have been made to provide the capacity to provide this additional storage requested by Algona should Algona choose to enter into a future Interlocal Agreement for the purchase of that storage capacity. Councilmember: Tracy Taylor Staff: Ingrid Gaub Page 29 of 374 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6980 April 23, 2025 Page 1 of 3 Rev. 04/24 ORDINANCE NO. 6980 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE CITY’S AMENDED 2024 COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Auburn operates a municipal water utility and provides drinking water to its water utility customers; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 70A.100.050, the City of Auburn is required to develop a Comprehensive Plan for its municipal water utility operations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 246-290-100(2), the City must prepare and submit the Comprehensive Water Plan (CWP) for review and approval by the Washington State Department of Health, which has regulatory authority over drinking water systems; and WHEREAS, the City’s 2024 CWP is one of the functional plans incorporated by reference in the Auburn Comprehensive Plan adopted through Ordinance 6960 on December 16, 2024; and WHEREAS, certain modifications were required to be made to the 2024 CWP to referenced tables describing the City’s water right for the City’s Braunwood satellite water system and updates to the City’s water reservoir storage analysis following a request from the City of Algona to purchase additional storage from Auburn to meet their water system planning needs; WHEREAS, the modifications to the 2024 CWP require the City Council to approve the amended Plan; and WHEREAS, the 2024 CWP still requires final approval from the Washington State Department of Health; and Page 30 of 374 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6980 April 23, 2025 Page 2 of 3 Rev. 04/24 WHEREAS, following approval from the Washington State Department of Health, the amended 2024 CWP will be included by reference and incorporated into the amended City Comprehensive Plan that is scheduled to be approved by Council in December 2025. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as follows: Section 1. Adoption of Amended Comprehensive Water Plan. The City of Auburn Amended 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan is adopted and approved as set forth in Exhibit ‘A’ attached and incorporated by reference pending approval from the Washington State Department of Health. City staff is authorized to provide modifications to the approved amended 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan based on comments received from the Washington State Department of Health. Any modifications made to the Amended 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan to address Washington State Department of Health comments, shall remain in substantial conformity with the adopted and approved 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan as set forth in Exhibit ‘A’. Section 2. Implementation. The Mayor is authorized to implement those administrative procedures necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation. Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this Ordinance, or the invalidity of the application of it to any person or circumstance, will not affect the validity of the remainder of this Ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Page 31 of 374 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6980 April 23, 2025 Page 3 of 3 Rev. 04/24 Section 4. Effective date. This Ordinance will take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law. INTRODUCED: _______________ PASSED: ____________________ APPROVED: _________________ ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Published: _____________________________________________________________ Page 32 of 374 Water System Plan May 2025 CITY OF AUBURN, WA Page 33 of 374 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Page 34 of 374 2024 Water System Plan City of Auburn, Washington May 2025 PREPARED BY: Consor Point of Contact: Adam Schuyler 600 University Street, Suite #300 Seattle, WA 98101 P: 206-462-7042 E: Adam.Schuyler@consoreng.com PREPARED FOR: City of Auburn Point of Contact: Ryan Vondrak 25 W Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 P: 253-931-3086 E: Rvondrak@auburnwa.gov Page 35 of 374 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Page 36 of 374 City of Auburn, WA Water System Plan May 2025 PREPARED BY: Consor Point of Contact: Adam Schuyler 600 University Street, Suite #300 Seattle, WA 98101 P: 206-462-7042 E: Adam.Schuyler@consoreng.com PREPARED FOR: City of Auburn Point of Contact: Ryan Vondrak 25 W Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 P: 253-931-3086 E: Rvondrak@auburnwa.gov This Plan was prepared by Ciara Murphy and Kevin Trott under the direction of the following registered professional engineer: Adam Schuyler, PE Consor Seattle, WA 05-27-2025 Page 37 of 374 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Page 38 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page i Table of Contents Executive Summary Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... ES-1 ES.1 Description of Water System ..................................................................................................... ES-1 ES.2 Basic Planning Data .................................................................................................................... ES-5 Water Service Connections and Usage ........................................................................................ ES-5 Water Supply and Production ...................................................................................................... ES-5 Future Population and Demand Projections ................................................................................ ES-5 ES.3 System Analysis and Asset Management ................................................................................... ES-7 Asset Management ..................................................................................................................... ES-7 Water Quality .............................................................................................................................. ES-7 Design Standards ......................................................................................................................... ES-7 Capacity Analysis ......................................................................................................................... ES-8 ES.4 Water Use Efficiency Program ................................................................................................... ES-9 Source and Service Metering ....................................................................................................... ES-9 Distribution System Leakage ..................................................................................................... ES-10 Water Use Efficiency Program ................................................................................................... ES-10 Climate Change Resiliency ......................................................................................................... ES-11 ES.5 Source Water Protection .......................................................................................................... ES-11 ES.6 Operations and Maintenance Program .................................................................................... ES-12 ES.7 Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards ....................................................... ES-14 ES.8 Capital Improvement Program ................................................................................................. ES-14 ES.9 Financial Program ..................................................................................................................... ES-15 Chapter 1 Description of Water System 1.1 Objective ........................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Plan Content .................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 Ownership and Management ........................................................................................................ 1-1 1.4 System History and Background .................................................................................................... 1-4 1.4.1 Geography ............................................................................................................................ 1-4 1.4.2 Existing System Overview ..................................................................................................... 1-5 Page 39 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page ii 1.4.3 History .................................................................................................................................. 1-5 1.5 Related Plans and Studies ............................................................................................................ 1-13 1.6 Service Area, Maps, and Land Use ............................................................................................... 1-16 1.6.1 Wholesale Interties ............................................................................................................. 1-16 1.6.2 Emergency Interties ............................................................................................................ 1-21 1.7 System Policies ............................................................................................................................. 1-22 1.8 Duty of Service ............................................................................................................................. 1-23 1.9 Local Government Consistency .................................................................................................... 1-24 1.10 Watershed Plan Consistency ...................................................................................................... 1-24 Chapter 2 Basic Planning Data 2.1 Water Service Area Population ...................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Water Service Connection and Usage ............................................................................................ 2-2 2.2.1 Historical Accounts ............................................................................................................... 2-2 2.2.2 Historical Consumption......................................................................................................... 2-4 2.2.3 Water Use Per Connection and Equivalent Residential Units ................................................ 2-6 2.2.4 Largest Water Users ............................................................................................................. 2-7 2.3 Water Supply and Production ...................................................................................................... 2-10 2.3.1 Historical Water Supply ..................................................................................................... 2-10 2.3.2 Average Day Demands and Maximum Day Demands ....................................................... 2-11 2.3.3 Peak Hour Demand ............................................................................................................. 2-12 2.3.4 Seasonal Variations ............................................................................................................ 2-13 2.4 Distribution System Leakage ........................................................................................................ 2-13 2.5 Water Supply Characteristics ....................................................................................................... 2-14 2.6 Water Supply Reliability Evaluation ............................................................................................. 2-15 2.6.1 Use Impacts on Instream Flows .......................................................................................... 2-17 2.6.2 Whole Interties ................................................................................................................... 2-17 2.6.3 Emergency Interties ............................................................................................................ 2-18 2.6.4 Potential Interties ............................................................................................................... 2-18 2.7 Future Population Projections and Land Use ............................................................................... 2-18 2.7.1 Demographic Forecast ........................................................................................................ 2-18 2.7.2 Future Land Use and Zoning ............................................................................................... 2-19 2.7.3 Projected Demographic Growth ......................................................................................... 2-23 2.8 Future Water Demand ................................................................................................................. 2-29 Page 40 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page iii 2.8.1 Projected Number of Connections ...................................................................................... 2-29 2.8.2 Projected Water Demand ................................................................................................... 2-31 2.8.3 Large User Demand Forecast ............................................................................................. 2-32 2.8.4 Projected Retail ERUs ......................................................................................................... 2-32 2.8.5 Projected Retail Average Day and Maximum Day Demands .............................................. 2-34 2.8.6 Wholesale Demands ........................................................................................................... 2-37 2.8.7 Total Demands ................................................................................................................... 2-38 Chapter 3 System Analysis and Asset Management 3.1 Asset Management – Asset Inventory and Analysis ....................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Distribution Facilities ............................................................................................................ 3-6 3.1.2 Water Source Facilities ....................................................................................................... 3-14 3.1.3 Water Treatment Facilities ................................................................................................. 3-17 3.1.4 Storage Facilities ................................................................................................................ 3-20 3.1.5 Pump Station Facilities ....................................................................................................... 3-22 3.1.6 Facility Back-Up Power ....................................................................................................... 3-23 3.1.7 Facility Monitoring and Control .......................................................................................... 3-24 3.1.8 2022 Sanitary Survey Findings ............................................................................................ 3-24 3.2 Water Quality ............................................................................................................................... 3-25 3.2.1 Water Quality Treatment and Objectives ........................................................................... 3-26 3.2.2 Analysis of Source Water Quality ........................................................................................ 3-26 3.2.3 Analysis of Distribution System Water Quality ................................................................... 3-28 3.2.4 Recent Regulatory Changes ................................................................................................ 3-30 3.3 Design Standards ......................................................................................................................... 3-33 3.4 Capacity Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 3-35 3.4.1 Water Rights ....................................................................................................................... 3-35 3.4.2 Physical Capacity Analysis .................................................................................................. 3-37 3.4.3 New Source of Supply Analysis ........................................................................................... 3-59 3.5 Summary of System Deficiencies ................................................................................................. 3-59 Chapter 4 Water Use Efficiency Program 4.1 Source and Service Metering ......................................................................................................... 4-2 4.1.1 Source Meters ....................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.1.2 Service Meters ...................................................................................................................... 4-3 Page 41 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page iv 4.2 Distribution System Leakage .......................................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.1 Water Audits......................................................................................................................... 4-5 4.3 Water Use Efficiency Program ....................................................................................................... 4-5 4.3.1 Program Requirements ......................................................................................................... 4-6 4.3.2 Mandatory Measures ........................................................................................................... 4-7 4.3.3 Program Goals ...................................................................................................................... 4-7 4.3.4 2024-2034 Demand-Side Program Measures ....................................................................... 4-8 4.3.5 Reclaimed Water ................................................................................................................ 4-10 4.3.6 WUE Budget ....................................................................................................................... 4-10 4.4 Water Use Efficiency Savings ....................................................................................................... 4-11 4.5 Climate Change Resiliency ........................................................................................................... 4-11 4.5.1 Expected Climate Changes for the City of Auburn .............................................................. 4-12 4.5.2 Extreme Weather Events and Significant Challenges.......................................................... 4-12 4.5.3 Assessment of Actions to Protect System ........................................................................... 4-13 Chapter 5 Source Water Protection 5.1 Sanitary Control Area ..................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Wellhead Protection Program ....................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2.1 Susceptibility Assessment ..................................................................................................... 5-2 5.2.2 Wellhead Protection Area Delineation .................................................................................. 5-2 5.2.3 Contaminant Source Inventory and Notification of Findings ................................................ 5-4 5.2.4 Contingency Plan .................................................................................................................. 5-4 Chapter 6 Operations and Maintenance Program 6.1 Water System Management and Personnel .................................................................................. 6-1 6.1.1 Mission Statement ................................................................................................................ 6-1 6.1.2 Department Overview .......................................................................................................... 6-1 6.1.3 Internal and External Factors ............................................................................................... 6-1 6.1.4 Water Utility Division Organization ...................................................................................... 6-2 6.1.5 Communication System ........................................................................................................ 6-4 6.1.6 Operator Certification Program ............................................................................................ 6-5 6.1.7 Education and Training Program .......................................................................................... 6-6 6.2 Operations and Preventive Maintenance ...................................................................................... 6-6 6.2.1 Inspections, Preventive Maintenance, Repairs, and Replacement ........................................ 6-7 Page 42 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page v 6.2.2 Reservoir Maintenance ......................................................................................................... 6-9 6.2.3 Pump Station Maintenance .................................................................................................. 6-9 6.2.4 Treatment Facility Maintenance ......................................................................................... 6-10 6.2.5 Pressure Reducing Valve Stations ....................................................................................... 6-10 6.2.6 Utility Locating Service ....................................................................................................... 6-10 6.2.7 Fire Hydrant Inspection....................................................................................................... 6-10 6.2.8 Dead-end Flushing .............................................................................................................. 6-10 6.2.9 Valve Exercising .................................................................................................................. 6-11 6.2.10 Unidirectional Flushing ..................................................................................................... 6-11 6.2.11 System Loss Program ........................................................................................................ 6-12 6.2.12 Distribution System Corrosion Inspection ......................................................................... 6-13 6.3 Comprehensive Water Quality Monitoring .................................................................................. 6-14 6.4 Emergency Preparedness and Response ..................................................................................... 6-15 6.4.1 Vulnerability Assessment .................................................................................................... 6-16 6.4.2 Wellhead Protection Program ............................................................................................ 6-16 6.4.3 Water Shortage Contingency Plan ...................................................................................... 6-16 6.5 Safety Procedures ........................................................................................................................ 6-16 6.6 Cross Connection Control Program .............................................................................................. 6-18 6.7 Sanitary Survey Findings .............................................................................................................. 6-18 6.8 Customer Complaint Response Program ..................................................................................... 6-19 6.8.1 Customer Request Response Program ................................................................................ 6-20 6.9 Recordkeeping and Reporting ...................................................................................................... 6-20 6.9.1 Cross Connection Control Program ..................................................................................... 6-21 6.9.2 Water Meter Consumption ................................................................................................. 6-21 6.9.3 Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) ............................................................. 6-21 6.9.4 Water Meter Reading ......................................................................................................... 6-21 6.10 Summary of O&M Deficiencies and Recommended Improvements.......................................... 6-22 6.10.1 Water Facilities Evaluation Study ..................................................................................... 6-22 6.10.2 Recommended Improvements .......................................................................................... 6-22 Chapter 7 Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards 7.1 Project Review Procedures ............................................................................................................ 7-1 7.2 Policies and Requirements for Outside Parties .............................................................................. 7-2 Page 43 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page vi 7.3 Design and Construction Standards ............................................................................................... 7-2 7.4 Construction Certification .............................................................................................................. 7-4 Chapter 8 Capital Improvements Program 8.1 Prioritization .................................................................................................................................. 8-1 8.1.1 Project Identification ............................................................................................................ 8-1 8.1.2 Prioritization Factors ............................................................................................................ 8-2 8.1.3 Estimated Costs .................................................................................................................... 8-2 8.2 Capital Improvement Program Summary and Schedule ................................................................ 8-4 8.2.1 Completed Projects ............................................................................................................... 8-4 8.2.2 Active Projects ...................................................................................................................... 8-5 8.2.3 Capital Improvement Projects .............................................................................................. 8-8 8.3 CIP Summary and Schedule ......................................................................................................... 8-18 Chapter 9 Financial Program 9.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 9-1 9.2 Past Financial Performance ............................................................................................................ 9-1 9.2.1 Comparative Financial Statements ....................................................................................... 9-1 9.3 Financial Plan ................................................................................................................................. 9-4 9.3.1 Capital Funding Plan ............................................................................................................. 9-5 9.4 Available Funding Assistance and Financing Resources ................................................................. 9-6 9.4.1 City Resources ....................................................................................................................... 9-6 9.4.2 Outside Resources ................................................................................................................ 9-8 9.4.3 Capital Financing Strategy .................................................................................................... 9-9 9.5 Financial Forecast .......................................................................................................................... 9-9 9.5.1 Current Financial Structure ................................................................................................. 9-10 9.6 Current and Projected Rates ........................................................................................................ 9-14 9.6.1 Current Rates ...................................................................................................................... 9-14 9.6.2 Projected Rates ................................................................................................................... 9-15 9.6.3 Conservation Based Rates .................................................................................................. 9-15 9.7 Affordability ................................................................................................................................. 9-15 9.8 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 9-16 List of Figures ES-1 RWSA Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................... ES-2 Page 44 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page vii ES-2 Existing Facilities ...................................................................................................................... ES-3 ES-3 Hydraulic Profile ....................................................................................................................... ES-4 ES-4 Wellhead Protection Area Map .............................................................................................. ES-13 1-1 RWSA Vicinity Map ..................................................................................................................... 1-2 1-2 Water Utility – Organizational Chart .......................................................................................... 1-3 1-3 Existing Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 1-6 1-4 Adjacent Water Systems .......................................................................................................... 1-18 1-5 Existing Land Use ..................................................................................................................... 1-19 1-6 Urban Growth Area .................................................................................................................. 1-20 2-1 Comparison of Number of Connections to Annual Water Consumption per Customer Classification in 2022 ................................................................................................................. 2-5 2-2 Historical Annual Consumption of the Top 20 Largest Water Users in Million Gallons (MG) .... 2-9 2-3 Historical Water Production with Peaking Factor .................................................................... 2-12 2-4 Temperature Effects on Water Usage in 2022 ......................................................................... 2-13 2-5 Comprehensive Future Land Use and Zoning Map .................................................................. 2-22 2-6 Single Family Population Projections by Service Area .............................................................. 2-25 2-7 Multi-Family Population Projections by Service Area .............................................................. 2-26 2-8 Employment Projections by Service Area ................................................................................ 2-27 2-9 Map of Projected Areas with Greatest Population Growth ..................................................... 2-28 2-10 Projected Retail Plus Firm Wholesale ADD and MDD............................................................... 2-40 3-1 Map of Water System Assets and Pressure Zones ..................................................................... 3-2 3-2 Hydraulic Profile ......................................................................................................................... 3-3 3-3 Hydraulic Profile - Detail A ......................................................................................................... 3-4 3-4 Hydraulic Profile - Detail B ......................................................................................................... 3-5 3-5 Water Main Leak and Break Repair Locations from 2014-2024 ............................................... 3-12 3-6 Low Pressure, Odor, and Discolored Water Complaints from 2014-2024 ............................... 3-13 3-7 Illustration of Reservoir Storage Components ......................................................................... 3-44 3-8 2024 PHD Scenario – Pressure and Velocity ............................................................................ 3-50 3-9 2034 PHD Scenario – Pressure and Velocity ............................................................................ 3-51 3-10 2044 PHD Scenario – Pressure and Velocity ............................................................................ 3-52 3-11 MDD+FF Deficiency Locations for 2024, 2034 and 2044 Scenarios ......................................... 3-54 3-12 Capital Improvement Projects Addressing Fire Flow Deficiencies ........................................... 3-55 5-1 Wellhead Protection Area Map .................................................................................................. 5-3 Page 45 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page viii 6-1 Auburn Water Utility Organizational Chart ................................................................................ 6-3 List of Tables ES-1 ADD, MDD, and ERUs Summarized by Service Area with Wholesale Included ........................ ES-6 ES-2 Summary of Pump Station Capacity Results............................................................................. ES-8 ES-3 Summary Storage Capacity Analysis ......................................................................................... ES-9 ES-4 Source Susceptibility Assessment Ratings .............................................................................. ES-11 ES-5 Water System Capital Improvement Program Budget 2024-2044 ......................................... ES-14 1-1 Water System Ownership Management .................................................................................... 1-3 1-2 Water Facilities History .............................................................................................................. 1-7 1-3 Emergency Interties ................................................................................................................. 1-21 2-1 Historical Population .................................................................................................................. 2-2 2-2 Historical Number of Connections per Customer Classification ................................................ 2-3 2-3 Historical Consumption in Million Gallons (MG) by Customer Classification ............................. 2-4 2-4 Historical Annual Demand per ERU (gpd per ERU) ..................................................................... 2-6 2-5 Historical Demand as Equivalent ERUs per Customer Classification .......................................... 2-7 2-6 Historical Annual Consumption of the Top 20 Largest Water Users in Million Gallons (MG) .... 2-8 2-7 Historical Annual Water Supply by Source in Million Gallons (MG) ......................................... 2-10 2-8 2022 Monthly Water Production by Source (MG) ................................................................... 2-10 2-9 Historical Annual ADD, MDD, Peak Day, and Peaking Factor ................................................... 2-11 2-10 Historical Peak Hour Demand .................................................................................................. 2-12 2-11 Historical Distribution System Leakage .................................................................................... 2-14 2-12 Summary of Source Water Pumping or Production Capacity Compared to 2022 Maximum Daily Production ............................................................................................................................... 2-16 2-13 Updated Zoning Districts and Fire Flow Requirements ............................................................ 2-20 2-14 Growth Rates by Customer Class and Service Area.................................................................. 2-23 2-15 Population and Employment Projections Calculated by Service Area ...................................... 2-24 2-16 Connection Projections by Customer Classification and Service Area ..................................... 2-29 2-17 Proposed Planning Values for Demand Projections ................................................................. 2-32 2-18 Large User Demand Projections ............................................................................................... 2-32 2-19 ERU Projections by Customer Class and Service Area .............................................................. 2-33 2-20 ADD Projections ....................................................................................................................... 2-34 2-21 MDD Projections ...................................................................................................................... 2-35 2-22 Wholesale Demand Projections ............................................................................................... 2-38 Page 46 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page ix 2-23 ADD, MDD, and ERUs Summarized by Service Area with Wholesale Included ........................ 2-39 3-1 Transmission and Distribution System Piping Inventory by Pipe Diameter ................................ 3-6 3-2 Transmission and Distribution System Piping Inventory by Material and Installation Decade .. 3-7 3-3 Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) Inventory .................................................................................. 3-8 3-4 Summary Customer Complaints .............................................................................................. 3-14 3-5 Source of Supply Well Pump Inventory .................................................................................... 3-14 3-6 Water Treatment Facility Inventory ......................................................................................... 3-18 3-7 Inventory of Storage Reservoirs ............................................................................................... 3-21 3-8 Pump Station and Booster Pump Station Inventory ................................................................. 3-23 3-9 Back Up Power Inventory ......................................................................................................... 3-23 3-10 Summary of 2022 Sanitary Survey Findings ............................................................................. 3-24 3-11 Summary of Operator Certifications ........................................................................................ 3-26 3-12 EPA Primary Drinking Water Standards Results from 2015 through 2022 ............................... 3-27 3-13 Total Chlorine Residuals Results from 2015 through 2022 ...................................................... 3-29 3-14 Summary of Disinfection By-Product Rule Monitoring Results from 2015 through 2022 ........ 3-29 3-15 Summary of Lead and Copper Sampling Results from 2015 through 2022 .............................. 3-30 3-16 PFAS State Action Levels and Monitoring Data ........................................................................ 3-32 3-17 System Capacity Analysis Criteria ............................................................................................. 3-33 3-18 Summary of Existing Water Rights ........................................................................................... 3-35 3-19 Supply Analysis with Largest Source Out of Service ................................................................. 3-36 3-20 Buildings in Auburn with High Fire Flow Requirements ........................................................... 3-37 3-21 Pumps Station Capacity for Valley Service Area Open Pressure Zones .................................... 3-38 3-22 Pump Station Capacity for Lea Hill Service Area Open Pressure Zones .................................... 3-39 3-23 Pump Station Capacity for Lakeland Service Area Open Pressure Zones ................................. 3-39 3-24 Pump Station Capacity for Academy Service Area Open Pressure Zones ................................ 3-40 3-25 BPS Capacity for Lakeland Service Area Closed Pressure Zones ............................................... 3-41 3-26 BPS Capacity for Academy Service Area Closed Pressure Zone................................................ 3-41 3-27 BPS Capacity for Lea Hill Service Area Closed Pressure Zone ................................................... 3-42 3-28 BPS Capacity for Game Farm Park Closed Pressure Zone ........................................................ 3-43 3-29 System-Wide Storage Analysis for the 2024 Scenario .............................................................. 3-45 3-30 System-Wide Storage Analysis for the 2034 Scenario .............................................................. 3-45 3-31 System-Wide Storage Analysis for the 2044 Scenario .............................................................. 3-46 3-32 Final C-Factors for Piping Materials ......................................................................................... 3-48 Page 47 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page x 3-33 Prioritized Pipeline Improvements to Address Fire Flow Deficiencies ..................................... 3-56 3-34 System Capacity Analysis in ERU Basis ..................................................................................... 3-58 3-35 Summary of System Deficiencies ............................................................................................. 3-59 4-1 WUE Rule Requirements ............................................................................................................ 4-1 4-2 Source Meter Details ................................................................................................................. 4-3 4-3 Annual Average Day Demand (gpd) per Capita .......................................................................... 4-7 4-4 Annual WUE Budget ................................................................................................................. 4-10 4-5 Demand Forecast With and Without Projected WUE Savings ................................................. 4-11 4-6 Predicted Increase in Demand from Baseline Due to Climate Change .................................... 4-12 5-1 Source Susceptibility Assessment Ratings Issued by DOH .......................................................... 5-2 5-2 State and Local Agencies Notified of CSI Findings ...................................................................... 5-4 6-1 Water Operations and Distribution Staff and Certifications ...................................................... 6-5 6-2 Water Operations - Facility Inspection Schedule ....................................................................... 6-8 6-3 Safety Policies and Procedures ................................................................................................ 6-17 6-4 Recommended Inspections ...................................................................................................... 6-22 6-5 O&M Improvement Projects .................................................................................................... 6-23 7-1 Water Main Design and Construction Standards ....................................................................... 7-3 8-1 Water Pipeline Construction Costs per Linear Foot ................................................................... 8-4 8-2 Reservoir Tank Construction Costs per Gallon ........................................................................... 8-4 8-3 Prioritized Water Supply Improvement Projects ...................................................................... 8-12 8-4 Storage Improvements Projects ............................................................................................... 8-14 8-5 Pump Station Improvement Projects ....................................................................................... 8-15 8-6 Water Repair & Replacements Cost Estimate .......................................................................... 8-16 8-7 Distribution System Improvements Projects ............................................................................ 8-17 8-8 General Water System Projects ............................................................................................... 8-18 8-9 Total CIP Cost by Project Category from 2024 through 2044 .................................................. 8-18 8-10 Capital Improvements Program Costs and Phasing ................................................................. 8-19 9-1 Summary of Historical Fund Resources and Uses Arising From Cash Transactions.................... 9-2 9-2 Summary of Historical Comparative Statements of Net Position ............................................... 9-3 9-3 10-Year and 20-Year CIPs ........................................................................................................... 9-5 9-4 10-Year CIP (Escalated $) ........................................................................................................... 9-6 9-5 10-Year and 20-Year Capital Financing Strategy ........................................................................ 9-9 9-6 10-Year Financial Forecast ....................................................................................................... 9-13 Page 48 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page xi 9-7 Ending Cash Balance Summary ................................................................................................ 9-14 9-8 Existing Schedule of Rates ........................................................................................................ 9-14 9-9 Proposed Schedule of Rates ..................................................................................................... 9-15 9-10 Community Affordability Test .................................................................................................. 9-16 Appendices Appendix A Water System Policies and Criteria Appendix B SEPA Checklist Appendix C Local Government Consistency Determination Forms Appendix D Public Meeting Documentation Appendix E Ordinances and Approvals Appendix F DOH (b)(3) Exemption Letter Appendix G Water Service Area, Interlocal & Wholesale Water Agreements Appendix H Water Facilities Inventory Form Appendix I Water Rights Self-Assessment Form Appendix J Water Rights Certifications Appendix K Hydraulic Model Calibration Documentation Appendix L Reclaimed Water Checklist Appendix M Water Use Efficiency Appendix N Consumer Confidence Reports Appendix O Water Quality Monitoring Plan Appendix P Design and Construction Standards Appendix Q Cross Connection Control Program Appendix R Water Shortage Contingency Plan Appendix S Conceptual Mitigation Plan for Water Right Application G1-28404 Appendix T Wellhead Protection Plan Appendix U Natural Hazard Vulnerability Summary Appendix V Worksheet 4-1 ERU Capacity Summary Appendix W CIP Cost Information Page 49 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Table of Contents Page xii THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 50 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Acronyms & Abbreviations Page xiii Acronyms & Abbreviations A AACE American Association of Cost Estimators AC Asbestos-Cement ACC Auburn City Code ac-ft/year Acre-Foot Per Year ADD Average Day Demand ADU Accessory Dwelling Unit AFY Acre Feet Per Year Algona City of Algona AMC Auburn Municipal Code AMI Advanced Metering Infrastructure APWA American Public Works Association ASR Aquifer Storage and Recovery AWC Association of Washington Cities AWWA American Water Works Association B BCA Bilaterial Compliance Agreement Bonney Lake City of Bonney Lake BPS Booster Pump Station C Cascade Cascade Water Alliance ccf Centum Cubic Feet CCI Construction Cost Index CCPP Calcium Carbonate Precipitation Potential CCR Consumer Confidence Report CCT Corrosion Control Treatment CCTF Corrosion Control Treatment Facility CDBG Community Development Block Grant CDPW Community Development & Public Works CEMP Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan CERB Community Economic Revitalization Board CEU Continuing Education Units cfs Cubic Feet Per Second cfm Cubic Feet Per Minute CFP Capital Facilities Plan City City of Auburn CIP Capital Improvement Plan CMP Coliform Monitoring Plan CPR Conservation Planning Requirements CSCSL Confirmed and Suspected Contaminate Sites Page 51 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Acronyms & Abbreviations Page xiv CWD Covington Water District CWSP Coordinated Water System Plan D D Distribution Improvements DBPR Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule DBP Disinfection Byproducts DHS Department of Homeland Security DI Ductile Iron DNS Determination of Non-Significance DOE Department of Ecology DOH Washington State Department of Health DSL Distribution System Leakage DWSRF Drinking Water State Revolving Fund E EDCS Engineering Design and Construction Standards ENR Engineering News Record EOC Emergency Operation Center EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency EPS Extended Period Simulation ERU Equivalent Residential Unit EWE Energy and Water Efficiency F FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FF Fire Flow ft/s or fps Feet Per Second G G General Improvements gal/ERU Gallons Per Equivalent Residential Unit GIS Geographic Information System gpd Gallons Per Day gpm Gallons Per Minute GMA Growth Management Act G.O. General Obligation GWMP Ground Water Management Plan GWR Groundwater Rule GWUI Groundwater Under the Influence of Surface Water H HAA5 Haloacetic Acids HGL Hydraulic Grade Line HPC Heterotrophic Plate Count HP Horsepower HWD Highline Water District Page 52 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Acronyms & Abbreviations Page xv I IA2 Interlocal Agreement 2 IA3 Interlocal Agreement 3 ICS Incident Command System IDSE Initial Distribution System Evaluation IGEA Investment Grade Efficiency Audit L LCRMR Lead and Copper Rule Minor Revisions LFC Local Facilities Charge LIDs Local Improvement Projects LMWD Lake Meridian Water District LRAAs Locational Running Annual Averages LR Larson Ratio LSI Langelier LWSD Lakehaven Water and Sewer District M MAG Electromagnetic Manual Public Works Emergency Response Manual MCL Maximum Contaminant Level MCLGs Maximum Contaminant Level Goals M/DBP Microbial/Disinfection By-Product MDD Maximum Day Demand MDRLs Maximum Disinfectant Residual Level MFR Multifamily Residential MG Million Gallon mgd Million Gallons Per Day MG/year Million Gallons Per Year MIT Muckleshoot Indian Tribe M&O Maintenance and Operations MRSC Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington MSDS Material Safety Data Sheets N NIMS National Incident Management System NOM Natural Organic Matter O O&M Operations & Maintenance OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration P PAA Potential Annexation Areas PGG Pacific Groundwater Group PHD Peak Hour Demand PHG Public Health Goal Page 53 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Acronyms & Abbreviations Page xvi PIC Forest Villa Manor PI Parcel Insight Plan Comprehensive Water Plan PLC Programmable Logic Controller PNR Public Notification Rule PR Pressure Reducing Project ID Identification Number PRV Pressure Reducing Valve psi Pounds Per Square Inch PSRC Puget Sound Regional Council PS Pump Stations PUD Planned Unit Development PW Public Works PWB Public Works Board Q Qaw White River Alluvium Qd Vashon Recessional Deltaic Deposits Qom Osceola Mudflow Qua Undifferentiated Alluvium Qu Undifferentiated Glacial and Interglacial Deposits R R Storage Improvement R5 Residential 5 Du/Acre RAA Running Annual Average RWSA Retail Water Service Area RWSS Regional Water Supply System S S Supply Improvement SCA Sanitary Control Area SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition SDC Standard Development Charge SDS Safety Data Sheets SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act SEATAC Seattle-Tacoma International Airport SEPA State Environmental Policy Act SFR Single-Family Residential/Duplex SMP Standard Monitoring Program SOC Synthetic Organic Chemical SOS Save Our Streets SSS System-Specific Study SWTR Surface Water Treatment Rule Page 54 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Acronyms & Abbreviations Page xvii T Tacoma City of Tacoma TAZ Transportation Analysis Zone TCR Total Coliform Rule TPU Tacoma Public Utility TTHM Total Trihalomethanes U UCM Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring UDF Unidirectional Flushing UGA Urban Growth Area ULID Utility Local Improvement District USGS United States Geological Survey USEPA United States Environmental Protectional Agency UTC Utilities And Transportation Commission V VA Vulnerability Assessment VFD Variable Frequency Drive VOC Volatile Organic Compound W WAC Washington Administrative Code WCIA Washington Cities Insurance Authority WD#111 King County Water District #111 WETRC Washington Environmental Training Resource Center WFI Water Facilities Inventory WHP Wellhead Protection WHPA Wellhead Protection Areas WHPP Wellhead Protection Plan WISHA Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act WSP Water System Plan WSSIP Water System Security Improvement Plan WUE Water Use Efficiency Page 55 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Acronyms & Abbreviations Page xviii THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 56 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-1 Executive Summary Introduction This Water System Plan (WSP) has been developed in accordance with Chapter 426-290 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC), as presented in the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) regulations for Group A Public Water Systems. This WSP supersedes the City of Auburn’s (City) 2015 WSP, approved by DOH on May 11, 2016, and the 2021 Limited WSP Update approved by DOH on December 16, 2021. The City’s water system identification number is 03350V. Th purpose of this WSP is to develop a long-term planning strategy for the City’s Retail Water Service Area (RWSA). Updated every ten years per DOH, the WSP evaluates the existing system and its ability to meet the anticipated requirements for water source, treatment, transmission, storage, and distribution over a 20-year planning period. Historical data through the year 2022 were used for the analyses throughout the WSP. The ten-year planning period is 2024-2034. The long-term planning period is 2034-2044. Water system improvement projects have been developed to meet the changing demands of regulatory impacts, population growth, and necessary infrastructure repair and replacement. The WSP also identifies planning-level costs of the improvement projects and provides a financial plan for funding the projects. ES.1 Description of Water System The City limits are within both King County and Pierce County in the Puget Sound Region of Washington. Figure ES-1 shows the City’s RWSA which encompasses approximately 30 square miles. Several water purveyors adjoin the City’s RWSA, including the cities of Algona, Bonney Lake, Federal Way, Kent, Pacific, and Sumner. Also included are the Covington Water District (CWD), Lakehaven Water and Sewer District (LWSD), Lake Meridian Water District (LMWD) (formerly known as King County Water District #111), Highline Water District (HWD), and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT). The City also provides internal staffing for the management, operations, and maintenance of the Braunwood Estates satellite system. The City’s water system consists of groundwater wells, springs, and interties with adjacent purveyors as water sources, chlorination and corrosion control treatment facilities, pump stations, pressure reducing valve stations, steel and concrete enclosed reservoirs for storage, and transmission and distribution pipelines to provide potable water to customers. The RWSA is further divided into four service areas (Valley, Lea Hill, Lakeland, and Academy) that include a total of 28 pressure zones. The City's four service areas and the location of key components of the water system are shown in Figure ES-2. Interties provide a tool that water utilities use to move water between systems to meet supply needs, to increase reliability and respond to emergencies. The City maintains wholesale supply interties with three water systems: City of Tacoma (Tacoma), Algona, and LMWD. The City also has a supply contract with the MIT and the Indian Health Service, dating from 1972, for services along a pipeline at SE 368th PL extending from the City limits into the reservation. The City has emergency interties with seven water systems, Algona, Bonney Lake, Kent, Pacific, LWSD, LMWD and Tacoma. A hydraulic profile of the City’s water system is presented in Figure ES-3, showing all service areas, pressure zones, supplies, interties, reservoirs, and pump stations. Page 57 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-2 Figure ES-1 | RWSA Vicinity Map Page 58 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-3 Figure ES-2 | Existing Facilities Page 59 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-4 Figure ES-3 | Hydraulic Profile Page 60 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-5 ES.2 Basic Planning Data Water Service Connections and Usage The City’s current and future water demand requirements were projected for each customer class (single- family residential/duplex, multifamily residential, commercial, manufacturing/industrial, schools, city accounts, irrigation, and wholesale). The water consumption, or demand, of each customer classification can be expressed in terms of equivalent residential units (ERUs) for forecasting and planning purposes . One ERU is defined as the average quantity of water used by one average, full-time, single-family residence per day. The quantity of water used by other customer classes, or by the entire system, can be expressed in terms of equivalent ERUs. The historical average and maximum water demands are important parameters when performing system and supply analyses. The Average Day Demand (ADD) is typically used in operational evaluations. The Maximum Day Demand (MDD) represents the single largest day water demand during the year and is a key parameter for infrastructure sizing. The City provided water to approximately 63,450 customers through 15,046 connections as of the end of 2022. Between 2015 and 2022 the ADD ranged from 6.32 million gallons per day (mgd) on the low end in 2020 to 7.67 mgd on the high end in 2016. The MDD has ranged from 11.25 mgd in 2019 to 12.43 mgd in 2020. The total number of connections increased by approximately three percent between 2015 and 2022. The City has two active wholesale water agreements, one with the City of Algona and the other with LMWD that is interruptible. Water Supply and Production The City has a diverse water supply consisting of two springs, ten wells and an intertie with the City of Tacoma. Wells 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 6, and 7 are in the lower alluvial aquifer in the Auburn Valley, referred to as the Valley Wellfield. Wells 3A, 3B and 7 are currently offline due to high manganese concentrations. Wells 5, 5A, and 5B are in the Upland Wellfield within the Lakeland Service Area. Once Well 5B came online, the City discovered that the aquifer was not recovering and Well 5B has been offline since 2006. The safe yield of Wells 5 and 5A have been decreased from their design capacity due to a drop in the aquifer’s capacity. The City has sufficient water rights to meet current demands as well as 10- and 20-year demand projections, as shown in the Water Rights Self-Assessment Form provided in Appendix I. Additional information on the City meeting future demands is mentioned in the Capacity Analysis Section under ES.3 (System Analysis and Asset Management). West Hill Springs draws from an unnamed confined aquifer. The spring source water flows by gravity into the Valley Service Area, although flows vary depending on aquifer conditions . Coal Creek Springs is the largest active water supply for the City and draws from a confined aquifer, however its flow varies depending on aquifer conditions. The City also owns two additional wells: the Algona Well 1, which is not operational and the Braunwood Well which serves the Braunwood satellite system. Future Population and Demand Projections Demographic projections are based on the Puget Sound Regional Council’s (PSRC) 2044 forecasts for population and employment within the City’s RWSA. Total population is projected to increase by 1.5 percent annually from 2021 to 2044 and total employment is projected to increase by 1.9 percent annually over the same period. Overall, the City is planning for an additional 24,987 residents and 20,525 employed people by 2044 within the RWSA. The Valley Service Area is projected to represent 64 percent of the system’s population and 93 percent of the system’s employment in 2044. Page 61 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-6 The projected ADD and MDD, along with wholesale demands, are summarized in Table ES-1. To be conservative, an ERU planning value higher than the average was used for demand forecasting. The 75th percentile of the historical ADD per ERU between 2015 and 2022 was used to select the planning ERU value of 182 gpd. The peak demands can be expressed as an MDD/ADD peaking factor, which is the relative magnitude of MDD compared to ADD. The City’s MDD/ADD peaking factor was 1.77. Distribution system leakage and authorized unbilled consumption are accounted for in the projections. Table ES-1 | ADD, MDD, and ERUs Summarized by Service Area with Wholesale Included 2024 2034 2044 Lea Hill Average Day Demand (mgd) 1.00 1.04 1.09 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 1.77 1.84 1.92 Equivalent Residential Units 5,506 5,729 5,966 Valley Average Day Demand (mgd) 5.11 5.84 6.72 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 9.02 10.31 11.88 Equivalent Residential Units 28,034 32,037 36,920 Lakeland Average Day Demand (mgd) 0.51 0.59 0.67 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 0.91 1.04 1.19 Equivalent Residential Units 2,815 3,217 3,684 Academy Average Day Demand (mgd) 0.43 0.48 0.54 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 0.76 0.85 0.95 Equivalent Residential Units 2,375 2,642 2,946 Total Retail Customers Average Day Demand (mgd) 7.05 7.95 9.02 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 12.47 14.04 15.94 Equivalent Residential Units 38,731 43,626 49,515 Algona (Firm Wholesale) Total Average Day Demand (mgd) 0.365 0.386 0.409 Total Equivalent Residential Units, ADD 2,005 2,120 2,246 Total Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 0.692 0.732 0.775 Total Equivalent Residential Units, MDD 3,800 4,018 4,256 Retail with Algona Total Average Day Demand (mgd) 7.42 8.33 9.43 Total Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 13.16 14.77 16.71 Retail with Firm Wholesale (Algona and MIT) Average Day Demand (mgd) 9.92 10.83 11.93 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 14.66 16.27 18.21 Retail with Firm & Interruptible Wholesale (Algona, MIT, and LMWD) Average Day Demand (mgd) 12.42 13.33 14.43 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 17.16 18.77 20.71 Page 62 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-7 ES.3 System Analysis and Asset Management Asset Management The City actively assesses and plans for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of its assets while preventive maintenance practices keep assets in good condition, thereby extending their useful life. For asset management, the City utilizes CarteGraph in conjunction with the geographic information system (GIS). GIS is updated using as-builts as projects are completed and CarteGraph is auto-populated from this information. CarteGraph is used to track and schedule maintenance activities and track material and labor costs and project timelines. An inventory of the City’s existing water system assets including distribution system components, treatment, reservoirs, supply facilities, pump stations, backup power, and the telemetry system is presented in Chapter 3. Water Quality The DOH requires that source water be monitored for primary and secondary contaminants. Primary contaminant levels are not to be exceeded for health reasons and secondary contaminants should not be exceeded for aesthetic reasons. Distribution system water quality testing requirements include monitoring of many contaminants for which the DOH determines maximum contaminant levels. Historically, the City has relied on groundwater supplies from wells and springs, which have been determined are not under the direct influence of surface waters. For these water sources, the City is required to meet the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Groundwater Rule. The treatment objectives of the City are to treat source water to contaminant concentrations below the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) established by the EPA and WAC. All constituents are currently below their respective MCLs. The required frequency of monitoring of inorganic chemical and physical parameters varies by source, however, the City typically monitors these constituents every 12 months . Within the study period, the maximum detected concentrations of these parameters did not exceed the MCLs published by the EPA. All active sources are disinfected with chlorine prior to entering the distribution system except for Well 5. The City has a capital project discussed in Chapter 8 that will include the addition of a chlorination facility to Well 5. Corrosion control treatment is required on the water produced by Coal Creek Springs, Well 1, Well 2, Well 6, and Well 7 to limit the corrosion of lead and copper in the system. Since the corrosion control treatment facilities were constructed, the lead and copper levels in the City’s system have been well below the action level. There were no water quality violations in the distribution system between 2015 and 2022. Design Standards The City’s most recent Engineering Design and Construction Standards are available on the City’s website and are provided as Appendix P. The City’s water quality design standards follow the design standards set forth by the EPA and the Washington DOH. Page 63 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-8 Capacity Analysis The City’s water supply (production) capacity compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria indicate that the City has the supply facilities necessary to meet demand projections under current and future projections for all required criteria. The City’s Water Rights Self-Assessment Form is provided in Appendix I and was used to assess the City’s water rights and includes supply that is available to the City through firm wholesale interties with Tacoma. The form includes a comparison of the available water rights to the existing, 10 -year and 20-year demand projections for the “High Demand Scenario” provided in Chapter 2. The calculations presented in the Water Rights Self-Assessment Form conclude that the City’s existing water rights are anticipated to be adequate to meet the current, 10-year, and 20-year projections for Qi and Qa. The City does not currently have the infrastructure necessary to withdraw from all water rights (i.e., Wells 3A, 3B, 5B, and 7 are not currently operational). Additionally, some sources have underlying aquifer or infrastructure restrictions that limit the capacity of the source (i.e., Well 2, Well 6, and Coal Creek Springs). Several facility improvement projects are necessary for the City to maximize water production capacity to meet future demands, and planned supply related capital projects to meet this need are discussed further in Chapter 8. Table ES-2 provides an overview of pump station supply analysis results expressed as either having a capacity surplus or deficit for open and closed zones. Open zones are pressure zones that are fed by gravity from a reservoir. Pressure zones that do not include a storage facility are analyzed as a closed zone. A closed zone in the Lea Hill Service Area and the Game Farm Park closed zone have a BPS capacity deficit identified in all planning scenarios. The City has planned a capital project to resolve the deficiency at the Intertie Pump Station/Lea Hill BPS. The Game Farm Park Pump Station only provides service to a recreational area with no residential or commercial property connections supplied by this facility. The City has reviewed the deficit with the Fire Marshal and the deficiency is not critical to address, therefore no actions are currently planned to resolve the deficiency at the Game Farm Park Pump Station. As further development progresses in and around the Game Farm Park Pump Station, modifications will be considered to address the deficiency. Table ES-2 | Summary of Pump Station Capacity Results 2024 2034 2044 Valley Open Zone Pump Station Capacity Surplus Surplus Surplus Lea Hill Open Zone Pump Station Capacity Surplus Surplus Surplus Lakeland Open Zone Pump Station Capacity Surplus Surplus Surplus Academy Open Zone Pump Station Capacity Surplus Surplus Surplus Lakeland Closed Zone BPS Capacity Surplus Surplus Surplus Academy Closed Zone BPS Capacity Surplus Surplus Surplus Lea Hill Closed Zone BPS Capacity Deficit Deficit Deficit Game Farm Park Closed Zone BPS Capacity Deficit Deficit Deficit The City’s water storage facilities were analyzed to determine if they have sufficient capacity to meet the existing and future storage requirements. A summary of the results is provided in Table ES-3. New sources and pump stations allow for reliable and redundant operation of the system as an interconnected whole, rather than separate Service Areas. As such, excess storage in one service area can be used to Page 64 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-9 offset a deficit in another area of the system. The results of the storage analysis indicate that there is sufficient capacity to meet the projected 2024 and 2034 storage requirements, however additional storage is projected to be necessary in 2044. The City has a planned capital project to add a new reservoir in the Valley Service Area to address this deficiency. Table ES-3 | Summary Storage Capacity Analysis Total Usable Storage 2024 2034 2044 Total Required Storage (MG) Surplus/ (Deficit) (MG) Total Required Storage (MG) Surplus/ (Deficit) (MG) Total Required Storage (MG) Surplus/ (Deficit) (MG) Academy 2.66 1.53 1.13 1.59 1.07 1.66 1.00 Lakeland 1.171 1.22 0.12 1.34 (0.17) 1.48 (0.31) Lea Hill 2.12 2.26 (0.14) 2.32 (0.20) 2.37 (0.25) Valley 7.96 7.58 0.38 8.52 (0.56) 9.67 (1.71) RWSA 13.911 12.59 1.49 13.77 0.14 15.18 (1.27) Note: 1. Algona has requested an additional storage capacity of 170,000 gallons of storage, anticipated to begin in 2025. The Lakeland and RWSA Total Usable Storage figures reflect this additional storage. The City’s existing distribution system was analyzed to determine if they have sufficient capacity to meet the existing and future demands and fire flow requirements using an updated and calibrated version of the City’s hydraulic model. A low-pressure analysis was performed in the hydraulic model to confirm that pressures throughout the system were above 30 psi during under peak hour demand (PHD) conditions for 2024, 2034, and 2044. The results of this analysis indicated that all areas of existing and future system have pressures meeting this condition and were compliant with requirements. An individual fire flow analysis was performed for each hydrant node in the hydraulic model to determine the available fire flow during MDD plus fire flow (FF) conditions, while maintaining a minimum residual pressure of 20 psi. The results of this analysis indicate that multiple pipeline improvement projects are necessary to address the distribution system deficiencies. An analysis of the water system’s overall physical capacity in terms of ERU using DOH Worksheet 4 -1 is provided in Appendix V. The analysis indicates that the existing system has sufficient capacity to serve the current and projected water demands through 2034 (10-year planning horizon). Under 2024 and 2034 demand conditions, storage is the limiting system component for growth and development. In 2044 (20- year planning horizon) storage is deficient, which is consistent with the other analysis findings. ES.4 Water Use Efficiency Program Source and Service Metering Each of the City’s sources are metered to measure the amount of water produced. The meters are calibrated annually. If a meter cannot be calibrated properly, it is replaced with a new one. Propeller source meters are being replaced with electromagnetic (MAG) meters as part of on-going operation and maintenance (O&M) improvements. Service meters are installed on every service line to measure the quantity of water used by a customer per WAC 246-290-496 and City Code Chapter 13.06.320. In 2015, the City began installing an Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system, as a part of the Water Meter and Billing System Improvements Page 65 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-10 project, which was completed in 2018. With the new AMI system, the City automatically receives meter reads via radio transmission and can integrate the data into the billing software. Distribution System Leakage Distribution System Leakage (DSL) represents the difference between production and documented water use (retail, wholesale, and authorized unmetered). The City’s historical DSL performance complies with the DOH requirement that the three-year average DSL be under ten percent to minimize water waste. To further reduce DSL, the City has ongoing leak detection, meter calibration, and an active repair and replacement program for water system infrastructure. Water Use Efficiency Program The City’s Water Use Efficiency (WUE) Program provides for efficient water use and supports stewardship of the City’s resources. The selected program measures are interrelated and will help the City achieve its goals to both reduce average water use and peak water use per customer. Per the WUE requirements, the following measures implemented as part of the 2024-2034 WUE program: ➢ Install production (source) meters. ➢ Install consumption (service) meters. ➢ Perform meter calibration. ➢ Implement a water loss control action plan to control leakage if the three-year rolling average exceeds ten percent. ➢ Educate customers about water use efficiency practices. Additionally, the following measures that must be evaluated are: ➢ Rates that encourage water demand efficiency (discussed in Chapter 9). ➢ Reclamation opportunities (discussed in detail in Chapter 4). The DOH requires that the City estimate the amount of water saved through implementation of the system’s WUE program over the last six years. Water use per-capita dropped from 112 gpd per capita in 2017 to 105 gpd per capita in 2022. The net water savings over this period equates to approximately 148 million gallons or 29.6 million gallons of savings per year. The City has chosen to focus on implementing voluntary measures to decrease both the average and peak water usage. The City’s goals are as follows: ➢ Decrease the planning ERU value (gpd/ERU) one percent annually from the current planning ERU value of 182 gpd/ERU, ➢ Decrease the planning peaking factor from the current 1.77 to 1.68, or less, and ➢ Maintain three-year average DSL under ten percent. The City is committed to wastewater reuse and rainwater reclamation, as stated in its official water system policies summarized in Appendix A. Currently, there are no reclaimed water users in the City. Page 66 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-11 Climate Change Resiliency To estimate the impact of climate change on the City’s water demands, results from the Water Supply Forum’s 2009 Regional Water Supply Outlook (WSF 2009 Outlook) were used. The impacts of climate change on sources that rely on groundwater are mostly unknown due to the variability between aquifers and site-specific effects. No changes to demand projections were made for the 20-year planning period to account for potential climate change due to the uncertain magnitude and timing of local effects. However, it is recognized that demand has the potential to increase in the future given these changes. In the event the City experiences such an increase, the City will use a model to compute firm yield from streamflow data, replacing historic inflows with projected inflows from three climate change scenarios as described by the WSF 2009 Outlook. This WSP discusses short and long-term actions the City can take to improve the resiliency of the water system from the impacts of climate change. The short-term measures can improve resiliency within three to five years while the long-term measures may require decades to be fully implemented. ES.5 Source Water Protection Sanitary Control Areas (SCAs) have been established for each of the City’s water sources per WAC 246- 290-135(2). The standard SCA for wells has a minimum radius of 100 feet from the wellhead. The standard SCA for spring sources has a minimum radius of 200 feet from the spring head. All City water sources have SCAs that were established and approved by DOH, and are documented in the susceptibility forms provided in Appendix T. The DOH has developed regulations that require Group A water systems using groundwater sources to develop and implement a Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP) in accordance with WAC 246-290-135. The City maintains its WHPP for 12 groundwater sources. A WHPP was prepared in 2014 for the City’s 2015 WSP; this remains the current WHPP for the City. Susceptibility Assessment Forms have been completed by the City and submitted to the DOH. The DOH’s susceptibility assessment rating for each source is summarized in Table ES-4 Table ES-4 | Source Susceptibility Assessment Ratings Source DOH Issued Susceptibility Rating Coal Creek Springs High West Hill Springs High Well 1 Moderate Well 2 High Well 3A Low (Off-line) Well 3B Low (Off-line) Well 4 Low Well 5 Low Well 5A Low Well 5B Low (Off-line) Well 6 High Well 7 High (Off-line) Page 67 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-12 The Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) defines the area around a groundwater source that has the potential to contaminate the source. This area is based on the source’s capture zones, which are the zones of the source aquifer and ground surface that can contribute water to the source in six months, one year, five years, or ten years of time of travel. The established WHPAs are shown in ES.6 Operations and Maintenance Program The Auburn Water Utility is operated as a utility enterprise under the direction of the Public Works (PW) Director. Specific water utility management responsibilities within the PW Department fall under either the Utilities-Water Section of Engineering Services or the Water Division of Maintenance and Operations Services. The Utilities-Water Section of Engineering Services is responsible for comprehensive water system planning, development of a Capital Improvement Program (CIP), as well as programming the design, construction, and inspection of projects related to the water system. The Water Division of Maintenance and Operations Services is responsible for operating and maintaining the water system, performing daily operation and inspection, water quality monitoring as required by DOH, and line management of the Water Utility. The mission statement of the City’s Water Utility is to provide for the efficient, environmentally sound , and safe management of the existing and future water system within the City’s service area. Operations staff provide daily O&M of wells, corrosion control treatment facilities, pump stations, and reservoirs. They also implement the cross connection control program and provide locating services for all City utilities. Distribution staff maintains the complete distribution system including water mains, valves, hydrants, pressure reducing stations, and meters. Primary operation of the water system is maintained via the Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) computerized control system. Wonderware software works in association with SCADA to provide real time graphical display of system data for staff interpretation and control. The Water Operations staff maintains an active and ongoing program of water quality monitoring and reporting to ensure a safe, high quality water supply. Two staff members are responsible for water quality monitoring, sampling, control, and record keeping as outlined in the City’s Water Quality Monitoring Plan provided in Appendix O. The City has prepared an electronic Public Works Emergency Response Manual (Manual) as a guide for management of emergency situations, with the objective of protecting life and property and restoration of essential services, such as providing clean water, as quickly as possible. The Emergency Response Plan is updated annually at the first of the year. The master response program for the entire City is documented in the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP), which provides guidance to the Emergency Management Organization for mitigation, preparedness, responsibilities, recovery operations, training, and community education activities. The CEMP also describes the functions of local government and incorporation of essential non-governmental organizations into the Emergency Management Organization. The City has a comprehensive safety program that meets Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA) regulations. The safety policies and procedures for the water department are documented in this WSP and cover the full range of hazards staff may experience while operating the water system. Figure ES-4. Page 68 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-13 A summary of potential contaminant sources for the City’s water sources was updated in July 2024 and is included in Appendix T. ES.6 Operations and Maintenance Program The Auburn Water Utility is operated as a utility enterprise under the direction of the Public Works (PW) Director. Specific water utility management responsibilities within the PW Department fall under either the Utilities-Water Section of Engineering Services or the Water Division of Maintenance and Operations Services. The Utilities-Water Section of Engineering Services is responsible for comprehensive water system planning, development of a Capital Improvement Program (CIP), as well as programming the design, construction, and inspection of projects related to the water system. The Water Division of Maintenance and Operations Services is responsible for operating and maintaining the water system, performing daily operation and inspection, water quality monitoring as required by DOH, and line management of the Water Utility. The mission statement of the City’s Water Utility is to provide for the efficient, environmentally sound , and safe management of the existing and future water system within the City’s service area. Operations staff provide daily O&M of wells, corrosion control treatment facilities, pump stations, and reservoirs. They also implement the cross connection control program and provide locating services for all City utilities. Distribution staff maintains the complete distribution system including water mains, valves, hydrants, pressure reducing stations, and meters. Primary operation of the water system is maintained via the Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) computerized control system. Wonderware software works in association with SCADA to provide real time graphical display of system data for staff interpretation and control. The Water Operations staff maintains an active and ongoing program of water quality monitoring and reporting to ensure a safe, high quality water supply. Two staff members are responsible for water quality monitoring, sampling, control, and record keeping as outlined in the City’s Water Quality Monitoring Plan provided in Appendix O. The City has prepared an electronic Public Works Emergency Response Manual (Manual) as a guide for management of emergency situations, with the objective of protecting life and property and restoration of essential services, such as providing clean water, as quickly as possible. The Emergency Response Plan is updated annually at the first of the year. The master response program for the entire City is documented in the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP), which provides guidance to the Emergency Management Organization for mitigation, preparedness, responsibilities, recovery operations, training, and community education activities. The CEMP also describes the functions of local government and incorporation of essential non-governmental organizations into the Emergency Management Organization. The City has a comprehensive safety program that meets Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA) regulations. The safety policies and procedures for the water department are documented in this WSP and cover the full range of hazards staff may experience while operating the water system. Page 69 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-14 Figure ES-4 | Wellhead Protection Area Map Page 70 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-15 The City’s Cross Connection Control Program (provided in Appendix Q) protects the public water system from contamination via cross connection hazards. It describes minimum operating policies, provides guidelines for installation, testing, and maintenance of approved backflow prevention assemblies, permitting process, inspection, and survey requirements for existing and new water service connections. The findings of the 2022 Sanitary Survey are also summarized in this WSP, along with the actions completed or in progress to address the deficiencies. The next DOH sanitary survey is scheduled for 2027. ES.7 Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards The Engineering Design and Construction Standards (EDCS) encompass policies and procedures governing project review and approval. To ensure the highest level of water system reliability, integration of the EDCS into the broader City infrastructure is essential. The integration of the EDCS in this WSP empowers the City to employ an alternative review process for distribution main projects, through the submittal exception process, which permits the City to approve project reports and construction documents without written approval from the DOH. The City’s Utilities-Water Section of Engineering Services reviews plans, including calculations, reports, and AutoCAD files, to verify conformity with development requirements, City standards, City policies, as well as other federal, state, and local requirements. Compliance with Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) "Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction," and relevant City, State, and Federal regulations is also evaluated during the review process. ES.8 Capital Improvement Program The CIP was developed to identify system improvements needed to meet customer demands throughout the 20-year planning horizon. The capital projects identified are categorized as water supply (S), storage (R), pump stations (PS), distribution (D), and general improvements (G). Planning-level cost estimates were developed for each of the recommended projects for budgeting purposes. The capital projects for the facilities improvements were prioritized based on existing capacity deficiencies, safety concerns, maintenance or capacity requirements, and regulatory requirements. A summary of the total planned CIP cost is provided in Table ES-5. All costs are presented as total project costs in March 2024 dollars. For future budgeting purposes, the latest Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) can be used to project current estimates to the year of implementation. The cost estimates for the Auburn area used the ENR Seattle CCI. The March 2024 CCI is 15,477. Overall, the City anticipates total projects costs of $214M over the next 20 years , with more than 50 percent of the cost being for distribution system improvements. Table ES-5 | Water System Capital Improvement Program Budget 2024-2044 Capital Improvement Category Total for 20-Year Period From 2024-2044 (2024 USD) Distribution $121,858,681 Supply $60,416,013 Storage $21,579,621 Pump Station $9,230,000 General $1,750,000 TOTAL $214,834,315 Page 71 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-16 ES.9 Financial Program Chapter 9 was prepared by FCS GROUP to provide a financial program that allows the City to remain financially viable during the 20-year planning horizon. This viability analysis considers the financial condition of the utility of the past six-year period (2017-2022), current and identified future financial and policy obligations, O&M needs, and the financial impacts of the capital projects identified in Chapter 8. A review of the water utility’s current rate structure with respect to rate adequacy and customer affordability is also included. The City’s water charges for services increased from $14.8M in 2017 to $16.5M in 2022, averaging an annual increase of approximately 2.2 percent per year. Operating expenditures increased by $1.7M across the six years with an average annual increase of 2.8 percent. Despite total operating expenses outpacing growth in operating revenues, operating income has been positive in all years observed. The financial forecast indicates that at existing rate levels the utility will be come deficient in 2025 as growth in expenses outpaces growth in revenues and the utility takes on additional debt obligations to fund capital infrastructure investments. The City has adopted a 7.50 percent increase for 2025 to resolve the remaining projected deficiency. Rates will need to potentially increase by 9.50 percent annually from 2026 through 2030, before decreasing to 3.00 percent annually through 2033. A detailed rate study is planned for completion in 2025. It is recommended that the City regularly review and update the key underlying assumptions that compose the multi-year financial plan to confirm that adequate revenues are collected to meet the City’s total financial obligations. Page 72 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Executive Summary Page ES-17 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 73 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-1 CHAPTER 1 Description of the Water System 1.1 Objective This Water System Plan (Plan) for the City of Auburn (City) has been prepared to serve as a guide for planning and designing future water system infrastructure and to assist the City in the efficient use of its water resources. The Plan identifies system improvements intended to meet the anticipated growth and changing needs of the City while maintaining reliable and quality water service to customers. The Plan is designed to meet state, county, and local requirements. It complies with the requirements of the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) as set forth in the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-290-100, Water System Plan. This Plan supersedes the City’s 2015 Water System Plan, approved by DOH on May 11, 2016, and the 2021 Limited Water System Plan Update approved by DOH on December 16, 2021. A 10-year approval period is desired for this Plan, and therefore the Plan analyzes the 10-year and 20-year planning periods. This Plan contains a framework for future funding decisions and capital projects. However, the timeframes are estimates and do not represent actual commitments by the City, which may depend on funding, resources availability, and/or other unidentified factors. 1.2 Plan Content This chapter addresses the following topics: 1.3 Ownership and Management 1.4 System History and Background 1.5 Related Plans and Studies 1.6 Service Areas, Maps, and Land Uses 1.7 System Policies 1.8 Duty to Serve 1.9 Local Government Consistency 1.10 Watershed Consistency 1.3 Ownership and Management The City owns and operates its water system and serves most of the City as delineated by the Retail Water Service Area (RWSA). The City also provides firm wholesale water supply to the City of Algona (Algona), and interruptible wholesale water supply to Lake Meridian Water District (LMWD) (formally known as King County Water District #111). The City RWSA boundary is further described in Section 1.4 and Figure 1-1 shows the City RWSA with wholesale customers. Page 74 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-2 Figure 1-1 | RWSA Vicinity Map Page 75 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-3 The City provides internal staffing for the management, operations, and maintenance of the water system and the Braunwood Estates satellite system. The DOH’s data on these water systems, managed by the City, is presented in Table 1-1. The water management structure is presented in Figure 1-2 and further elaborated in Chapter 6. Chapter 3 provides details on the existing water facilities, while Appendix H includes a copy of the current Water Facility Inventory (WFI) form. Table 1-1 | Water System Ownership Management Information Type Description System Names City of Auburn Braunwood Estates (Satellite System) System Type Group A - Community Public Water System County King County and Pierce County City of Auburn System ID Number 03350V Braunwood Estates System ID Number (Satellite System) 03336E Address 25 W Main St Auburn, WA 98001 Primary Contact Josh Flanders, Water Division Manager Owner Contact (253) 876-1998 Figure 1-2 | Water Utility – Organizational Chart The City’s water system is publicly owned, under the jurisdiction of the local government. As a result, it is exempt from regulation by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC), which is Mayor Public Works Director Utility Engineering Manager Water Utility Engineer Civil Engineer -Utilities Utilities Technician Maintenance & Operations Services General Manager Water Division Manager Field Supervisor - Water Operations Maintenance Workers (4) Maintenance Specialists (2) Cross Connection Specialists (2) Field Supervisor - Water Distribution Maintenace Workers (12) SCADA Technician Page 76 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-4 responsible for overseeing some private water companies. There are no plans to bring the City’s water utility service under UTC’s regulatory authority during this planning period. 1.4 System History and Background 1.4.1 Geography The City is centrally located between Seattle and Tacoma in both King and Pierce Counties, Washington. It encompasses approximately 30 square miles. Adjacent cities include Pacific, Algona, Bonney Lake, Federal Way, Kent, Sumner, and Covington. 1.4.1.1 Topography The City’s RWSA is dominated by a broad valley surrounded by uplifted plateaus. The Green River enters from the eastern City limit and then runs north cutting through the center of the City. Mill Creek, a tributary of the Green River, parallels the western corporate limits. The White River flows through the southern part of the City before turning south to join the Puyallup River. The topography of the service area is a result, in part, of the glaciation of the region. Most of the City lies on a two to three-mile wide plain bound by Mill Creek on the west and the Green River on the east. Ground elevations in the area range between 50 to 100 feet and slope upward generally to the north. The terrain rises sharply to elevations of 400 to 500 feet on either side of the valley as well as in the southern portion of the City, south of the White River and between the White and Green Rivers. The topographic features of the RWSA provide for a necessary divide of the water system into four major service areas serving the valley and the surrounding plateaus. The following are the major service areas and associated elevations: ➢ Valley Service Area (service elevation from 39 to 235 feet) ➢ Lea Hill Service Area (service elevation from 129 to 513 feet) ➢ Academy Service Area (service elevation from 171 to 444 feet) ➢ Lakeland Service Area (service elevation from 122 to 578 feet) Each service area is further subdivided into smaller hydraulic operating areas based on topographic elevations, called pressure zones. Additional details on the City's major service areas are provided in Chapter 2. 1.4.1.2 Climate The RWSA has a West Coast, marine-type climate caused by the influence of air masses coming from the Pacific Ocean. In late fall and winter, orographic lifting, and cooling cause moist air masses to create clouds and precipitation throughout the area. The average annual rainfall is approximately 40 inches, generally occurring between October and March. The average annual snowfall is 8.6 inches. The temperatures typically range from mid-70 degrees Fahrenheit in the summer to 38 degrees Fahrenheit during the winter, with an overall average of 54 degrees Fahrenheit. Water consumption is notably impacted by climate conditions, as customers adjust their usage based on weather patterns. In periods of hot and dry weather, consumption rises, driven by activities such as lawn watering and outdoor water use. Conversely, consumption tends to decrease during wet weather. Page 77 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-5 1.4.1.3 Geology The geology of the City is the result of glacial and interglacial processes acting over millions of years. During the periods when large continental glaciers, not rivers nor lakes, occupied the Puget Sound area, landslides created deposits and erosion through glacial and interglacial deposits. Generally, the uplands surrounding the City are composed of glacial and interglacial deposits and the valleys are filled with more recent deposits overlying older ones. Five major geologic units lie within the White and Green River Valleys: White River Alluvium (Qaw), Osceola Mudflow (Qom), Undifferentiated Alluvium (Qua), Vashon Recessional Deltaic Deposits (Qd) and Undifferentiated Glacial and Interglacial Deposits (Qu). Bedrock is known to lie approximately 1,280 feet beneath the valley floors. The Pacific Groundwater Group (PGG) completed an extensive geological and hydrogeological study within the City's RWSA, known as the Auburn Water Resources Program Study, and the results are documented in several volumes: ➢ 1996 Preliminary Hydrogeologic Characterization ➢ Summary of 1997 Hydrogeologic Investigations ➢ The 1997-1998 Test Well Drilling and Installation Program ➢ The 1999 Hydrogeologic Characterization Report and Appendices The general groundwater flow system in the City’s vicinity is characterized by recharge within uplands and discharge to the rivers in the lowland valleys. Precipitation and Lake Tapps are sources of groundwater recharge. Lake water flows from the lake bottom into the groundwater system. Contrary to recharge in other upland areas, recharge from Lake Tapps is not totally dependent upon precipitation because water is routed to the lake from outside the area. The main discharge zone for the City’s area is the Green River Valley. Some groundwater discharges into the river in the City’s vicinity and further downstream. 1.4.2 Existing System Overview The City’s water system consists of wells, springs and interties as water sources, chlorination stations and corrosion control facilities for water treatment, pump stations, pressure reducing stations, steel and concrete enclosed reservoirs for storage, and transmission and distribution pipelines to provide potable water to customers. Service is provided to four major service areas (Valley, Lea Hill, Lakeland, and Academy). Each major service area is further divided into pressure zones as required by local topography. The City's four major service areas and the location of key elements of the water system are shown in Figure 1-3. A more detailed inventory of assets and system hydraulic profile is presented in Chapter 3. 1.4.3 History The earliest record of a potable water system for the City of Auburn traces back to 1884 with the establishment of the Peasley Canyon supply. Initially serving the City, then called Slaughter, a 4-inch wood- stave pipe connected Peasley Canyon Reservoir to deliver surface water. The year 1907 marked a pivotal moment as the City acquired West Hill Springs for $2,000, a source that continues to yield approximately 1 million gallons of water per day (600 gpm) and remains active. Page 78 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-6 Figure 1-3 | Existing Facilities Page 79 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-7 As the City's population grew to a few thousand by 1922, the demand for water prompted the introduction of groundwater wells alongside the existing West Hill Springs. These wells, strategically drilled in the downtown area, were complemented by pump stations, with one situated at the present site of City Hall. Despite their longstanding service, these early wells and pump stations have since been decommissioned. The evolution of Auburn's water distribution system saw a transition from wooden pipes to the installation of the first recorded steel water main in 1924 - a 10-inch pipeline connecting West Hill Springs to the valley floor. The Coal Creek Springs water collection system, which included a 24-inch steel main under the White River was constructed in 1925, along with the construction of Reservoir 1 (later replaced in 1975), to meet the escalating water needs of the growing City. By 1946, the population had increased, prompting construction of the Coal Creek Pump Station, to pump water from Coal Creek Springs to the distribution system. In 1960, the City embarked on further enhancements by supplementing its two springs with a well system, beginning with Well 1 and then Well 2 in 1969. In 1961, water system facilities were constructed in the Academy Service Area. Expansion into the Lea Hill Service Area occurred between 1964 and 1965, coinciding with extensive modifications to the Coal Creek supply system and the implementation of a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. The early 1980s saw the extension of the water system into Lakeland Service Area. A key development occurred in 1991 with the acceptance of Braunwood Estates (now called Hidden Valley) as a satellite water system operating independently outside the City’s distribution network. The late 1990s marked significant construction under the Interlocal Agreement 2 (IA2) project, a water supply project between LMWD, Covington Water District (CWD) and the City to provide LMWD and CWD with wholesale water supply, and as a result expanding the water system. Expansion into Pierce County and service agreement modifications characterized the late 1990s and early 2000s. Table 1-2 summarizes key construction and enhancements related to the City's wells, springs, reservoirs, pump stations, treatment, water pipelines, and system upgrades. Notably, the water pipelines improvements focus on transmission mains, excluding distribution mains installation and replacements (due to the extensive list), with exceptions for distribution improvements mandated by environmental (water quality) regulations. The table provides a documented history of the water system, recognizing occasional gaps. Table 1-2 | Water Facilities History Springs West Hill Springs • Before 1907: Established as a potable water supply for the City. • 1915: Construction of 210,000-gallon concrete reservoir to store water from West Hill Springs. • 1924: Installation of the first recorded steel water main (10” pipeline from West Hill Springs to the valley floor). • 1960: Ongoing use, with a replacement of collection boxes. • 1988: Removal of reservoir. West Hill Springs water flows continuously into the system. Page 80 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-8 • 2000: Partial fencing of the watershed carried out according to the 2000 Water Comprehensive Plan. • 2017: Flow Control Improvements, including installation of an electromagnetic meter and flow control valve for automatic shutdown. • Current: The spring has a capacity of 600-gpm, with varying supply based on aquifer conditions. Equipped with chlorination station. Coal Creek Springs • 1925: Construction of Collection system. • 1925: Installation of 24” wood-stave supply pipeline connecting the Coal Creek Springs collection system to a booster pump station (present Howard Road site) and 14” transmission main to Reservoir 1, including installation of 24” steel pipe under the White River • 1964: Construction of south and middle collectors in the system. • 1964: Replacement of the 24” wood-stave supply pipeline connecting the Coal Creek Springs collection system to a booster pump station (present Howard Road site) with 24-inch concrete pipe. • 1998: Addition of the north collector for enhanced system performance. • 2023: Coal Creek Springs Transmission Main Replacement underway to install a new transmission main suspended from a utility/pedestrian bridge over the white river to replace a portion of the old main crossing the river. • Current: Flows by gravity to Howard Road Corrosion Control Treatment Facility (CCTF) and pumped into Reservoir 1, with typical production capacity of 3,000-gpm. Equipped with chlorination station. Wells Well 1 • 1960: Construction of Well 1, within Valley Service Area. • 1998: Shutdown due to reduced well output and water levels. • 2010: The well was brought back into service temporarily to meet summer demands. • 2015: Phase 1 improvements to bring the facility back online. Construction of transmission main in M St SE, 17th St SE, R St SE & Howard Road SE to convey supplies from Well 1 to Howard Road CCTF. • 2016: Phase 2 improvements to bring the facility back online. Improvements included new well house, pumping system (2,200-gpm), disinfection with sodium hypochlorite, on-site emergency power, and upgraded electrical and SCADA controls. • Current: Operational and pumps to Howard Road CCTF, then boosted to Reservoir 1. Well 2 • 1969: Construction of Well 2 (3,000-gpm capacity), within Valley Service Area. • 2000: Replacement with a new masonry building, pump (1,600-gpm) and associated equipment. • 2014: Installation of Variable-frequency Drive (VFD). • 2023: Rehabilitation and replacement of well pump and motor. • Current: Operational with the Fulmer Field CCTF, providing chlorination and emergency power. Well 3A • 1983: Construction of Well 3A (1,650-gpm) with automatic standby generator, pumps directly into Valley Service Area. • 1984: Installation of chlorination system . • Current: Inactive since mid-1990’s (Est. 1995 – 1997) due to elevated manganese levels. Well 3B • 1984: Construction of Well 3B (1,650-gpm) adjacent to Well 3A, with chlorination system. • Current: Inactive since mid-1990’s (Est. 1995 – 1997) due to elevated manganese levels. Well 4 • 1985: Construction of Well 4 (2,600-gpm), to pump directly into Reservoir 1 and capable of feeding south end of Valley distribution system through pressure-reducing station. • 2016: Emergency Power Improvements project added a diesel-fueled generator and hypochlorite chlorination equipment. Page 81 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-9 • 2018: Upgrade of Well soft starter. • 2023 (ongoing): Well 4 Facility Improvements project underway to replace aging mechanical equipment and electrical improvements. • Current: Pumps directly to Reservoir 1 and to south end of Valley Service Area through PRVs. Well 5 • 1983: Construction of Well 5 (1,000-gpm) to serve the Lakeland Hills Development. • Current: Maximum production capacity of 650-gpm, not chlorinated and pumps directly into Lakeland Service Area and supplies Reservoirs 5 and 6. Well 5A • 1990: Construction of Well 5A (180-gpm) to supplement Well 5. • Current: Equipped with chlorination facilities and a manual transfer switch. Pumps directly into Lakeland Service Area and supplies Reservoirs 5 and 6. Well 5B • 2005: Construction of Well 5B (600-gpm) with hypochlorite generation and ATEC media filters, to remove iron and manganese prior to disinfection. • Current: Removed from service in 2006 due to irrecoverable aquifer. Well 6 • 1998-2000: Construction of Well 6 (3,500-gpm) within Valley Service Area. • 2014: Replacement of pump bowl and installation of VFD. • 2000: Rehabilitation with a new masonry building, well pump (1,600-gpm), and associated equipment. • Current: Operational with the Fulmer Field CCTF, providing chlorination and emergency power. Well 7 • 1997: Construction of Well 7 (3,500-gpm) within Valley Service Area. • Current: Inactive as of 2012, due to elevated manganese levels. Reservoirs West Hill Springs Reservoir • 1915: Construction of 210,000-gallon concrete reservoir to store water from West Hill Springs. • Current: Reservoir removal (1988). West Hill Springs water flows continuously into the system. Academy Reservoir • 1961: 500,000 gallons steel reservoir, supplied by Academy Pump Station. • Current: Reservoir removed (1978-1980) when Reservoir 8B was constructed. Reservoir 1 • Est. 1925: Construction of 3.0 million gallons to store water from Coal Creek Springs. • 1975: Replacement of uncovered reservoir with covered 5-MG concrete reservoir. • 2019: Seismic isolation control valve installed on outlet piping. • Current: Primary storage for Coal Creek Springs and can also be filled with water from Well 4. Serves as water supply for the Academy Pump Station and Valley Service Area. Reservoir 2 • 1975: Construction of a 3.6-MG pre-stressed concrete underground reservoir (dual- purpose facility with tennis court on top) in Lea Hill. • Current: Supplied with several City sources and Reservoir 1. Serves as water supply for Valley Service Area. Design for the addition of a seismic isolation control valve in 2024 with construction expected in 2025. Reservoir 4A • 1965: Construction of 1.0-MG steel reservoir in Lea Hill. • 1965: Installation of 12-inch ductile iron pipeline from Porter (8th St NE) Bridge to Reservoir 4A. • 1998: Replacement of exterior and interior protective coatings. • Current: Supplied by Valley Service Area through Lea Hill & Green River Pump Stations . Serves as water supply for Lea Hill Service Area. Addition of a seismic isolation control valve underway with construction anticipated in 2024. Reservoir 4B • 1983: Construction of 1.5-MG steel reservoir in Lea Hill. • 1998: Replacement of exterior protective coatings. • 2002-2003: Replacement of interior protective coatings Page 82 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-10 • Current: Supplied by Valley Service Area through Lea Hill & Green River Pump Stations. Serves as water supply for Lea Hill Service Area. Addition of a seismic isolation control valve underway with construction anticipated in 2024. Reservoir 5 • 1981: Construction of 1.0-MG steel reservoir for Lakeland Service Area. • 2015: Painting of the Interior and exterior, installation of seismic isolation control valve and addition of ladder. • Current: Supplied with wells 5, 5A and Terrace View Booster Pump Station. Serves as water supply for Lakeland Service Area. Reservoir 6 • 2012: Construction of 1.0-MG reservoir in Lakeland Service Area (also provides storage for City of Algona). • Current: Supplied with wells 5, 5A and Terrace View Booster Pump Station. Serves as water supply for Lakeland Service Area and City of Algona. Reservoir 8A • 1973: Construction of 1.2-MG steel reservoir in Academy Service Area. • 2002-2003: Recoating of the reservoir’s exterior and interior. • Current: Supplied with Reservoir 1 through the Academy Pump Station. Serves as water supply for Academy Service Area. Addition of a seismic isolation control valve underway with construction anticipated in 2024. Reservoir 8B • 1980: Construction of 1.5-MG steel reservoir in Academy Service Area. • 2002-2003: Recoating of the reservoir’s exterior and interior. • Current: Supplied with Reservoir 1 through the Academy Pump Station. Serves as water supply for Academy Service Area. Addition of a seismic isolation control valve underway with construction anticipated in 2024. Pump Stations Howard Road Site Pump Station • 1925: Construction of Howard Road Site Pump Station with 5 hydraulic ram-type pumps to move water from coal creek springs to Reservoir 1 & distribution system. • Current: (1962) Operation of ram-type pumps ended. Coal Creek Springs Pump Station • 1946: Construction Coal Creek Springs Pump Station to pump water to Reservoir 1 and distribution system (consisted of pump house and an electric pump). • 1947-1952 (exact year unknown): Addition of second pump (2,000-gpm). • 1953: Addition of third pump (3,000-gpm) • 1964: Replacement of two pumps with new 1,500-gpm and 2,500-gpm pumps. • 1999: Replacement of Diesel fuel storage tanks for emergency generators with above- ground, double-walled fuel tanks (easier to inspect for fuel leakage). • Current: Pump station removed in 2003 to make way for Howard CCTF. Academy Pump Station • 1960: Construction of Academy Pump Station 1, housing Pumps 1 and 2 (300-gpm and 500-gpm capacity). • 1961: Installation of 2 miles 10” cast iron transmission main from Academy Pump station 1 to Academy reservoir. • 1980: Construction of Academy Pump Station 2, housing Pumps 3 and 4 (750-gpm capacity each), with emergency power generator. • 1980: Installation of 2 miles 14” ductile iron transmission main, connecting Academy Pump Station 2 to Reservoirs 8A & 8B. • 1999: Replacement of Diesel fuel storage tanks for emergency generators with above - ground, double-walled fuel tanks (easier to inspect for fuel leakage). • 2022: Academy Pump Stations 1 and 2 replaced with a single pump station, Academy Pump Station 3, that consists of 4 vertical turbines, variable speed drive pumps with firm pumping capacity of 2,100-gpm. • Current: Pumps water to the Academy Reservoirs (Reservoirs 8A & 8B) Green River Pump Station • 1999: Construction of the Green River Pump Station, equipped with 4 pumps (1,170- gpm capacity each), as part of the Interlocal Agreement 2 (IA2) to supply water to CWD & LMWD. Page 83 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-11 • 2020: Facility improvements for emergency generator and associated electrical equipment. • Current: Pumps water to the Lea Hill Reservoirs (Reservoirs 4A & 4B). Game Farm Park Pump Station • 1988: Construction of the Game Farm Wilderness Park Pump station for water supply and fire protection of the park. • 1992: Installation of 60-gpm domestic pump. • 1993: Installation of 1,000-gpm fire pump. • Current: Pumps water to the Game Farm Wilderness Park from the Coal Creek gravity supply line. (Lea Hill) Intertie/Booster Pump Station • 1998-2000: Construction of Intertie Pump Station near Lea Hill Reservoirs, designed to operate in conjunction with Green River Pump Station to serve IA2 partners (using 4 pumps) and to also serve small area at the top of Lea Hill using a “package type” booster-pump station. • Current: Pumps water to small higher elevation service area in Lea Hill. Equipped with a hypochlorite chlorination system. Lea Hill Pump Station • 1965: Construction of Lea Hill Pump station with two 600-gpm and one 800-gpm pumps, to boost water from Valley Service Area to Lea Hill Service Area. • 1999: Replacement of Diesel fuel storage tanks for emergency generators with above - ground, double-walled fuel tanks (easier to inspect for fuel leakage). • Current: Pumps water to the Lea Hill Service Area. Lakeland Hills Booster Pump Station • 1990: Construction of Lakeland Hills Booster Pump Station, consisting of a three-pump pressure sustaining package system and two large-capacity fire pumps, to pump water from Lakeland Hills Reservoir to Lakeland Service Area. • 2013: Replaced for improved service to boosted Lakeland Service Area, using three low flow pumps (720-gpm capacity each) and two fire flow pumps (3,125-gpm capacity each). • Current: Pumps water to higher elevation service area in Lakeland. Terrace View Booster Pump Station • 2010: Construction of Terrace View Booster Pump Station with firm capacity of 1,100- gpm, to supply water from Valley 242 to Lakeland 630 pressure zone. • Current: Pumps Valley Service Area water to Lakeland Service Area. Equipped with hypochlorite feed pump. Academy East Booster Pump Station • 2014: Construction of the Academy East Booster Pump Station replaced the single pump Janssen’s Addition Pump Station, equipped with three domestic pumps with firm capacity ranging from 750 to 1,250-gpm. • Current: Pumps water from Reservoirs 8A and 8B into Academy Service Area. Treatment Howard Road Corrosion Control Treatment Facility (CCTF) • 2004: Construction of the Howard Road CCTF (6,300-gpm capacity), to treat water from Coal Creek Springs and Well 1 and boost to Reservoir 1, using three 2,100-gpm booster pumps. • Current: Pumps water to Reservoir 1. Fulmer Field CCTF • 2004: Construction of the Fulmer Field CCTF (9,600-gpm capacity), to treat water from Well 2, 6 and 7 and boost to Reservoir 2 and distribution system, using four 3,200 -gpm booster pumps. • 2013-2018: Evaluation of Fulmer Field CCTF (along with Wells 2, 6 and 7) to identify improvements to increase the supply and treatment capacity of the existing facilities and infrastructure. • Current: Pumps water to Reservoir 2 and the Valley Service Area. Distribution Main Improvements (mandated by Environmental Regulations) & Interties Intertie with City of Algona • After 1996: Construction of wholesale interties (combined 1.1-mgd capacity) at: o 1149 Industry Drive SW o Boundary Boulevard and Milwaukee Ave Page 84 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-12 o Iowa Drive and West Valley Highway o 1st Avenue • Emergency Interties at o Boundary Boulevard and Celery Ave o Boundary Boulevard and O Street Intertie with City of Bonney Lake • 2002: Construction of 8” emergency intertie at Evergreen Way, southwest of Lakeland Hills Way • After 2010: Construction of emergency interties at o Lakeland Hills Way & 59th Avenue o Evergreen Way and Nathan Avenue o Olive Avenue, south of Evergreen Loop Intertie with City of Pacific • After 2003: Construction of emergency interties at o Ellingson Road near Pacific Ave o A St SE, north of White River Intertie with City of Kent • After 2001: Construction of emergency intertie with 78th Avenue S and S 277th Street Intertie with LMWD • Est. 1996 – Construction of 12” wholesale intertie at 30502 132nd Avenue SE (5-mgd capacity) • 1996 – 2002: Construction of emergency interties in o 127th Place SE, south of SE 299th Place o 124th Avenue SE and SE 300th Way o SE 300th & 132nd Ave SE o 1998-2000 at SE 288th St & 132nd Ave SE Intertie with Lakehaven Water & Sewer District (LWSD) • Est. 1995: Construction of the Aaby Dr. emergency intertie with LWSD at R St. NW (named Intertie #2). • 2004: Transfer of Aaby Dr. pump station and service from City to LWSD. • 2006: Emergency intertie with LWSD at R St. NW (Intertie #2) was removed from service • After 2010: Installation of water meter and control valve vault for 6” emergency intertie at Aaby Dr. and Knickerbocker Dr. (reinstating Intertie #2) Intertie with City of Tacoma • Est. 2012: Construction of wholesale interties at: o 3240 B St NW (2,200-gpm max. instantaneous flow rate) o 29598 132nd Ave SE (4,500-gpm max. instantaneous flow rate) o Combined max. flow rate of 5.12 MGD (3,555 gpm) in a 24 hour period (the interties could flow at a higher rate for a portion of the day so long as the 24-hour average meets the contractual peak period flow) Distribution Main Improvements (mandated by environmental (water quality) regulation) • 2015: Replacement of 2,760 linear feet of Asbestos Cement (AC) water main with ductile iron main. • 2022: Removal and replacement of approximately 186 service lines with lead goosenecks and approximately 7,075 linear feet of distribution water main with ductile iron main. System Upgrades Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system • 1975: Addition of SCADA/telemetry, to control all reservoirs, wells and pumps from the Maintenance and Operations building. • 2015: Extensive upgrade of the SCADA/telemetry system, to improve control of the water utility facilities and replace obsolete components. • 2024: Updated System Platform to AVEVA. Major components and new hardware were replaced to provide more reliable service. Metering • 2016: Installation of two master meters for Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) Casino, to facilitate City and MIT account administration. Page 85 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-13 • 2017-2018: Installation of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) for all customers. The AMI allowed for more accurate meter reads, daily information for quicker detection of leaks, and improved efficiency of billing operations. • 2020 - 2022: Replacement of deduct meters used for irrigation purposes with separate water service tap on the city’s main. 1.5 Related Plans and Studies In preparing this Plan, related studies and plans were reviewed to ensure coordination with adopted documents that affect system planning and operations. The related plans are categorized into two groups for clarity: Internal Studies/Plans Specific to the City and External Plans Influencing City -Wide Water Management. A brief synopsis of these studies and plans are presented below. Internal Studies/Plans Specific to the City: Wellhead Protection Plan, City of Auburn, 2014: The City developed a Wellhead Protection Plan to identify and protect groundwater sources. The initial plan was created in 2000 by Pacific Groundwater Group (PGG) and subsequently updated by Robinson Noble in 2008 and 2014. The plan maintains existing wellhead protection areas (WHPAs) and contributes to hazard assessments within these zones. It aligns with county ordinances, impacting land use planning and reflecting in critical aquifer recharge areas as outli ned in the King County Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the plan developed a monitoring system for groundwater sampling, which enhanced operational readiness by providing early warnings of potential contaminations. City of Auburn Water Resources Program, Pacific Groundwater Group, Inc., 1995-1999: Pacific Groundwater Group conducted a comprehensive groundwater study in response to recommendations of the 1995 Comprehensive Water Plan. The study was documented in a series of reports (listed below), collectively known as the Auburn Water Resources Program Study. The Auburn Water Resources Program assessed the long-term potential for the City's continued use of groundwater for its water supply. The study confirmed substantial quantities of groundwater underlying the valley area and provided the basis for the water supply conclusions for this Plan. This comprehensive program, spanning several years, strategically addresses water rights acquisition by delving into technical studies of the local groundwater system. Two key elements of the program were the installation of monitoring wells and river gauges, and the assessment of the existing City wells in the deep aquifer. The installation of monitoring wells and river gauges not only aids in system planning by understanding groundwater dynamics but also enhances operational efficiency through real-time data collection. The program also included the development of a regional ground-water model (MODFLOW), using the United States Geological Survey (USGS) model program. This provided a tool for analyzing potential withdrawal scenarios, offering valuable insights into optimizing water system operations. ➢ 1996 Existing Data Hydrogeologic Characterization ➢ 1996 Preliminary Hydrogeologic Characterization ➢ Summary of 1997 Hydrogeologic Investigations ➢ 1997-1998 Test Well Drilling and Installation Program ➢ 1999 Hydrogeologic Characterization Report and Appendices ➢ Regional Groundwater Model Report Bilateral Compliance Agreement (BCA), 1996: This agreement, entered with the Department of Health (DOH) due to copper levels that exceeded the action levels in samples collected in 1993, outlined treatment options and schedules for corrosion control facilities. As a result, new corrosion facilities at the Howard Road/Coal Creek Springs Pump Station and Fulmer Field Park were completed in 2004. The completion of Page 86 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-14 these facilities in 2002 directly impacts operational efficiency, ensuring compliance with health standards and safeguarding water quality in the long term. City of Auburn – Public Works Emergency Response Manual, 2022: This electronic manual is only one element of the City’s overall Emergency Response Plan, which serves as a guide for management of emergency situations. It was first developed in 1999 in response to the potential impact of Y2K and it is updated annually at the first of the year. The manual is not all-inclusive for every type of disaster that could occur, but it is a valuable tool for dealing with many of the emergency situations that most water utilities could face. City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan, 2015 and Amendments: This current plan, originally adopted in 2015 in accordance with the State Growth Management Act (GMA) is the City's comprehensive land use plan and policy document. It consists of goals, land use policies, and the Comprehensive Plan maps. The plan may be amended annually as needed. The update of the comprehensive plan is taking place concurrently with the revision of this water system plan. City of Auburn 2015 Comprehensive Water Plan, City of Auburn Public Works, 2015 : The previous Comprehensive Water Plan provided evaluation of needs and recommended improvements to the City system for 2015-2022. In 2021, DOH extended the approval period for the 2015 WSP until May 11, 20 26. The plan adopted in 2015 constitutes the basis for this Plan. Capital Facilities Plan (2023-2028), City of Auburn Finance Department, 2022: Adopted in 2022, this plan is instrumental in both planning and operations. It outlines goals, policies, and implementation programs mandated by the State GMA, providing a roadmap for capital improvements. This directly influences the operational landscape by defining necessary infrastructure enhancements and improvements, aligning with the city's capital improvements program. Engineering Design and Construction Standards, City of Auburn, 2024: The City updates its Design and Construction Standards as needed, typically on an annual or bi-annual basis. These standards not only guide the planning of new infrastructure but also enhance day-to-day operations by ensuring adherence to the latest industry practices and regulations. The City of Auburn Design and Construction Standards are attached in Appendix P. Water Shortage Contingency Plan, City of Auburn, 2024: The plan establishes actions and procedures for implementing Auburn City Code (ACC) 13.14 during impending or actual water shortages, to maintain levels of service essential for public health and safety, minimize adverse impacts on economic activity, and protect customer’s lifestyle; refer to Appendix R. Water Cost of Service Rate Update Study, City of Auburn, 2022: This study informs strategic decisions related to water rates and influences the operational budget. System Development Charge Study, City of Auburn, 2014: Completed in 2014, this study examines system development charges, offering insights for future infrastructure development. Its findings directly influence the planning of new systems and infrastructure projects and provide a financial basis for expansion. External Plans Influencing City-Wide Water Management: King County 2016 Comprehensive Plan, King County Department of Local Services, 2016 : The King County Comprehensive Plan establishes land use zoning for areas outside the City limits, but within the RWSA. Additionally, King County provides critical area ordinances and critical aquifer recharge areas that support Page 87 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-15 the City’s wellhead protection efforts. The current King County Comprehensive Plan was first adopted on December 5, 2016, and was later amended in 2020. Pierce County Comprehensive Plan, 2015 and Amendments: This is a comprehensive plan and policy document for Pierce County. The plan was developed in accordance with the GMA and is amended every two years. This plan influences planning by offering insights into regional policies. Pierce County Coordinated Water System Plan, 2021: In 1983, all of Pierce County was declared a Critical Water Supply Service Area. In response to this declaration, Pierce County established the first Coordinated Water System Plan to coordinate planning and establish water service areas. The current Coordinated Water System Plan, adopted in 2021 through Ordinance 2018-39s2, influences both regional water planning and City’s operational coordination with other systems in the county. Pierce County White River Basin Plan, 2013: This plan provides a comprehensive guide to storm drainage and surface water management in portions of the White River Basin. Given that the City of Auburn utilizes this basin, the plan significantly influences operational considerations and emergency resp onse strategies during storm events. South King County Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP), 1989 : This plan, adopted in 1989, defined the initial service area boundaries for the water systems within the Critical Water Supply Area of South King County. The City of Auburn Comprehensive Water Plan, upon adoption, becomes an element of the CWSP. South King County Ground Water Management Plan (GWMP), 2003: The GWMP was initiated by Ecology with the intent to develop methods to protect the quality and quantity of ground water, meet future resource needs while recognizing existing water rights and provide effective and coordinated management of ground-water resources. This plan is considered in planning for and operation of the City’s water system. Tribal Land Use Plan, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, 1978: The adoption of the MIT's Zoning Ordinance in 1979, which influences land use within the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, affects water-related considerations. This plan plays a crucial role in ensuring collaborative water management efforts that respect tribal land use. USGS Hydrogeologic Framework, Groundwater Movement, and Water Budget in the Puyallup River Watershed and Vicinity, Pierce and King Counties, Washington: Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5068: A collaborative effort involving various entities (Cities of Auburn, Milton, Puyallup, Sumner, and Tacoma; Pierce Conservation District; DOH; Cascade Water Alliance; Lakehaven Utility District; Summit Water & Supply Company; Mt. View-Edgewood Water Company; and The Russell Family Foundation), this report contributes valuable insights into the hydrogeologic framework, groundwater movement, and water budget in the Puyallup River Watershed. It significantly influences both regional water planning and operational considerations, providing a scientific basis for understanding the water dynamics in the watershed. Other Plans In addition to the studies listed above, the current Water Comprehensive Plans from the following neighboring water systems (City of Algona, Bonney Lake, Kent, Pacific, CWD, LWSD, LMWD and Highline Water District (HWD)) were considered during the preparation of this Plan. Page 88 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-16 1.6 Service Area, Maps, and Land Use The City’s RWSA boundaries were initially defined and documented through the South King County CWSP in 1989. The boundaries of the RWSA have been adjusted since 1989. An area of Pierce County was incorporated into the RWSA through the Pierce County Coordinated Water System Planning process (1997) and interlocal agreements with Bonney Lake (1998 and 2016), LWSD (2004), Kent (2006), and LMWD (2006). Copies of the Water Service Area Agreements are provided in Appendix G. The RWSA covers a total area of 16,193 acres; 15,877 acres are in King County and the remaining 316 acres are in Pierce County within Auburn City Limits. A total of 700 acres (4.3 percent) of the RWSA is in unincorporated King County urban and rural areas. Several water purveyors adjoin the City of Auburn RWSA, as shown in Figure 1-4. These include the cities of Algona, Bonney Lake, Kent, Pacific, and Sumner. Also included are the CWD, LWSD, LMWD, HWD, and MIT. Purveyors with wholesale water agreements and interties are discussed in Section 1.6.1. The City currently does not plan to update its service area boundaries unless the need arises in the future. The City will continue to evaluate its service area boundaries and will consider updates if future needs or circumstances warrant changes. Figure 1-5 reflects the City’s current land use designations. The City includes a wide range of residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial land uses. Public and quasi -public land uses include parks, open space, and public recreation as well as institutional uses such as schools. Commercial and industrial uses occur primarily in the valley; however, large areas of residential land use and the Downtown Urban Center (DUC) also exist in the valley area. The Academy and Lakeland Service Areas are primarily residential, although some commercial development is located along Auburn Way South (SR 164) in the Academy Service Area. The Lea Hill Service Area is also primarily residential although other uses include small amounts of commercial and open spaces, and Green River College. Areas within the RWSA, but outside the City limits, are governed by unincorporated King County land uses which include agricultural, rural and residential land use types as shown in Figure 1-5. The unincorporated King County land uses shown in Figure 1-5 were obtained from King County’s open data portal which reflects the current adopted land use designations established in the Comprehensive Plan. Those land use designations reflect the intended long-range use of land of the 20-year planning horizon of the plan. Figure 1-6 shows the Urban Growth Area (UGA), which is comprised of both the current City limits and potential annexation areas (PAA). 1.6.1 Wholesale Interties Interties provide a tool that water utilities use to move water between systems to meet supply needs, to increase reliability and respond to emergencies. The City maintains wholesale supply interties with three water systems: City of Tacoma, Algona, and LMWD. The City also has a supply contract with the MIT and the Indian Health Service, dating from 1972, for services along a pipeline at SE 368th PL extending from the City limits into the reservation. Page 89 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-17 1.6.1.1 City of Tacoma In 2012, Tacoma agreed to provide water to the City in the quantity of up to 1.0 mgd average day use, 1.8 mgd peak day use, and 1.62 mgd four-day peak use. Two interties were constructed to supply the City: located at 3200 B Street NW and 29600 132nd Avenue SE in Auburn. This agreement will remain in force as long as Tacoma (or its successors in interest of its water system) remains in the business of providing water, and as long as the City meets the terms and conditions of the agreement. In 2014, Tacoma amended and restated the 2012 agreement with the City to provide a total of 3.5 mgd (2,430 gpm) of average use and 5.12 mgd (3,555 gpm) of peak use combined from the interties. The B Street NW Intertie is limited to a maximum flowrate of 2,200 gpm and the 132nd Avenue SE Intertie is limited to a maximum flowrate of 4,500 gpm. However, the combined use of the interties cannot exceed 5.12 mgd (3,555 gpm) in a 24 hour period. Page 90 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-18 Figure 1-4 | Adjacent Water Systems Page 91 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-19 Figure 1-5 | Existing Land Use Page 92 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-20 Figure 1-6 | Urban Growth Area Page 93 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-21 1.6.1.2 City of Algona (Algona) In 1996, the City and Algona entered into a water supply interlocal agreement (IA3) for the City to provide wholesale water supply to Algona. In 2002, the agreement was superseded with Interlocal Agreement 3A (IA3A). IA3A called for the City to provide for a firm quantified (uninterruptible) wholesale water supply and Algona would provide the City its groundwater rights from the failed well located at the intersection of 3rd Avenue and Washington Boulevard. Per IA3A, Algona also agreed to maintain its 100,000 gallons of system storage and financially participate in an additional 180,000-gallon share of the City’s Reservoir 6 storage capacity. Per request in 2016, Algona elected to increase its participation in Reservoir 6 by 100,000 gallons, which accounted for a total share of 280,000-gallon storage capacity. If the City experiences any failure or decreased capacity, the supply of water to Algona may be decreased by the same percentage that is experienced by the City. Algona is served (per agreement IA3A) through 8-inch meter located at 1st Avenue and by two 8-inch intertie meter stations located at 1149 Industry Drive SW, and at Boundary Boulevard and Milwaukee Avenue. A fourth 8-inch master meter is located near Iowa Drive and West Valley Highway. All the interties are connected to the City’s 242 zone. 1.6.1.3 Lake Meridian Water District (LMWD) An intertie between the City and LMWD was constructed in 1996 as part of Interlocal Agreement 2 (IA2), to enable the District to purchase water from the City. The intertie also allows the City to provide an emergency supply to Kent's East Hill Service Area through LMWD. A provision of the IA2 agreement calls for the district to provide an emergency supply to the City when needed for the Lea Hill Service Area. As part of the IA2, the City agrees to provide up to 2.5 mgd of MDD to LMWD (total maximum day demand of 5.0 mgd). Per the 2017 Amendment to the IA2, LMWD discontinued regular purchase of water from the City and instead switched their primary supply to CWD. The amendment maintained the intertie with LMWD but modified the conditions of service to interruptible. 1.6.2 Emergency Interties The City has emergency interties with seven water systems as summarized in Table 1-3. Table 1-3 | Emergency Interties Water System Receiver Location Auburn Pressure Zone Mode of Operation Meter Size Operated by City of Algona City of Algona Boundary Boulevard and Celery Ave Valley 242 Manual N/A City of Auburn City of Algona City of Algona Boundary Boulevard and O Street Valley 242 Manual 8" City of Auburn City of Bonney Lake City of Bonney Lake Evergreen Way SE (southwest of Lakeland Hills Way) Lakeland 697 Manual 8" City of Bonney Lake City of Bonney Lake Two-way Lakeland Hills Way & 59th Avenue Lakeland 697 Manual N/A City of Auburn/ Bonney Lake City of Bonney Lake Two-way Evergreen Way and Nathan Avenue Lakeland 697 Manual N/A City of Auburn/ Bonney Lake Page 94 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-22 Water System Receiver Location Auburn Pressure Zone Mode of Operation Meter Size Operated by City of Bonney Lake Two-way Olive Avenue, south of Evergreen Loop Lakeland 697 Manual N/A City of Auburn/ Bonney Lake City of Kent Two-way 78th Avenue S and S 277th Street Valley 242 Manual 6" City of Auburn/ Kent City of Pacific City of Pacific Ellingson Road near Pacific Ave Valley 242 Manual 4" City of Pacific City of Pacific City of Pacific A St SE (north of White River) Valley 242 Manual N/A City of Pacific Lakehaven Water & Sewer District (LWSD) City of Auburn Aaby Drive and Knickerbocker Drive Valley 242 Manual 6” LWSD LMWD Two-way 127th Place SE, south of SE 299th Place Lea Hill 648 Manual N/A City of Auburn LMWD Two-way 124th Avenue SE and SE 300th Way Lea Hill 648 Manual N/A City of Auburn LMWD LMWD SE 300th & 132nd Ave SE Lea Hill 648 Manual 8” City of Auburn LMWD LMWD SE 288th St & 132nd Ave SE Lea Hill 648 Manual 8” City of Auburn 1.7 System Policies The City manages the water utility in accordance with established water system policies that govern various facets of utility operations. The water system policies are established to support a vision or mission and to provide a framework for the design, operation, and ongoing wellbeing of the City’s water utility. The policies establish consistency and ensure that adequate levels of service are provided throughout the system. The policies also provide documentation to current water-system customers, as well as those considering service from the City. The City’s Water Comprehensive Plan is based upon the following mission statement for the water utility: “The City will provide for the efficient, environmentally sound and safe management of the existing and future water system within Auburn’s service area.” For areas outside its municipal boundaries, the City maintains water franchises that allow for construction, operation, and maintenance of its facilities. Water system design and construction in the franchise areas are consistent with franchise requirements and the design and construction standards included in this Plan. The City’s water system policies and criteria, provided in Appendix A, are grouped within goal statements that are headlined under seven categories: Business Practices, Service Area, Operations and Maintenance, Financial, Planning, Environmental Stewardship, and Design and Construction. Page 95 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-23 1.8 Duty to Serve The City recognizes its duty to serve all new service connections within its RWSA when the following thresholds are met per WAC 246-290-106. ➢ The water system has sufficient capacity to serve water in a safe and reliable manner. o To ensure the water system's capacity for safe water delivery, hydraulic analysis is conducted. This involves assessment of peak demand patterns, pressure requirements, and potential system expansions. The goal is to establish and maintain a water supply infrastructure that can reliably and securely accommodate the needs of new connections. ➢ The service request is consistent with adopted local plans and development regulations. o Service requests undergo a comprehensive review to ascertain their alignment with local plans, including the City’s Design and Construction Standards. ➢ The water system has sufficient water rights to provide service. o Assessment of water production data is performed for all sources to confirm the water system's capacity and compliance with available water rights. ➢ The water system can provide service in a timely and reasonable manner. o The assessment of the water system's capability to provide service promptly and reasonably encompasses evaluating infrastructure readiness, adherence to construction timelines, and minimizing disruption to existing customers. The City incorporates Washington State DOH recommendations for timely and reasonable service, which is defined as providing water service within 120 days of receiving a complete application, barring any extenuating circumstances. o If a customer or applicant is dissatisfied with a decision made by the City Engineer concerning water service, they may file a written objection with the Public Works Director within 15 working days of receiving the decision. The Director will respond within 15 working days. If the response is unsatisfactory, the appellant may request a hearing with the City’s hearing examiner within 30 days. o The hearing examiner’s decision is final, but can be appealed in superior court following RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598. o For customers in the city's RWSA located within unincorporated areas of King County, if all city- level appeals are exhausted and unresolved, the dispute may be escalated to the King County Utilities Technical Review Committee (UTRC) in accordance with King County Code (KCC) 13.24.080. The City will plan to provide water service to all customers within its RWSA, in accordance with the WAC requirements and City Code. Revisions to the City’s RWSA will be made only by written agreement and in accordance with local, county and state regulations. Page 96 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Description of the Water System Page 1-24 1.9 Local Government Consistency The City has submitted this plan to DOH, King and Pierce Counties, adjacent utilities, and local governments as part of the Agency Review process. Local government consistency review is completed in accordance with WAC 246-290-100(7) and WAC 246-290-108 to confirm consistency between the water system plan and local comprehensive plans, development regulations, and other local codes. The consistency review also supports planning and development, minimizing conflicts and legal entanglements. The completed and signed Local Government Consistency Determination forms (DOH 331- 568) are provided in Appendix C. 1.10 Watershed Plan Consistency The City is in the Duwamish-Green (WRIA 9) and Puyallup-White Watershed (WRIA 10). The City currently has no plans to expand water rights place of use to include any portion of the service area that was not previously within the place of use for the water right when documented in an approved planning or engineering document and as identified in this Plan. If the City expands water rights place of use, the new area within the water rights place of use service area will be formed in compliance with the terms of WAC 246-290-107 and consistent with the Watershed Plan approved for WRIA 9 or WRIA 10, under RCW 90.54.040(1). Page 97 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-1 CHAPTER 2 Basic Planning Data This chapter’s objective is to meet the requirements of WAC 246-290-100 (4)(b), incorporating basic planning data into this 2024 Water System Plan (WSP). It provides current population and water demand information; estimates future population and water demand; validates data; and compares future population and water demand estimates with locally adopted plans. Projecting realistic future water requirements, or demand, is necessary for planning infrastructure projects and securing adequate water supply to meet future growth. Future water demands are a key component of the water system analyses presented in this WSP and in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Accurate demand projections require a thorough review of historical water use, predicting where and how much growth will occur, and estimating the future water use for existing and new customers. The following topics are addressed in this chapter: 2.1 Water Service Area Population 2.2 Water Service Connections and Usage 2.3 Water Supply and Production 2.4 Distribution System Leakage 2.5 Water Supply Characteristics 2.6 Water Supply Reliability Evaluation 2.7 Future Population Projections and Land Use 2.8 Future Water Demand 2.1 Water Service Area Population The City’s current area within the RWSA boundary is smaller than its City limits, with adjacent purveyors serving the portion of the City’s population that is outside its RWSA boundary, as shown in Figure 1-1 presented in Chapter 1. As a result, historical City population data does not accurately represent the population served by the City’s water system. To calculate the RWSA population, the Housing Unit Method was used, which is presented as an acceptable option for population determination in the Washington State Department of Health’s (DOH) Water System Planning Guidebook 2020 Revision. The Housing Unit Method calculates the population based on the number of residential units and the area’s average person’s per household ratio. The historical population data for the water system, as calculated using the Housing Unit Method, is presented in Table 2-1. These calculated populations are consistent with the numbers the City has reported on its Water Facilities Inventory (WFI), included in Appendix H. Page 98 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-2 Table 2-1 | Historical Population 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Persons per household1 2.73 2.75 2.76 2.77 2.79 2.80 2.81 2.82 Single-Family Residential Connections2,3 11,600 12,128 11,852 11,857 11,883 11,894 11,985 11,980 Multi-Family Residential Connections2 1,045 1,070 1,035 1,044 1,054 1,054 1,064 1,052 Calculated Multi-Family Units4 10,450 10,700 10,350 10,440 10,540 10,540 10,640 10,520 Calculated Population Served5 60,259 62,704 61,294 61,872 62,535 62,876 63,576 63,450 City Population6 78,210 80,362 82,058 84,352 86,353 87,256 88,080 88,750 City Employment (Non- Residential Population)7 37,298 39,466 29,487 40,855 41,985 39,092 37,871 N/A Notes: 1. Persons per household per Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM). 2021 and 2022 values are projected since OFM data is only available for the census period of 2010-2020. 2. Single and Multi-Family connections per City’s water system billing records. 3. Single-Family Residential connections include duplexes per the City’s design standards. 4. Assumed units per multi-family connection is 10 per the City’s WFI, updated on 3/15/2022. 5. Calculated Population Served is calculated as the number of single-family connections plus the number of multi-family units multiplied by the persons per household. 6. City population per the Washington State OFM records. 7. Employment data is from the United States Census OnTheMap data source using a City-defined selection area. Based on the calculated historical water system population presented in Table 2-1, the City’s water system has seen growth in population between 2015 and 2022 averaging a one percent increase annually. The number of connections peaked in 2016 (along with the calculated population), however this was during the time when the City was transferring services to AMI metering, resulting in some apparent fluctuations of reported connections during the switchover that could not be easily rectified. The last row in Table 2-1 provides the City population as reported by the Office of Financial Management (OFM). The City population has had a similar, steady growth to the calculated water system population, with an average annual growth rate of 1.8 percent annually. The City population as reported by the OFM is larger than the calculated water system population because the RWSA is smaller than the City limits as shown in the Water System Map (Figure 1-3). Additionally, growth in parts of the City beyond the RWSA has been greater than the rate of growth experienced within the RWSA. The OFM City population information is provided for reference; the calculated population served will be used for the purposes of this WSP. 2.2 Water Service Connections and Usage Historical water use, or consumption, data was obtained from City records to characterize the demands of the City’s customers. Annual water use data for the years 2015 to 2022 was used to develop historical demand patterns and parameters, which represent current and likely future water use. Two key demand parameters were generated from the data: typical water use per customer classification, and typical water use per equivalent residential unit. These parameters were used as the basis of future demand projections. 2.2.1 Historical Accounts The City’s water customers are divided into eight customer classifications, which are: ➢ Single-family Residential (SFR). ➢ Multi-family Residential (MFR). ➢ Commercial. Page 99 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-3 ➢ Manufacturing and Industrial. ➢ Schools. ➢ Municipal (City Accounts). ➢ Irrigation. ➢ Wholesale. The number of connections for each customer classification is summarized in Table 2-2. Unmetered, also referred to as non-revenue water, also accounts for a portion of the City’s water use, however, this classification is not included in Table 2-2. Please note that per the City’s standards, SRF connections include duplexes. Table 2-2 | Historical Number of Connections per Customer Classification 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Single-Family Residential 11,600 12,128 11,852 11,857 11,883 11,894 11,985 11,980 Multi-Family Residential 1,045 1,070 1,035 1,044 1,054 1,054 1,064 1,052 Commercial 1,317 1,386 1,340 1,339 1,333 1,328 1,284 1,244 Manufacturing & Industrial 50 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 Schools 70 64 60 60 60 60 58 55 Municipal (City Accounts) 32 34 33 33 33 33 33 33 Irrigation 459 499 484 499 514 514 620 675 Wholesale 8 8 8 7 5 5 5 5 Number of Connections, Total 14,581 15,193 14,816 14,842 14,884 14,890 15,051 15,046 As summarized in Table 2-2, SFR connections make up approximately 80 percent of all accounts. The total number of connections has increased by approximately three percent between 2015 and 2022. Variation in the total number of water service connections in 2016 is linked to the rollout of AMI technology from 2016 to 2017. Throughout this transitional phase, there may have been instances of double counting meters in 2016, leading to an inflated number of connections. Subsequently, there was a notable decrease in 2017 as the number of connections were normalized. A significant change in manufacturing and industrial accounts occurred between 2015 and 2016 due to some meters being reclassified as commercial connections. Manufacturing and industrial services are classified as businesses engaging in the manufacture of products, materials, equipment, machinery, and supplies with a meter size of two inches or larger and a monthly annual average water consumption equal to or greater than 30,000 cubic feet. There were several accounts that did not meet the criteria for this classification and were changed to Commercial classification rate following 2015. The total number of connections from 2016 to 2017 decreased due to low and high flow meters (two meters) being replaced with one meter; this impacted Commercial, Manufacturing and Industrial, and School connections. The number of SFR, MFR, and commercial connections peaked in 2016, however, as mentioned in the opening paragraph, this is likely due to the fluctuations in the City’s transition to AMI metering. Municipal connections remained constant over this period. Wholesale connections were reduced in 2019 when Covington Water District (CWD) and Lake Meridian Water District (LMWD), formerly known as King County Water District # 111, discontinued regular purchase of water from the City. Page 100 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-4 2.2.2 Historical Consumption The City’s historical annual water consumption based on City billing data for each customer classification is presented in Table 2-3 in million gallons (MG); the table does not include non-revenue (unmetered) water. Table 2-3 | Historical Consumption in Million Gallons (MG) by Customer Classification 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Single-Family Residential 774 753 759 836 729 777 796 755 Multi-Family Residential 537 546 523 587 536 553 559 559 Commercial 501 581 595 594 585 461 470 472 Manufacturing & Industrial 170 153 123 124 121 101 94 96 Schools 41 49 56 49 42 30 33 28 Municipal (City Accounts) 5 4 5 5 5 4 4 3 Irrigation 163 162 160 102 102 118 173 173 Wholesale 425 428 153 137 130 131 128 125 Total Consumption, MG 2,616 2,676 2,374 2,433 2,251 2,175 2,257 2,211 Consumption has slightly declined over the period of record. While SFR and MFR consumption varied from year to year, it generally saw a slight increase during the study period which is correlated to the steady increase in the number of connections presented in Table 2-2. SFR and MFR consumption peaked in 2018, which is likely due to AMI meters implementation. Manufacturing and industrial demands decreased between 2015 and 2022 which is attributed to the reduced number of connections (reclassification) presented in Table 2-2 as well as reduced consumption from Boeing which is the City’s only current manufacturing and industrial customer. Commercial and school consumption decreased in 2020 through 2022 which is likely correlated with remote working and schooling that resulted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Wholesale demands also decreased over the planning period since LMWD and CWD discontinued purchase of water from the City. Additionally, no wholesale water was supplied to the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) for the future fish hatchery; refer to Section 2.8 for additional information. Figure 2-1 presents the percentage of customer connections and annual billed water consumption by customer classification in 2022. Comparing the number of connections and water consumption illustrates the differences in water consumption between the different customer classifications. For example, SFR customers represent 80 percent of the connections, yet only 34 percent of the total consumption in 2022. Conversely, MFR customers represent seven percent of the connections, but 25 percent of the total consumption in 2022. Wholesale customers have six accounts in 2022 (0.04 percent of the total connections), but account for six percent of the total consumption in 2022. Similarly, manufacturing and industrial have two connections in 2022 (0.01 percent of the total connections), but account for four percent of the total consumption in 2022. Page 101 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-5 Figure 2-1 | Comparison of Number of Connections to Annual Water Consumption per Customer Classification in 2022 80% 7%8% 0.01%0.37%0.22% 4% 0.03% 34% 25% 21% 4% 1%0.15% 8% 6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Single-Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Commercial Manufacturing & Industrial Schools Municipal (City Accounts) Irrigation Wholesale Number of Connections Water Consumption Page 102 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-6 2.2.2.1 Historical Wholesale Consumption Wholesale consumption decreased between 2015 and 2022. From 2015 to 2016 wholesale consumption represented 16 percent of the City’s annual water consumption. In 2017 wholesale consumption decreased to six percent and remained relatively constant through 2022. The City has two wholesale water agreements, one with the City of Algona and the other with LMWD. These agreements are described below, and copies of the agreements are included in Appendix G. The City of Algona relies on the City of Auburn for water supply under the Water System Intertie Agreement, Algona/Auburn Intertie Agreement No. 3A (Agreement 3A). Agreement 3A was amended in 2002 to continue the agreement for the City of Auburn to provide a portion of the City of Algona’s long-term water supply needs. Additionally, in 2016 the City of Algona purchased 100,000 gallons of additional storage in Lakeland Reservoir 6, bringing their total storage capacity to 280,000 gallons. Algona’s consumption increased in 2018. Water consumption averaged 0.33 mgd between 2015 and 2017, and 0.36 mgd between 2018 and 2022. See Table 2-6 for annual usage totals. The City’s Interlocal Agreement 2 (IA2) outlines the agreement with LMWD. The City’s agreement with LMWD is on an interruptible basis and allows sales up to 2.5 mgd. This agreement was executed in October of 1996 and amended as Resolution 5332 in 2017. The agreement will remain in full force unless terminated by mutual agreement of the participants. LMWD did not purchase wholesale water during the planning period since they discontinued regular purchase of water from the City of Auburn in 2017 per the amendment to IA2. Instead, LMWD switched their primary supply to CWD, however, LMWD still maintains intertie with the City to use as a wholesale water supply on an as-needed basis. The first amendment to IA2 also included the termination of CWD’s wholesale agreement with the City; CWD did not purchase wholesale water during the planning period. 2.2.3 Water Use Per Connection and Equivalent Residential Units The water use, or demand, of each customer classification can be expressed in terms of equivalent residential units (ERUs) for forecasting and planning purposes. One ERU is defined as the average quantity of water beneficially used by one average, full-time, SFR per day. The ERU calculation does not include non- revenue water or distribution leakage. Table 2-4 summarizes the annual demand per ERU from 2015 to 2022 in gpd. Table 2-4 | Historical Annual Demand per ERU (gpd per ERU) 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 SFR Consumption (MG)1 774 753 759 836 729 777 796 755 Number of SFR Connections2 11,600 12,128 11,852 11,857 11,883 11,894 11,985 11,980 ERUADD (gpd)3 183 170 176 193 168 179 182 173 Notes: 1. Per annual residential consumption from Table 2-3. 2. Per residential connections from Table 2-2. 3. Calculated as annual consumption divided by number of connections. To be conservative, an ERU planning value higher than the average was used by the City for demand forecasting. The 75th percentile of all the eight-year values was used to select the planning ERU value of 182 gpd. This methodology is consistent with the City’s 2015 Plan. The ERU value of 182 gpd is seven percent lower than the 2015 Plan’s ERU planning value of 195 gpd per ERU. Page 103 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-7 The conversion of total water consumption to ERUs provides a means to express water consumption by non-residential customers as an equivalent number of SFR accounts. The number of ERUs per account is obtained by dividing the water consumption per account by the water use per ERU (182 gpd for this planning period). Table 2-5 presents the number of ERUs per account for each customer classification based on the planning value of 182 gallons per ERU. Table 2-5 | Historical Demand as Equivalent ERUs per Customer Classification 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Single-Family Residential(ERUs)1 11,600 12,128 11,852 11,857 11,883 11,894 11,985 11,980 Multi-Family Residential (ERUs) 8,078 8,194 7,864 8,832 8,067 8,295 8,403 8,411 Commercial (ERUs) 7,542 8,709 8,947 8,933 8,806 6,920 7,066 7,096 Manufacturing & Industrial (ERUs) 2,561 2,298 1,857 1,864 1,817 1,510 1,412 1,437 Schools (ERUs) 614 730 842 742 624 448 497 420 Municipal (City Accounts) (ERUs) 69 62 69 72 82 56 67 49 Irrigation (ERUs) 2,454 2,431 2,412 1,528 1,534 1,775 2,608 2,603 Wholesale (ERUs) 6,395 6,414 2,299 2,057 1,949 1,966 1,925 1,884 Annual Demand Equivalent (ERUs) 39,314 40,967 36,141 35,884 34,762 32,863 33,963 33,881 Note: 1. The number of Single-Family Residential ERUs is equivalent to the actual number of connections. For all other customer classifications, the planning value of one ERU is equivalent to 182 gpd. 2.2.4 Largest Water Users The top 20 largest water users for the City’s water system are summarized in Table 2-6 and Figure 2-2 with rank assignments based on 2022 consumption. Total consumption values are presented in MG. This list, in conjunction with the information above, provides information on where water is consumed in the system. It is important to note the type of customer classification, because the top 20 water users consume a significant percentage of the total consumption. As mentioned above, SFR connections make up most of the total connections and water consumption for the system, but no individual SFR connections are listed within the top 20 largest water users. Though the City of Algona is comprised of individual SFR’s, the City of Algona is one of the top 20 largest water users because it is a wholesale customer supplied via a limited number of connections. The top 20 water users in the City’s water system accounted for approximately 24 percent of the total water system consumption in 2022. LMWD was the largest water user in 2015 and 2016, purchasing over 300 MG per year, but discontinued regular purchase of consumed water from the City in 2017. Copper Gate, Promenade Apartments, and Villas/Reserve are developments that were constructed after 2015, which pushed Tall Cedars and Leisure Manor multi-family users out of the top 20. Boeing and the City of Algona make up almost 50 percent of the top 20 water users’ consumption. Page 104 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-8 Table 2-6 | Historical Annual Consumption of the Top 20 Largest Water Users in Million Gallons (MG) Rank1 Customer Name Classification Service Area 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 1 Boeing Manufacturing/Commercial Valley 220.67 227.34 207.23 195.48 207.15 159.83 138.70 149.57 2 City of Algona Wholesale Valley 120.93 125.29 120.46 137.04 130.75 132.07 127.22 125.18 3 Muckleshoot Casino Commercial Academy 36.65 37.04 37.08 37.66 36.49 18.79 24.24 29.79 4 Auburn Manor Multi-Family Valley 21.25 22.367 22.24 20.61 21.45 22.59 25.03 27.10 5 Copper Gate2 Irrigation/Multi-Family Valley - - - - - 0.22 17.70 26.80 6 Emerald Downs Commercial/Irrigation Valley 35.51 34.48 32.40 32.81 30.69 27.28 23.33 23.36 7 White River Estates Multi-Family Valley 13.24 13.09 13.42 13.36 13.66 15.87 18.06 21.47 8 Laundry Facility Commercial Valley 19.52 23.73 26.25 20.81 31.31 30.87 32.19 21.32 9 Promenade Apartments2 Commercial/Irrigation/Multi-Family Lea Hill - - - 7.58 13.00 17.53 19.48 20.74 10 MultiCare Commercial/Irrigation Valley 12.45 14.86 14.95 11.35 12.04 11.48 12.32 15.30 11 Villas/Reserve2 Commercial/Irrigation/Multi-Family Valley - - - 4.75 11.84 14.09 13.62 13.66 12 Wal-mart/Supermall Commercial/Irrigation Valley 14.54 15.98 17.70 13.31 13.78 9.79 13.26 13.58 13 Auburn Dairy Commercial Valley 9.73 10.03 9.73 9.49 10.38 10.63 11.58 12.82 14 Rio Verde Multi-Family Valley 16.91 14.21 11.41 11.72 11.72 11.46 12.12 12.48 15 College Place Multi-Family Lea Hill 10.81 11.46 11.75 12.59 10.99 11.77 11.89 11.74 16 Skylark Village Multi-Family Valley 11.80 12.23 14.30 11.93 14.65 11.13 11.73 11.11 17 The River Estates Multi-Family Valley 10.23 10.59 10.38 9.97 9.17 9.59 10.49 10.27 18 Safeway Commercial Valley 11.01 9.48 9.81 9.27 9.44 9.95 9.32 9.14 19 Adventist Academy School/Multi-Family Academy 10.66 9.92 8.89 12.49 9.33 6.17 6.50 8.26 20 Forest Villa (PIC) Multi-Family Academy 13.86 10.83 8.24 8.13 8.63 7.80 7.82 8.00 - LMWD3 Wholesale Lea Hill 302.89 303.02 29.40 - - - - - TOTAL CONSUMPTION (MG)3 905.86 918.45 618.85 588.28 613.31 545.32 546.66 571.67 Notes: 1. Rank assignments are based on 2022 consumption data. 2. Service location was constructed after 2015 WSP was published. 3. LMWD was the largest water user in 2015 and 2016 but discontinued purchase of water from the City in 2017. Included to contribute to the total consumption. 4. The annual total is the sum of the top 20 largest users from each year; Tall Cedars and Leisure Manor consumption data is not shown but is included in the total. Page 105 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-9 Figure 2-2 | Historical Annual Consumption of the Top 20 Largest Water Users in Million Gallons (MG) 0 50 100 150 200 250 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022Million Gallons (MG)Boeing City of Algona Muckleshoot Casino Auburn Manor Copper Gate Emerald Downs White River Estates Laundry Facility Promenade Apartments MultiCare Villas/ Reserve Walmart/Supermall Auburn Dairy Rio Verde College Place Skylark Village The River Estates Safeway Adventist Academy Forest Villa (PIC) Linear (Forest Villa (PIC)) City of Algona Boeing Page 106 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-10 2.3 Water Supply and Production The historical average and maximum water demands are important parameters when performing system and supply analyses. The term “water demand” refers to all the water requirements of a system including metered customers, unmetered water use, and unaccounted for water loss such as leakage and theft. For this reason, the City’s supply data, which accounts for all water demand, was used to calculate the Average Day Demand (ADD) and Maximum Day Demand (MDD) for each year. 2.3.1 Historical Water Supply The City produces water through its springs, wells, and, when needed, wholesale water purchases. Table 2-7 summarizes the amount of water produced and purchased by the City between 2015 and 2022 as MG. The City has not purchased water from the City of Tacoma since 2016. Table 2-7 | Historical Annual Water Supply by Source in Million Gallons (MG) 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Lakeland Well 5 4.9 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 0.9 1.2 3.3 Lakeland Well 5A 54 45 64 76 68 65 72 59 Lakeland Well 5B - - - - - - - - Valley Well 1 - 200 336 93 143 143 57 73 Valley Well 2 - - - 270 296 235 305 314 Valley Well 3A - - - - - - - - Valley Well 3B - - - - - - - - Valley Well 4 302 430 421 121 96 84 88 66 Valley Well 6 - - - 402 445 349 438 468 Valley Well 7 - - - - - - - - Coal Creek Springs 1,456 1,613 1,510 1,315 1,208 1,268 1,338 1,225 West Hill Springs 173 198 114 176 136 133 140 157 Algona Well 1 - - - - - - - - Total Production (MG)1 2,033 2,487 2,506 2,464 2,410 2,313 2,443 2,395 Total Purchased (MG) 732 321 - - - - - - Total Supply (MG) 2,765 2,808 2,506 2,464 2,410 2,313 2,443 2,395 Note: 1. Small differences exist between the total production value and the sum of individual production values by source. This is due to the use of raw unprocessed data for individual sources, which was subsequently processed to identify and remove outliers, correct data entry errors and account for anomalies that could distort the overall results. These adjustments ensure that the . Total Production values presented depict the most accurate information available. Table 2-8 | 2022 Monthly Water Production by Source (MG) Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Lakeland Well 5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Lakeland Well 5A 6 5 6 6 6 6 5 6 6 6 - 1 Lakeland Well 5B - - - - - - - - - - - - Valley Well 1 3 1 - 1 - 3 19 41 5 - - - Valley Well 2 27 25 29 28 29 25 30 29 24 23 21 24 Page 107 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-11 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Valley Well 3A - - - - - - - - - - - - Valley Well 3B - - - - - - - - - - - - Valley Well 4 3 2 2 3 - 2 18 27 8 1 - - Valley Well 6 41 37 44 41 43 36 44 44 37 35 31 35 Valley Well 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - Coal Creek Springs 90 71 77 62 83 110 129 159 153 112 89 90 West Hill Springs 13 11 13 12 13 13 13 15 14 14 13 13 Algona Well 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.3.2 Average Day Demands and Maximum Day Demands Table 2-9 summarizes the historical ADD and MDD based on production from 2015 through 2022. To calculate the ADD, the total annual supply was divided by the number of days in the year. Historical values of MDD are equivalent to the highest production and purchase in one day each year, usually during the summer when irrigation use is highest. The MDD is a key parameter used for supply capacity, pump station discharge rates, reservoir capacity, and pump sizes. The peaking factor is also a key parameter in developing the future MDD projections. Table 2-9 | Historical Annual ADD, MDD, Peak Day, and Peaking Factor 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Annual Supply (MG)1 2,765 2,808 2,506 2,464 2,410 2,313 2,443 2,395 Average Day Demand (mgd) 7.57 7.67 6.87 6.75 6.60 6.32 6.69 6.56 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 11.62 12.56 11.76 11.60 11.25 12.43 11.77 11.78 Max Day Date (month/day) 6/28 8/25 8/22 7/27 8/1 7/29 7/27 7/29 MDD/ADD Peaking Factor 1.53 1.64 1.71 1.72 1.70 1.97 1.76 1.80 Note: 1. Value is from Table 2-7. The last row of Table 2-9 presents the historical MDD to ADD peaking factor, which normalizes the historical data to compare between years. The minimum MDD factor was 1.53 in 2015, and the maximum MDD was 1.97 in 2020. Due to variability of the peaking factor, the City has chosen to use the 75th percentile of the historical peaking factors in demand projections, which is 1.77. This factor provides a better representation of the peaking factors observed historically for water supply predictions. Figure 2-3 shows that from 2015 to 2022 the ADD has decreased, which is correlated with improved water use efficiency, but the MDD and MDD/ADD peaking factor have increased. This is likely due to warmer and drier summer months and a reduction in the ADD after CWD opted out of their original agreement with the City, terminating their purchase of water, and LMWD stopped regular purchase of consumed water from the City, switching to interruptible supply. Page 108 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-12 Figure 2-3 | Historical Water Production with Peaking Factor 2.3.3 Peak Hour Demand Peak Hour Demand (PHD) is the amount of water used, excluding fire flow, during the largest use hour of the year. Because the City does not track hourly production data, PHD was estimated based on Equation 3- 1 from the DOH Water Design Manual, which is as follows: PHD = (ERUMDD/1440) [(C x N) + F] + 18 Where PHD = Peak Hourly Demand, total system (gpm) C = Coefficient Associated with Ranges of ERUs (1.6 for systems with more than 500 ERUs) N = Number of ERUs based on MDD F = Factor Associated with Ranges of ERUs (225 for systems with more than 500 ERUs) ERUMDD = Maximum Day Demand per ERU (gpd) The calculated annual PHD for the system is summarized in Table 2-10. Table 2-10 | Historical Peak Hour Demand 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 ERUMDD (gpd) 279 298 312 313 310 358 320 327 Number of ERUs based on MDD 41,586 42,115 37,692 37,068 36,253 34,696 36,747 36,025 PHD (gpm) 12,973 14,019 13,135 12,950 12,567 13,881 13,140 13,159 PHD to MDD Factor 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.61 Page 109 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-13 The last row of Table 2-10 provides the calculated PHD to MDD factor, which normalizes the historical data to compare between years. The calculated PHD factor remained consistent at 1.61 between 2015-2022. Due to this consistency, the City has elected to use the PHD factor of 1.61 in future demand projections. 2.3.4 Seasonal Variations The pattern of water consumption differs between the customer classifications. Water use increases significantly during the summer when daylight hours are longer, and lawn and landscape watering is prominent. Other outdoor uses, including car washing, pools, and recreation, are also at their highest during summer months. Figure 2-4 presents the effect that temperature has on water usage by comparing 2022 monthly consumption data per customer classification to the average monthly temperature. Figure 2-4 | Temperature Effects on Water Usage in 2022 As seen in Figure 2-4, SFR and irrigation customers show a significant peak in total consumption during the summer months. Other customer classifications show a smaller similar peak during these months. MFR customers do not show a significant peak during summer monthly because City’s policy dictates the use of separate irrigation accounts for all non-SFR accounts. These monthly variations can be used to target water use efficiency efforts and/or to project future water-use patterns for planning purposes. 2.4 Distribution System Leakage Distribution System Leakage (DSL) represents the difference between production and documented water use (retail, wholesale, and authorized unmetered). It may include inaccurate master and service connection meters, unaccounted-for non-revenue water use, pipeline leakage, and unauthorized use. DSL does not include authorized water usage such as water used for fire protection, flushing, construction, and other 32 42 52 62 72 82 92 - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 Temperautre (Fahrenheit)Water Use (1,000-gallon) Single Family Multi-Family Commercial Manufacturing & Industry School City Accounts Irrigation Monthly Average Temperature Page 110 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-14 maintenance and operations practices. However, to be credited, this must be accounted for by metering or estimating using credible means. DSL is calculated as the difference between the total amount of water produced and the sum of water sold and authorized unbilled water usage. DOH requires the three-year average DSL to be under 10 percent to minimize water waste. The City’s estimated DSL for 2015 through 2022 is presented in Table 2-11. Revised DSL values have been provided to DOH for 2020, 2021 and 2022 that are lower than the values presented in Table 2-11. However, the revised values are not utilized for projections, as the revisions were made after the demand projections and system analysis were completed. Since the values used for demand projections and system analysis are slightly higher than the revised values, the projections are slightly more conservative than would have been necessary otherwise. Table 2-11 | Historical Distribution System Leakage 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total Water Supply1 (MG) 2,765 2,808 2,506 2,464 2,410 2,313 2,443 2,395 Billed Consumption2 (MG) 2,616 2,676 2,374 2,433 2,251 2,175 2,266 2,214 Authorized Non-Billed Consumption (MG) 7 4 6 13 7 4 5 5 Total Authorized Consumption (MG) 2,623 2,679 2,380 2,446 2,257 2,179 2,271 2,219 DSL (MG) 142 128 126 18 153 133 172 176 Annual Percent DSL 5.1% 4.6% 5.0% 0.7% 6.3% 5.8% 7.1% 7.4% 3-Year Rolling Average (Percent) 6.8% 5.1% 4.9% 3.4% 4.0% 4.3% 6.4% 6.7% 3-Year Rolling Average (MG) 183 139 132 91 99 101 153 161 Notes: 1. From Table 2-7. 2. From Table 2-3. For the City’s water system, the total three-year rolling average DSL ranged from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent of the total production meeting DOH requirements and the City’s goal. The City’s annual average DSL over the period was 5.2 percent. During this period the City maintained a DSL below 10 percent on an annual basis, which is an improvement from the last planning period. Abnormally high authorized non-billed consumption was recorded in 2018 due to unidirectional flushing for the Valley Service Area. Starting in 2021, the billed consumption was updated to track hydrant water used during construction. The City is committed to maintaining a 3-year rolling average DSL below 10 percent and actively works to identify and eliminate DSL throughout the system through its ongoing leak detection, meter calibration, and repair and replacement programs for water system infrastructure, as detailed in Chapter 6 – Operations and Maintenance. Additionally, the City has maintained efforts to reduce non-payment bills and water theft. 2.5 Water Supply Characteristics The City has a diverse water supply consisting of two springs, ten wells and an emergency intertie with the City of Tacoma; refer to the Existing Facilities Figure provided in Chapter 1 (Figure 1-3). The City’s aquifer characteristics are described in several sources; this section draws mainly from the Conceptual Mitigation Plan (CMP) for Water Right Application G1-28404, provided in Appendix S. Page 111 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-15 Wells 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 6, and 7 are in the lower alluvial aquifer in the Auburn Valley, referred to as the Valley Wellfield. This wellfield is mostly confined by the Osceola Mudflow, an important aquitard in the Auburn Valley depicted in Figure 4 of the CMP. Groundwater discharge from the upland aquifers is the primary source of recharge to the lower alluvial aquifer, which hosts all the City’s wells. Groundwater generally moves upward in the valley aquifers and moves horizontally at approximately one to four feet per day. Alluvial groundwater from the White River also recharges the Green River alluvial aquifer. Groundwater in the vicinity of Wells 2, 6, and 7 discharges into the Puget Sound via the Green River and the Duwamish River valley. Wells 2, 6, and 7 are located northeast of downtown Auburn and collectively referred to as the Fulmer Wellfield. Wells 1, 3A, 3B, and 4 are in the White River Drainage Basin and Wells 2, 6, 7 and West Hill Springs are in the Green River Drainage Basin. Wells 3A, 3B and 7 are not currently in use due to high manganese concentrations, however the City plans to install manganese treatment at each of these facilities to bring them back online. The City has a pending water right application for 13,443 acre-feet per year from the existing Wells 6 and 7 and a future Well 8. The City has sufficient water rights to meet current demands, 10-year, and 20-year demand projections, as shown in the Water Rights Self-Assessment Form provided in Appendix I. Mitigation obligations due to the proposed water right for Wells 6, 7, and 8 are listed below and are described in detail in the CMP: ➢ Mitigation of impacts to Green River, ➢ Mitigation of impacts to White River, and ➢ Mitigation of impacts to Mill Creek. Wells 5, 5A, and 5B are in the Upland Wellfield and constructed within the Lakeland Service Area. The upland aquifers are recharged through precipitation and leakage from Lake Tapps and discharge into the White River system. Once Well 5B came online, the City discovered that the aquifer was not recovering. Well 5B has been offline since 2006. The safe yield of Wells 5 and 5A have been decreased from their design capacity due to a drop in the aquifer’s capacity. Specific information on the individual wells and their associated water rights are provided in Section 3.4.1. West Hill Springs draws from an unnamed confined aquifer. The spring source water flows by gravity into the Valley Service Area, although flows vary depending on aquifer conditions, and discharges into Mill Creek, which flows into the Green River. Coal Creek Springs is the largest active water supply for the City and draws from a confined aquifer, however its flow varies depending on aquifer conditions. Coal Creek Springs collection system is located at the base of Lake Tapps Upland and is in the White River Drainage Basin. Further aquifer details are provided within the Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP) provided as Appendix T. The City also owns two additional wells: the Algona Well 1 and the Braunwood Well. Algona Well 1 was acquired by the City in 1996 but has since been taken offline due to operational issues. The City plans to use a groundwater flow model being developed by the USGS to predict potential impacts to surface water. 2.6 Water Supply Reliability Evaluation The City’s active water sources have maintained current production capacities and are deemed reliable, as they have back-up power sources available. The production of some water sources is limited by pump or intake capacity, as mentioned in Section 2.5, however all production is managed to be within available water rights and is managed by the physical capacity of each facility as summarized in Table 2-12. Page 112 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-16 Table 2-12 | Summary of Source Water Pumping or Production Capacity Compared to 2022 Maximum Daily Production Source Service Area Pumping/Production Capacity (gpm) Maximum Daily Production1 (gpm) Well 5 Lakeland 760 640 Well 5A Lakeland 180 180 Well 5B Lakeland --2 -- Well 1 Valley 2,100 2,100 Well 2 Valley 1,6004 1,470 Well 3A Valley --2 -- Well 3B Valley --2 -- Well 4 Valley 2,600 1,796 Well 6 Valley 1,800 1,777 Well 7 Valley --2 -- Coal Creek Springs Valley 3,5003 4,383 West Hill Springs Valley 600 563 Algona Well 1 -- --2 -- TOTAL 13,140 12,909 Notes: 1. Maximum daily production per source is the maximum production rate recorded in 2022. 2. The facility is currently offline. No production capacity is available without facility improvements. 3. Water rights for Coal Creek Springs allow for a Qi of 6,732 gpm. 3,500 gpm is the typical historical production capacity limitation experienced. The City is currently investigating the possible factors influencing the feasible withdrawal from this source. 4. The pump at Well 2 was replaced in 2023 and now has a capacity of 1,115 gpm. Calculations presented in the Water Rights Self-Assessment Form (Appendix I) conclude that the City’s existing water rights are anticipated to be adequate to meet the current, 10-year, and 20-year projections for maximum instantaneous flows (Qi) and total annual withdrawal (Qa). However, the City does not have the infrastructure required to withdraw from all water sources, and some sources have underlying production restrictions that require further evaluation. Several facility improvement projects are required to maximize production and obtain the full water rights. Furthermore, potential demand from LMWD was not included in the assessment, as they have an interruptible wholesale agreement with the City which is a secondary priority to the City’s demand. Currently, the City’s interties with the City of Tacoma provide additional wholesale water for purchase if necessary to meet demands, however the City has not purchased water from Tacoma since 2016. The City has established a policy of maintaining the capability to supply the MDD while the largest water source is out of service. The system analysis documented in Chapter 3 confirms that with projected demands over the 20-year planning period, the City will maintain the capability to meet MDD if the largest pumping source is out of service. This evaluation includes the Tacoma interties as available sources to meet this need and excludes the capacity of facilities that are offline or not operational. Of the twelve sources, only Wells 5 and 7 are currently without a standby power source. Standby power will be added to Wells 5 and 7 as part of CIP projects discussed in Chapter 8. The Fulmer Field Corrosion Control Treatment Facility has backup power. The Game Farm Park Pump Station, Lea Hill BPS, and Intertie Pump Station are the only pump stations without a standby power source or connection. Backup power will be added to the Lea Hill BPS and the Intertie Pump Station as part of a capital projects discussed further in Chapter 8. The Game Farm Park Pump Page 113 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-17 Station is a small facility that serves a recreational area and does not serve residential or commercial properties, therefore back-up power is not a critical element. 2.6.1 Use Impacts on Instream Flows New water right appropriations in the Green-Duwamish Basin are subject to instream flow (ISF) regulations as described in the CMP and WAC 173-509. These ISF are senior to the City’s recent water rights application G1-28404. This requires mitigation for potential impacts to the Green River when instream flows are not met, such as predicting when streamflow will drop below ISFs as well as determining the lag time associated with impacts to instream flows from groundwater withdrawals. The CMP includes the following detailed description of the streamflow characteristics: “A review of historical streamflow data indicates that on average streamflow’s are below the ISFs at the Auburn gauge approximately 20 percent of the time (Table 3). Streamflow’s are generally more often below the minimum ISFs during the summer months, falling below the minimum ISFs 35 percent to 61 percent of the time between June and September. The flows are frequently above the minimum ISFs during the spring and winter months but can drop to below ISFs at any time of the year. For example, in April, streamflow falls below the minimum ISFs approximately 3 percent of the time (4.1.2).” The City’s current rights are senior to the instream rights and therefore not effected by the instream flow limitations, however as stewards of the watershed, the City has an aggressive water use efficiency program described in Chapter 4 meant to limit the volume of withdrawals, especially during the dry season. The City has a minor surplus of both annual volume withdrawn (Qa) and maximum instantaneous flow rate withdrawn (Qi) to meet MDD through the 20-year planning period. However, several facility improvements are required to make the withdrawals feasible. 2.6.2 Wholesale Interties The City has three wholesale interties, described below and in further detail in Section 1.6.2. City of Algona The City has supplied water to Algona on a regular basis since 1996, when interlocal agreement IA3 was negotiated. A superseded agreement, IA3A, was negotiated in October 2002 which reflects the current status. The agreement will remain unless terminated by mutual agreement of the City and Algona. Currently, Algona is served through the metered Boeing Welded Duct Intertie and by two eight -inch, manually operated meter stations located at Boundary Boulevard and Industry Drive North, and at Boundary Boulevard and Milwaukee Avenue. LMWD An intertie between the City and LMWD was constructed in 1996 as part of IA2 to enable LMWD to purchase water from the City. The manually operated intertie also allows the City to provide an emergency supply to Kent’s East Hill Service Area. The City agreed to provide up to 2.5 MGD average day and 5.0 MGD maximum day use. A provision of the agreement calls for LMWD to send an emergency supply of water to Page 114 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-18 the City when needed for the Lea Hill Service Area. The IA2 agreement also included several improvements to allow delivery of water: ➢ The Green River Pump Station and pipelines to deliver additional water into the Lea Hill Service Area ➢ The Intertie Pump Station and pipelines to deliver water from the Lea Hill Service Area to LMWD ➢ Construction of two additional wells (Wells 6 and 7). LMWD discontinued regular purchase of water from the City in 2017 per the amendment to IA2, however LMWD still maintains the intertie with the City to use as a wholesale water supply on an as-needed basis. This interlocal agreement has a term of sixty years, commencing in 2017. City of Tacoma In 2012, Tacoma agreed to provide water to the City in the quantity of up to 1.0 MGD average day use, 1.8 MGD peak day use, and 1.62 MGD four-day peak use. Two interties were constructed to supply the City’s Valley pressure zone: located at 3200 B Street NW and 29600 132nd Avenue SE in Auburn. In 2014, Tacoma amended and restated the 2012 agreement with the City to provide a total of 3.5 mgd (2,430 gpm) of average use and 5.12 mgd (3,555 gpm) of peak use from the interties. The B Street NW remotely operated intertie is limited to a maximum flowrate of 2,200 gpm and the 132nd Avenue SE Intertie is limited to a maximum flowrate of 4,500 gpm. However, the combined use of the interties cannot exceed 5.12 mgd (3,555 gpm) in a 24 hour period. This agreement will remain in force as long as the City of Tacoma remains in the business of providing water, however the City has not purchased water for consumption from the City of Tacoma since 2016. 2.6.3 Emergency Interties Emergency interties are an important tool that helps water utilities increase reliability and respond to emergencies. The City has emergency interties with seven water systems, as described in Section 1.6.2 and summarized in Table 1-3. 2.6.4 Potential Interties The City has an interest in acquiring additional interties that would enhance the reliability of water service in the City and among adjacent purveyors. Tacoma Public Utilities constructed the Second Supply Pipeline Project, which runs through the north end of the City’s RWSA between 30th and 37th Streets NE. In addition to the B Street NW and 132nd Avenue SE interties, a third turnout was constructed as part of the pipeline project in the Valley Service Area. The City does not currently plan to develop this turnout but may do so in the future. 2.7 Future Population Projections and Land Use 2.7.1 Demographic Forecast Demographic forecasts provide an estimate of future population and employment. The City is a member of the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), which develops demographic analyses for the central Puget Sound region (King County, Kitsap County, Pierce County, and Snohomish County). The demographic projections are developed based on local planned development capacities and regional policies adopted by the PSRC Vision 2050. Vision 2050 established the region’s strategy for accommodating population and employment growth to maintain the high quality of living, economic prosperity, and a healthy environment Page 115 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-19 through the year 2050. Through this planning process, the City is required to plan for a specific number of additional housing units and jobs. Consistent with the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), the City uses the Vision 2050 growth values as the basis of the demographic projections. Demographic projections are based on the PSRC‘s 2044 forecasts for housing, population, and employment for each Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) within the City’s RWSA, as the City’s policy is to serve all customers within its RWSA. Additional information on the City’s existing land use, future zoning, demographic projections, and corresponding rates of growth are detailed in this Section. 2.7.2 Future Land Use and Zoning Land use and zoning regulations provide important information in determining future water requirements. Land use and zoning determines the area available for various types of development including both SFR and MFR development, as well as commercial and other types of land use that provide the economic base necessary to support residential development. The housing, population and employment projections developed for the 2024 Periodic Comprehensive Plan are based on the employment and housing targets provided by King and Pierce counties that the City must accommodate over the 20-year planning horizon. This consistent approach is encouraged by the Washington State GMA and should result in predictable and stable land uses over longer planning periods. Future land use and zoning designations for the City’s RWSA are shown on the Comprehensive Zoning Map provided as Figure 2-5. Land uses in unincorporated King County which are part of the RWSA, but beyond City limits are anticipated to remain consistent with current designations, as the current land use designations reflect the intended long-range use of land for the 20-year planning horizon in the current Comprehensive Plan; additional data for future land use designation for unincorporated King County are not currently available. Zoning designations implement the land use identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; therefore, the current land use reflects the City’s historical zoning. House Bill 1337 and House Bill 1110, both effective as of July 2023, are geared at expanding housing options. As such, the City has adopted future zoning to allow for accessory dwelling units within areas previously dedicated to single -family detached housing. Table 2-13 summarizes the updating zoning designations and fire flow requirements. Note that the required fire flow in some zoning designations will be determined on a case-by-case basis pending development or re-development type. Fire flow requirements for portions of the RWSA located in unincorporated King County are also captured in Table 2-13. Three of the updated residential zoning designations presented in Table 2-13 allow for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Policies related to ADU water service metering and connection fees are included in Appendix A. The demographic population projections are expected to be sufficient to account for growth that is realized by the additional ADUs within the service area. The demographic population projections are discussed in Section 2.7.3 and demand projections are discussed in Section 2.8.2. Required fire flow for ADUs will be determined on a case-by-case basis pending development or re-development type. The City includes a wide range of residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial land uses. Public and quasi-public land uses include parks, open space, and public recreation as well as institutional uses such as schools. Commercial and industrial uses occur primarily in the Valley Service Area; however, large areas of residential land use and the Downtown Urban Center (DUC) also exist in the Valley Service Area. The Academy and Lakeland Service Areas are primarily residential, although some commercial zoning is located along Auburn Way South (SR 164) in the Academy Service Area. The Lea Hill Service Area is also Page 116 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-20 primarily residential although other uses include small amounts of commercial and open space, and Green River College. Areas within the RWSA, but outside the City limits, are governed by King County zoning. Land use was assumed to be consistent with zoning in these areas. The area in the northwest corner of the RWSA, west of SR167 and north of S 287th Street is zoned for Agriculture. A second area is located near Auburn Narrows State Park, which is north and west of SR18. This area includes Rural Residential, as well as Park and Greenbelt zoning. The City does not currently provide service in this area; however, it is willing to provide service to customers meeting the Service Area Policies. There are two additional unincorporated “pockets” of urban residential zoning within the RWSA that the City currently serves, where the southern area also contains a single parcel of Industrial zoning. The King County zoning was used in the demographic analyses. Table 2-13 | Updated Zoning Districts and Fire Flow Requirements Zoning District Land Use Definition Fire Flow Requirement (gpm) RC RESIDENTIAL CONSERVANCY Residential Conservancy No change 1,500 R-1 RESIDENTIAL 1 DU/ACRE Neighborhood Residential One No change 1,500 R-10 PLUS1 Neighborhood Residential Two Single family, townhouse, duplex, triplex, fourplex, two-story stacked flats, cottage housing-4-6 units/lot ADUs 1,500 - 2,500 R-16 PLUS Neighborhood Residential Two R-10, plus five-plex, six-plex, 3 story stacked flats, courtyard apartments, apartment buildings and mixed use up to 20 units ADUs 2,500 R-20 PLUS Neighborhood Residential Three R-16 plus apartment buildings, and mixed use over 20 units ADUs 2,500 R-NM NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED-USE Mixed Use R-16 and C-1 Uses + Mixed-use (horizontal or vertical) encouraged 2,500 R-MHC RESIDENTIAL MANUFACTURED/MOBILE HOME COMMUNITY Neighborhood Residential Three No change 2,500 RO RESIDENTIAL OFFICE Mixed Use Smaller scale R-NM with emphasis on conversion of existing structure 2,500 C-1 LIGHT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Commercial Generally the same as existing 2,500 C-2 HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Commercial Generally the same as existing 2,500 AUBURN GATEWAY DISTRICT Mixed Use North Auburn Subarea Use 2,500 M-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT Industrial Generally the same as existing 2,500 M-2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT Industrial Generally the same as existing 2,500 AIRPORT ZONE Industrial No change 2,500 P1 PUBLIC USE DISTRICT Public/Quasi-Public Public schools, recreational spaces, police stations, fire stations, cemeteries 2,500 Page 117 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-21 Zoning District Land Use Definition Fire Flow Requirement (gpm) I INSTITUTIONAL USE DISTRICT Public/Quasi-Public Private schools, Green River College, large campus development 2,500 OS OPEN SPACE Open Space No change - DUC - DOWNTOWN URBAN CENTER 125 Downtown Urban Center DUC with up to 125-ft tall buildings where permitted 2,500 DUC - DOWNTOWN URBAN CENTER 75 Downtown Urban Center DUC with up to 75-ft tall buildings where permitted 2,500 DUC - DOWNTOWN URBAN CENTER 55 Downtown Urban Center DUC with up to 55-ft tall buildings where permitted 2,500 DUC - NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL Downtown Urban Center Mixed-use and R-15 2,500 DUC - HEALTH AND WELLNESS 125 Downtown Urban Center R-OH-MultiCare Zone 2,500 DUC - FLEX RESIDENTIAL Downtown Urban Center RO with permitted specific industrial uses (craft workshops, breweries, coffee, etc.) 2,500 LAKELAND HILLS SOUTH SPECIAL PLAN AREA – PUD1 Neighborhood Residential Two 1,500-2,500 AIRPORT LANDING FIELD DISTRICT Industrial 2,500 AUBURN GATEWAY DISTRICT Mixed Use 2,500 DUC - I INSTITUTIONAL Downtown Urban Center 2,500 DUC - M-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL Downtown Urban Center 2,500 I INSTITUTIONAL Public/Quasi-Public 2,500 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT1 Varies by location 1,500-2,500 TERRACE VIEW DISTRICT Commercial 2,500 UNCLASSIFIED USE DISTRICT1 Varies by location 1,500-2,500 A-10 Agricultural 1 Dwelling Unit per 10 acres, located in unincorporated King County. 1,500 RA-5 Rural Area 1 Dwelling Unit per 5 acres, located in unincorporated King County. 1,500 R-1 Residential 1 Dwelling Unit per acre, located in unincorporated King County 1,500 R-4 Residential 4 Dwelling Units per acre, located in unincorporated King County 1,500 Note: 1. Required fire flow will be determined on a case-by-case basis pending development or re-development type. Page 118 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-22 Figure 2-5 | Comprehensive Future Land Use and Zoning Map Page 119 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-23 2.7.3 Projected Demographic Growth Many factors influence population growth including the state of the economy, interest rates, annexation of adjacent areas, and up-zoning for new development. Growth management policies, along with coordination between local governments, should make development more predictable and growth projections more accurate than they have been historically. The City’s Comprehensive Plan, as well as this Plan, are key documents to aid the City in preparing for the predicted growth. However, it is common for actual growth rates to vary from those predicted. In addition, growth rates will vary between various parts of the City based on the availability of services and the costs to develop for the zoned use. Housing, population, and employment projections were used to calculate rates of growth. PSRC’s Vision 2050 requires the City to plan for a given number of additional housing units and jobs. The demographic projections for population and employment were allocated based on water meter locations within the four Water Service Areas that comprise the RWSA. Population projections extending beyond the RWSA boundary were modified or eliminated and are not included in the projections. 2.7.3.1 Demographic Projections Existing and future demographic projections consistent with the City’s GMA goals were provided by the City for 2021 and 2044. City planning provided projections of housing, population, and employment growth based on TAZ data. The intermediate 10-year planning horizon (2034) was interpolated assuming consistent compounding growth across the planning period. The projections were further delineated by Service Area, as growth is expected to vary due to zoning, availability of vacant or re-developable land, existing and proposed infrastructure, etc. Demographic growth rates, rather than total number of people or employed people, were used to develop demand projections. The resulting demographic growth rates as a compounding annual percentage are presented in Table 2-14. Total population is projected to annually increase by 1.5 percent from 2021 to 2044 and total employment is projected to increase by 1.9 percent annually over the same period. Overall, the City is planning for an additional 24,987 people and 20,525 employed people by 2044 within the RWSA. Table 2-14 | Growth Rates by Customer Class and Service Area Total Growth from 2021 to 2044 (Housing Units/Population) Total Growth from 2021 to 2044 (%) Annual Average Compounding Growth (%) Single-Family Unit Projections Lea Hill 201 5.9% 0.248% Valley 275 5.3% 0.223% Lakeland 534 27.0% 1.043% Academy 436 36.3% 1.355% Multi-Family Unit Projections Lea Hill 254 12.6% 0.518% Valley 7,862 77.1% 2.515% Lakeland 1,003 55.7% 1.943% Academy 124 10.4% 0.433% Population Projections Lea Hill 1,245 8.2% 0.343% Valley 18,009 44.1% 1.602% Page 120 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-24 Total Growth from 2021 to 2044 (Housing Units/Population) Total Growth from 2021 to 2044 (%) Annual Average Compounding Growth (%) Lakeland 4,113 39.4% 1.456% Academy 1,621 24.6% 0.962% Employment Projections Lea Hill 484 30.6% 1.168% Valley 18,692 43.8% 1.586% Lakeland 171 31.1% 1.172% Academy 1,178 77.8% 0.316% Table 2-15 summarizes the calculated demographic projections for population or employment projections by Service Area for each category when applying the growth rates from Table 2-14. Table 2-15 | Population and Employment Projections Calculated by Service Area 2024 2034 2044 Single-Family Population Lea Hill 10,498 10,864 11,243 Valley 19,889 23,315 27,330 Lakeland 4,394 5,077 5,866 Academy 5,009 5,512 6,066 Subtotal 39,789 44,767 50,505 Multi-Family Population Lea Hill 5,341 5,527 5,719 Valley 25,203 29,544 34,633 Lakeland 3,454 3,991 4,612 Academy 1,535 1,689 1,859 Subtotal 35,533 40,752 46,824 Total Population Lea Hill 15,839 16,391 16,962 Valley 45,092 52,859 61,964 Lakeland 7,848 9,068 10,478 Academy 6,544 7,201 7,925 Subtotal 75,323 85,519 97,328 Employment Lea Hill 1,720 1,932 2,170 Valley 46,946 54,948 64,313 Lakeland 596 669 752 Academy 1,605 1,656 1,709 Subtotal 50,867 59,205 68,944 The demographic growth for each Service Area is shown in Figure 2-6, Figure 2-7, and Figure 2-8, where single family population, multi-family population, and employment population growth are each presented in a different graph. The figures show the anticipated variability in growth between the Service Areas. For example, employment growth rate (percentage) is projected to be greater in the Valley Service Area than the other Services Areas between 2024 and 2044. Since the Valley Service Area has a much greater magnitude of population and employment than the other Service Areas, minor differences in growth projection percentages results in larger increases in total population and employment numbers. The Valley Page 121 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-25 Service Area is projected to represent 64 percent of the system’s population and 93 percent of the system’s employment in 2044. Figure 2-6 | Single Family Population Projections by Service Area - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 2024 2034 2044PopulationSingle Family Population Projections by Service Area Lea Hill Valley Lakeland Academy Page 122 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-26 Figure 2-7 | Multi-Family Population Projections by Service Area - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 2024 2034 2044PopulationMulti-Family Population Projections by Service Area Lea Hill Valley Lakeland Academy Page 123 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-27 Figure 2-8 | Employment Projections by Service Area Areas anticipated to have higher than average population and employment growth through 2044, termed “Growth Centers” identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, are presented in Figure 2-9. Demand in each Service Area was modified during the system analysis to reflect focus growth in the areas identified in Figure 2-9, matching the population and employment growth projection data. - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 2024 2034 2044Employment Lea Hill Valley Lakeland Academy Page 124 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-28 Figure 2-9 | Map of Projected Areas with Greatest Population Growth Page 125 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-29 2.8 Future Water Demand 2.8.1 Projected Number of Connections The number of water connections was used in determining the ERU, ADD, and MDD projections. The number of water connections in the future was projected using the demographic growth rates presented in Table 2-14 and the number of existing water accounts presented in Table 2-2. The projected future connections by both Service Area and customer classification are presented in Table 2-16. ➢ The respective housing unit growth rates for each Service Area were used to calculate projected SFR and MFR connections. ➢ The School connections were projected by multiplying the percentage of the City population aged 5-19 (22%) by population growth rates for each Service Area. ➢ The projected employment growth rates were used to calculate future Commercial, Municipal (City Accounts), and Irrigation connections. ➢ The City’s largest user (Boeing) is not included in Table 2-16, their projections are based on individual demand and are presented separately. Boeing also accounts for the only Manufacturing and Industrial connections within the City. ➢ Wholesale customers are not included in Table 2-16, their projections are based on individual demand and are presented separately. Table 2-16 | Connection Projections by Customer Classification and Service Area 2024 2034 2044 Lea Hill Single-Family Residential 3,265 3,347 3,431 Multi-Family Residential 167 176 186 Commercial 22 24 27 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 11 11 11 Municipal (City Accounts) 1 1 1 Irrigation 61 69 78 Valley Single-Family Residential 5,954 6,088 6,226 Multi-Family Residential 807 1,035 1,327 Commercial 1,272 1,489 1,743 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 37 38 40 Municipal (City Accounts) 32 38 45 Irrigation 532 622 729 Lakeland Single-Family Residential 1,354 1,502 1,666 Multi-Family Residential 109 132 161 Commercial 34 39 43 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 9 9 9 Page 126 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-30 2024 2034 2044 Municipal (City Accounts) - - - Irrigation 21 23 26 Academy Single-Family Residential 1,581 1,808 2,069 Multi-Family Residential 47 49 51 Commercial 14 14 15 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 2 2 2 Municipal (City Accounts) 1 1 1 Irrigation 34 35 36 Total Single-Family Residential 12,153 12,745 13,391 Multi-Family Residential 1,131 1,393 1,725 Commercial 1,342 1,566 1,828 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 59 60 62 Municipal (City Accounts) 35 40 47 Irrigation 648 750 868 2.8.1.1 Lea Hill Service Area The Lea Hill Service Area is located east of the Auburn-Kent Valley and the Green River. The area is mostly residential with supportive neighborhood businesses. Green River College is in the Lea Hill Service Area and has a concentration of multi-family residential units in the vicinity of the college. The Lea Hill service area is projected to have the lowest growth rate in population with a 0.3 percent per year average increase from 2021 to 2044. This Service Area is projected to have a moderate growth in employment with a 1.2 percent growth per year from 2021 to 2044. 2.8.1.2 Valley Service Area The Valley Service Area contains a significant amount of developable land designated as multi-family and commercial, including the Downtown Urban Center. The Service Area is projected to have the highest growth rate in population at 1.6 percent per year from 2021 to 2044. The multi-family connections in this area are projected to grow 2.5 percent per year from 2021 to 2044 and employment is projected to grow 1.6 percent per year. These growth projections are based on the City’s anticipation of growth trends and the redevelopment of Auburn’s Downtown Urban Center, as well as commercial developments in locations with available space throughout the Service Area. 2.8.1.3 Lakeland Service Area The Lakeland Service Area includes the entire City south of the White River. A sizable portion of this Service Area is designated residential conservancy land use, which is anticipated to be developed within the planning horizon related to the anticipated closure of the Segale Gravel Pit. The area includes proposed special planning areas for Stuck River Road and Mount Rainier Vista anticipated to be developed with a moderate population growth rate of 1.5 percent per year. This Service Area is projected to have a moderate growth in employment with a 1.2 percent growth per year from 2021 to 2044. Page 127 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-31 2.8.1.4 Academy Service Area The Academy Service Area is a well-developed portion of the City. It is expected to have a population growth of 1.0 percent per year from 2021 to 2044. This Service Area is projected to have minimal growth in employment with a 0.3 percent per year increase from 2021 to 2044. 2.8.2 Projected Water Demand Projecting future water demand is one of the key elements of the water system planning process. Identification of system improvements such as supply, pumping, storage, and piping requirements are all related to demand projections. This section summarizes the ERU, ADD, and MDD projections, as well as the potential range in future demands associated with various factors, such as water use per ERU, DSL, and demographic growth rate. 2.8.2.1 Potential Range in Future Water Demand Several factors and assumptions affect the accuracy of projected future water demands. Recognizing that certain assumptions built into the demand projections will vary in the future, the projections were developed for medium and high demand scenarios to provide a range in demands that may be experienced in the future. The medium projection will be used for the system analysis in Chapter 3, while the high projection will be used for the water right evaluation in Chapter 5. The system analysis determines future pumping, storage, and distribution system deficiencies and identifies potential improvements to achieve the City’s established capacity criteria. The water right evaluation looks at both water rights and overall supply capacity. Only the medium projections are presented within this Chapter. The variables considered in developing the range of demand projections are summarized in Table 2-17 and are discussed below. ➢ Future Water Connections: The future water connections are presented in Table 2-16 and were used for both demand scenarios. ➢ Water Use Per ERUADD: Water use per ERU for the average demand day projections are based on the 75th percentile of the historical data, which is the medium demand scenario, presented in Table 2-4. This value equals 182 gpd per ERU. The high demand scenario used the highest annual value from the data set presented in Table 2-4, which equals 193 gpd per ERU. ➢ ERUs per Account: The historical ERU per account by customer classification presented in Table 2-4 was used to develop demand projections. The ERU per Account values are based on the 75th percentile of the historical data and a water use per ERU value of 182 gpd per ERU. These values are used in both projections. ➢ Distribution System Leakage: Historical annual DSL varied between 0.7 and 7.4 percent of the City’s total City production between 2015 and 2022. The average three-year rolling average of historical DSL values of 5.2 percent is utilized in the medium demand scenario and the maximum three-year rolling average of 6.8 percent was used for the high demand scenario. ➢ Authorized Unbilled Consumption: Historical annual authorized unbilled consumption varied between 0.14 and 0.54 percent of the City’s total billed consumption between 2015 and 2022. The 75th percentile value of 0.27 percent is utilized in the medium demand scenario and the maximum values of 0.54 percent is used for the high demand scenario. ➢ Water Use Per ERUMDD: Water use per ERU for the maximum demand day projections are based on 75th percentile of the historical data, which is the medium demand scenario, presented in Table Page 128 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-32 2-10. This value equals 322 gpd per ERU. The high demand scenario used the highest annual value from the data set presented in Table 2-10, which is 358 gpd per ERU. ➢ MDD/ADD Peaking Factor: The 75th percentile of historical annual peaking factors of 1.77 is utilized in the medium demand scenario. The highest value in the historical annual peaking factor data set was used for the high demand scenario, which is 1.97. The City’s largest user (Boeing) and wholesale customers are not included in Table 2-17, their projections are based on individual demand and are presented separately. Table 2-17 | Proposed Planning Values for Demand Projections Assumptions Medium Demand Scenario High Demand Scenario Water Demand per ERUADD (gpd) 182 193 DSL 5.2% 6.8% Authorized Unbilled 0.27% 0.54% Water Demand per ERUMDD (gpd) 322 358 MDD/ADD Peaking Factor 1.77 1.97 2.8.3 Large User Demand Forecast The large user term is used to identify customers consuming the greatest volume of water on an annual basis as presented in Table 2-6. Projections for the City’s single largest user (Boeing) is separated from the demand forecasts to aid in accurate forecasting and in the system analyses. The forecasts were based on historical water use data from 2015 through 2022 and is presented in Table 2-18. The projected demand will use the 75th percentile of water use from the historical period of record. Boeing’s consumption has trended down over the historical period of record, therefore, the projected demand is conservative and actual consumption is anticipated to be less than the value presented in Table 2-18. Wholesale connections are also projected separately in Table 2-22. The remaining largest users are not presented separately in demand forecasts; their projected consumption is built into the overall Service Area projections by customer classification. Table 2-18 | Large User Demand Projections Large User Customer Class Service Area Representative Historical Water Use Statistic1 Representative Annual Water Use (MG)2 Projected ERUs in 2044 Boeing Manufacturing Commercial Valley 75th percentile 210.6 3,168 Notes: 1. Historical water use data from 2015 through 2022 2. Based on representative historical water use statistic. 2.8.4 Projected Retail ERUs Future water system demands are based on projected ERUs, which in turn are based on the projected water consumption by customer classification and the projected number of accounts discussed earlier in this chapter. Table 2-19 shows the projected ERUs for the City’s individual service areas over the planning period. The projected number of ERUs for each Service Area was calculated by multiplying the projected number of accounts, provided in Table 2-16, by the number of ERUs per account, as summarized in Table Page 129 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-33 2-3, for each customer class. Wholesale customer demand in terms of ERUs is not included in the demand projections below and must be added separately as summarized in Table 2-23. Table 2-19 | ERU Projections by Customer Class and Service Area 2024 ERU 2034 ERU 2044 ERU Lea Hill Single-Family Residential 3,265 3,347 3,431 Multi-Family Residential 1,379 1,452 1,529 Commercial 128 143 161 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 127 128 129 Municipal (City Accounts) 2 3 3 Irrigation 319 358 402 Authorized Unbilled 14 15 15 DSL 272 283 295 Valley Single-Family Residential 5,954 6,088 6,226 Multi-Family Residential 6,652 8,528 10,933 Commercial 7,554 8,841 10,348 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 435 451 467 Municipal (City Accounts) 70 82 96 Irrigation 2,758 3,228 3,778 Boeing (Largest User) 3,170 3,170 3,170 Authorized Unbilled 56 66 78 DSL 1,386 1,584 1,825 Lakeland Single-Family Residential 1,354 1,502 1,666 Multi-Family Residential 900 1,091 1,323 Commercial 204 230 258 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 102 106 109 Municipal (City Accounts) - - - Irrigation 108 121 136 Authorized Unbilled 7 8 9 DSL 139 159 182 Academy Single-Family Residential 1,581 1,808 2,069 Multi-Family Residential 388 405 423 Commercial 81 84 86 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 25 26 27 Municipal (City Accounts) 2 2 2 Irrigation 174 179 185 Authorized Unbilled 6 7 8 DSL 117 131 146 Total Single-Family Residential 12,153 12,745 13,391 Multi-Family Residential 9,320 11,477 14,209 Page 130 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-34 2024 ERU 2034 ERU 2044 ERU Commercial 7,967 9,298 10,853 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 690 711 732 Municipal (City Accounts) 74 87 101 Irrigation 3,359 3,887 4,502 Boeing (Largest User) 3,170 3,170 3,170 Authorized Unbilled 83 96 110 DSL 1,914 2,156 2,447 City of Algona (Wholesale) Refer to Table 2-22. 2.8.5 Projected Retail Average Day and Maximum Day Demands The ADD projections include the projected customer demands by customer classification, authorized unbilled consumption, and DSL by service area. The resulting ADD projections are summarized in Table 2- 20. ➢ Customer demands by classification were calculated by multiplying the projected ERUs summarized in Table 2-19 by the average ERU water use (182 gpd/ERU). ➢ Authorized unbilled consumption projections were calculated by multiplying the sum of all customer classification use by the medium demand scenario percentage presented in Table 2-17. ➢ DSL consumption projections were calculated by multiplying the sum of all customer classification use and authorized unbilled use by the medium demand scenario percentage presented in Table 2-17 for DSL. Table 2-20 | ADD Projections 2024 (mgd) 2034 (mgd) 2044 (mgd) Lea Hill Single-Family Residential 0.595 0.610 0.625 Multi-Family Residential 0.251 0.265 0.279 Commercial 0.023 0.026 0.029 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 0.023 0.023 0.023 Municipal (City Accounts) - - 0.001 Irrigation 0.058 0.065 0.073 Authorized Unbilled 0.003 0.003 0.003 DSL 0.050 0.052 0.054 Valley Single-Family Residential 1.084 1.109 1.134 Multi-Family Residential 1.212 1.553 1.991 Commercial 1.376 1.610 1.885 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 0.079 0.082 0.085 Municipal (City Accounts) 0.013 0.015 0.017 Irrigation 0.502 0.588 0.688 Boeing (Largest User) 0.577 0.577 0.577 Page 131 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-35 2024 (mgd) 2034 (mgd) 2044 (mgd) Authorized Unbilled 0.010 0.012 0.014 DSL 0.252 0.288 0.332 Lakeland Single-Family Residential 0.247 0.274 0.303 Multi-Family Residential 0.164 0.199 0.241 Commercial 0.037 0.042 0.047 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 0.019 0.019 0.020 Municipal (City Accounts) - - - Irrigation 0.020 0.022 0.025 Authorized Unbilled 0.001 0.002 0.002 DSL 0.025 0.029 0.033 Academy Single-Family Residential 0.288 0.329 0.377 Multi-Family Residential 0.071 0.074 0.077 Commercial 0.015 0.015 0.016 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 0.005 0.005 0.005 Municipal (City Accounts) - - - Irrigation 0.032 0.033 0.034 Authorized Unbilled 0.001 0.001 0.001 DSL 0.021 0.024 0.027 Total Single-Family Residential 2.214 2.321 2.439 Multi-Family Residential 1.698 2.091 2.588 Commercial 1.451 1.694 1.977 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 0.126 0.129 0.133 Municipal (City Accounts) 0.014 0.016 0.018 Irrigation 0.612 0.708 0.820 Boeing (Largest User) 0.577 0.577 0.577 Authorized Unbilled 0.015 0.017 0.020 DSL 0.349 0.393 0.4546 The MDD projections include the projected customer demands by customer classification, authorized unbilled consumption, and DSL by service area and are summarized in Table 2-21. ➢ Customer demands by classification, authorized unbilled consumption projections, and DSL projections were calculated by multiplying the ADD projections as summarized in Table 2-20 by the MDD/ADD Peaking Factor presented in Table 2-17. Table 2-21 | MDD Projections 2024 (mgd) 2034 (mgd) 2044 (mgd) Lea Hill Single-Family Residential 1.051 1.077 1.104 Multi-Family Residential 0.444 0.468 0.492 Commercial 0.041 0.046 0.052 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Page 132 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-36 2024 (mgd) 2034 (mgd) 2044 (mgd) Schools 0.041 0.041 0.041 Municipal (City Accounts) 0.001 0.001 0.001 Irrigation 0.103 0.115 0.129 Authorized Unbilled 0.005 0.005 0.005 DSL 0.088 0.091 0.095 Valley Single-Family Residential 1.916 1.960 2.004 Multi-Family Residential 2.141 2.745 3.519 Commercial 2.431 2.846 3.331 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 0.140 0.145 0.150 Municipal (City Accounts) 0.022 0.026 0.031 Irrigation 0.888 1.039 1.216 Boeing (Largest User) 1.020 1.020 1.020 Authorized Unbilled 0.018 0.021 0.025 DSL 0.446 0.510 0.587 Lakeland Single-Family Residential 0.436 0.483 0.536 Multi-Family Residential 0.290 0.351 0.426 Commercial 0.066 0.074 0.083 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 0.033 0.034 0.035 Municipal (City Accounts) - - - Irrigation 0.035 0.039 0.044 Authorized Unbilled 0.002 0.003 0.003 DSL 0.045 0.051 0.059 Academy Single-Family Residential 0.509 0.582 0.666 Multi-Family Residential 0.125 0.130 0.136 Commercial 0.026 0.027 0.028 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 0.008 0.008 0.009 Municipal (City Accounts) 0.001 0.001 0.001 Irrigation 0.056 0.058 0.060 Authorized Unbilled 0.002 0.002 0.002 DSL 0.038 0.042 0.047 Total Single-Family Residential 3.912 4.102 4.310 Multi-Family Residential 3.000 3.694 4.573 Commercial 2.564 2.993 3.493 Manufacturing/Industrial - - - Schools 0.222 0.229 0.236 Municipal (City Accounts) 0.024 0.028 0.032 Irrigation 1.081 1.251 1.449 Boeing (Largest User) 1.020 1.020 1.020 Authorized Unbilled 0.027 0.031 0.036 DSL 0.616 0.694 0.788 Page 133 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-37 2.8.6 Wholesale Demands The City currently has a wholesale water contract with the City of Algona. The City is also planning to supply wholesale water for the MIT’s future fish hatchery. As stated in the Retail Water Service Policy, “the City will plan for and provide water service to all retail customers and wholesale customers with firm contracts. As supply permits, the City may provide water to wholesale customers without firm contracts unilaterally or as part of a capital improvement partnership agreement.” The wholesale demands for the City are summarized in Table 2-22. Algona’s current agreement allows for the sale of up to 525,000 gallons per day on a firm basis for the ADD and up to 1,114,00 gallons per day on a firm basis for the MDD. In 2022, Algona purchased an average of 342,953 gallons per day of water from the City. Algona’s 2022 Water System Plan (WSP) projects 2042 ADD to be 404,278 gallons per day and 2042 MDD to be 766,137 gallons per day. Algona’s WSP demand projections were used for projecting the wholesale water purchases by Algona, rather than the contractual amount, as presented in Table 2-22. MIT plans to develop a fish hatchery on the White River. An agreement dated from 1986 (included in Appendix G) requires that the City provide the tribe with an average annual demand of 3.9 cubic feet per second (cfs) (2.52 mgd) from Coal Creek Springs for MIT’s future fishery enhancement purposes. The agreement does not specify an MDD but rather states: “The Tribe and the City agree to work in harmony toward a mutually satisfactory allocation of the Coal Creek waters. In furtherance of this goal, the City understands that the water requirements for fishery enhancement purposes are greatest in the winter and spring months. Accordingly, the City agrees to increase the amount of water above 3.9 cfs as needed for fishery purposes. The Tribe understands that the City’s requirement for water for domestic use is greatest in the summer and fall months. Accordingly, the Tribe agrees to decrease its use of water below 3.9 cfs, as needed for domestic water purposes…It is further understood that the tribe requires a minimum of 3 cfs at all times for fishery enhancement purposes”. The intent of this agreement indicates that the MIT demand will be at a minimum when the City’s demands are at their maximum. Based on this understanding, the planned MDD for the MIT is 1.5 mgd and the ADD was 2.5 mgd. For planning purposes, the MIT demand was added to the Algona demand and included in the “Retail + firm wholesale” group of demands. LMWD has an interruptible wholesale contract that can be terminated at any time and is therefore represented separately. As discussed in the Historical Wholesale Consumption section, LMWD discontinued regular purchase of water from the City in 2017 per the amendment to IA2 but maintains an intertie with the City to use wholesale water supply on an as-needed basis. LMWD may purchase up to 2.5 mgd of wholesale water per IA2. The contract does not have an expiration date and therefore 2.5 mgd of interruptible wholesale demand is projected through 2044. Page 134 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-38 Table 2-22 | Wholesale Demand Projections Wholesale Customer Service Area Contractual Delivery1 2024 (mgd) 2034 (mgd) 2044 (mgd)2 ADD Algona Valley Firm 0.37 0.39 0.41 MIT Fish Hatchery Valley Firm 2.5 2.5 2.5 LMWD Lea Hill Interruptible 2.5 2.5 2.5 MDD Algona Valley Firm 0.69 0.73 0.78 MIT Fish Hatchery Valley Firm 1.5 1.5 1.5 LMWD Lea Hill Interruptible 2.5 2.5 2.5 Notes: 1. The City will plan for and provide water services to all retail customers and wholesale customers with firm contracts. As supply permits, the City may provide water to wholesale customers without firm contracts unilaterally or as part of a CIP agreement. 2. Algona’s projections are provided through 2042; their projected rate increase was used to project consumption to 2044. 2.8.7 Total Demands The total projected demands are tabulated for retail customers, firm wholesale, and interruptible wholesale in Table 2-23. The demands are presented separately to show the level of obligation to the City’s customers. Projected retail ADD, MDD, and ERUs are presented by Service Area for the medium demand scenario. Additionally, the ADD and MDD are presented as the total of the projected retail demand and firm wholesale. The retail with firm wholesale represents the projected demand that is used as the basis for the system analysis and are shown in Figure 2-10. The difference between the historical and projected wholesale demands is due to the projected allocation of the supply to the proposed MIT Fish Hatchery, per the 1986 Stipulation Settlement Agreement. Additionally, both CWD and LMWD discontinued regular purchase of water from the City in 2017. The 2044 retail ADD demand is projected to 9.02 mgd, which represents a 28 percent increase from 2024. Throughout the planning period, approximately 40 percent of the City’s demand may be from wholesale purchases when both firm and interruptible supply are considered. The MDD is projected to increase by 24 percent from 2024 to 2044 for the sum of firm wholesale customers and retail customers. Page 135 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-39 Table 2-23 | ADD, MDD, and ERUs Summarized by Service Area with Wholesale Included 2024 2034 2044 Lea Hill Average Day Demand (mgd) 1.00 1.04 1.09 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 1.77 1.84 1.92 Equivalent Residential Units 5,506 5,729 5,966 Valley Average Day Demand (mgd) 5.11 5.84 6.72 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 9.02 10.31 11.88 Equivalent Residential Units 28,034 32,037 36,920 Lakeland Average Day Demand (mgd) 0.51 0.59 0.67 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 0.91 1.04 1.19 Equivalent Residential Units 2,815 3,217 3,684 Academy Average Day Demand (mgd) 0.43 0.48 0.54 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 0.76 0.85 0.95 Equivalent Residential Units 2,375 2,642 2,946 Total Retail Customers Total Average Day Demand (mgd) 7.05 7.95 9.02 Total Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 12.47 14.04 15.94 Total Equivalent Residential Units 38,731 43,626 49,515 Algona (Firm Wholesale) Total Average Day Demand (mgd) 0.365 0.386 0.409 Total Equivalent Residential Units, ADD1 2,005 2,120 2,246 Total Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 0.692 0.732 0.775 Total Equivalent Residential Units, MDD1 2,150 2,274 2,409 Retail Customer Demand with Algona (Firm Wholesale) Total Average Day Demand (mgd) 7.42 8.33 9.43 Total Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 13.16 14.77 16.71 Retail with Firm Wholesale (Algona and MIT Fish Hatchery) Total Average Day Demand (mgd) 9.92 10.83 11.93 Total Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 14.66 16.27 18.21 Retail with Firm & Interruptible Wholesale (Algona, MIT Fish Hatchery, and LMWD) Average Day Demand (mgd) 12.42 13.33 14.43 Maximum Day Demand (mgd) 17.16 18.77 20.71 Note: 1. The Algona ERU values were calculated using the City of Algona’s projected demand and the City of Auburn’s ERUADD and ERUMDD factors. Page 136 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Basic Planning Data Page 2-40 Figure 2-10 | Projected Retail Plus Firm Wholesale ADD and MDD - 5 10 15 20 25 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2034 2044Water Demand (mgd)Year Historical ADD Historical MDD Projected ADD High Projected MDD High Projected ADD Medium Projected MDD Medium ProjectedHistorical Page 137 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-1 CHAPTER 3 System Analysis and Asset Management This chapter’s objective is to identify existing facilities and determine their capacity to reliably satisfy current and projected water demands with safe drinking water. The cost of addressing identified infrastructure deficiencies and operational and maintenance improvements is addressed in priority order in Chapter 8. This chapter addresses the following topics: 3.1 Asset Management – Asset Inventory and Analysis 3.2 Water Quality 3.3 Design Standards 3.4 Capacity Analysis 3.5 Summary of System Deficiencies 3.1 Asset Management – Asset Inventory and Analysis This section establishes a date-based inventory of all system-owned water assets and satisfies the requirements of WAC 246-290-100(4)e(iii). The City actively assesses and plans for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of its major assets while preventive maintenance practices keep assets in good condition, thereby extending their useful life. The City utilizes Cartegraph, an asset management software program, in conjunction with ESRI ArcGIS, a geographic information system (GIS) software program to manage its water assets. GIS is updated using record drawings as projects are completed and Cartegraph is linked to automatically update with new GIS information. Cartegraph is used to track and schedule maintenance activities, as well as materials, labor hours, costs and project timelines. Capital costs for the replacement of assets are assessed on a case-by- case basis. The City’s water system is comprised of groundwater wells, springs, interties with other water systems, treatment facilities, pump stations, storage facilities, pressure reducing stations, and water transmission and distribution pipelines. The City’s water system includes 28 pressure zones in four different service areas: Lea Hill, Valley, Academy, and Lakeland. The location of major assets and pressure zones are shown in Figure 3-1. The hydraulic profile of the City’s water system is presented in Figure 3-2, with enlargements provided as Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4. Water system vulnerabilities relating to risks from natural hazards, such as power outage, flooding, and earthquake are detailed in the Natural Hazard Vulnerability Summary, which is provided in Appendix U. Page 138 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-2 Figure 3-1 | Map of Water System Assets and Pressure Zones Page 139 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-3 Figure 3-2 | Hydraulic Profile Page 140 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-4 Figure 3-3 | Hydraulic Profile - Detail A Page 141 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-5 Figure 3-4 | Hydraulic Profile - Detail B Page 142 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-6 3.1.1 Distribution Facilities The City’ water distribution system includes approximately 300 miles of piping. Table 3-1 summarizes the water piping inventory by size (diameter). The criticality ratings for the system’s pipes are presented in Table 3-1, as criticality of the pipelines is assessed based on size. Water main and transmission pipelines vary in diameter from 4 to 36 inches, with a predominance of 8 and 12 inches, and range in age with the oldest piping dating back to 1925. Approximately 78 percent of the distribution system is ductile iron pipe. Table 3-1 | Transmission and Distribution System Piping Inventory by Pipe Diameter Distribution System Piping Diameter (inches) Length (linear feet) Design Life (years) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical)1 ≤ 6 189,574 100 4 8-10 681,601 4 12-15 532,953 3 16-20 119,997 3 24-30 15,582 2 36-42 35 2 Unknown 1,380 -- Note: 1. Criticality was assessed based on pipe diameter. Larger diameter pipes were identified as being more critical than smaller diameter pipes. Table 3-2 organizes water system piping by material and age and identifies the anticipated pipe condition. Pipe condition was assessed based on pipe age and remining useful life. Cast iron pipe that was installed after the 1930’s, which constitutes over 48 miles of water mains or 16 percent of the total length of water mains in the City’s system, was designated to have a significantly reduced design life of 50 years due to known pipe integrity issues. As such, the City is prioritizing replacement of cast iron pipe and regularly partners with other City projects to replace this piping efficiently and has capital programs to fund replacements as discussed further in Chapter 8. Piping that has an unknown material and unknown installation date will be updated in the City’s GIS system and Cartegraph as more records research is completed. In 2014, the City conducted leak detection testing and condition assessment of approximately 2.8 miles of 14 to 24-inch ductile iron and concrete composite pipe. The results indicated that the 20-inch and 16-inch ductile iron mains in the Lea Hill Service Area range from moderate to good condition. The Coal Creek Springs concrete composite main was identified as being in good condition. The 14-inch ductile iron main located in the Academy Service Area was suspected of being in poor condition, however this was later thought to be in decent condition as more information regarding the pipe material was obtained. A portion of the 14-inch piping was replaced as part of a roundabout project within Auburn Way S. In 2020 the City conducted additional leak detection testing and condition assessment of approximately 13,500 feet of 10 to 16-inch cast iron main. With a focus on four specific sites: Auburn Way South, C Street Southwest, West Hill Springs, and Lea Hill Road. All the pipe on Auburn Way South and Lea Hill Road are in moderate condition. The pipe on C Street Southwest and at West Hill Springs are in poor to moderate condition. The C Street Southwest piping is currently being replaced by the City’s “C St SW Preservation” capital project that will begin construction in in 2024.The West Hill Springs piping will be replaced in a forthcoming capital project titled “West Hill Springs Transmission Main Replacement” that is identified in Chapter 8. Page 143 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-7 Table 3-2 | Transmission and Distribution System Piping Inventory by Material and Installation Decade Piping Material Total Length (linear feet) Install Decade (10-Year Period) Length (linear feet) Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition)1 Cast Iron 253,919 1920 11,877 100 -4 7 1930 10,602 6 6 1940 3,079 50 -34 10 1950 5,937 -24 10 1960 147,764 -14 9 Unknown 74,660 -- -- Concrete2 11,284 1960 11,284 100 36 3 Ductile Iron 1,198,958 1960 48,235 100 36 4 1970 115,184 46 4 1980 283,977 56 4 1990 299,293 66 4 2000 230,295 76 3 2010 156,307 86 2 2020 50,594 96 1 Unknown 15,072 -- -- HDPE 409 2010 409 100 86 1 PVC2 19,498 1960 1,630 100 36 4 1970 2,598 46 4 1980 1,251 56 4 1990 1,784 66 4 2000 2,647 76 3 2010 2,588 86 2 2020 1,117 96 1 Unknown 5,884 -- -- RCP 1,014 1970 884 100 46 3 2020 130 96 1 Steel 1,030 1920 870 100 -4 6 1970 160 46 4 Unknown - Anticipated to be Cast Iron based on install date 4,022 1960 4,022 50 -14 4 28,564 1970 4,001 100 46 4 1980 3,822 56 4 Page 144 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-8 Piping Material Total Length (linear feet) Install Decade (10-Year Period) Length (linear feet) Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition)1 Unknown – Anticipated to be Ductile Iron based on install date 1990 12,465 66 4 2000 4,165 76 3 2010 4,112 86 2 Unknown 23,089 Unknown 23,089 50 -- -- Notes: 1. Condition was assessed based on remaining useful life of the pipe. 2. The City is investigating pipe materials in 2024 to verify pipe materials in the City’s database that may be mislabeled. The distribution system piping is delineated into pressure zones using Pressure Reducing Valves (PRVs). An inventory of the City’s PRVs, as well as their size, remaining useful life, condition, and criticality are summarized in Table 3-3. As PRVs approach their anticipated design life, the City’s Maintenance and Operations (M&O) staff remove and rebuild the valve to extend the useful life of the asset, when feasible. Table 3-3 | Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) Inventory Valve ID # PRV Location Description Valve Size (inches) Install Date (year) Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) Lea Hill Service Area 411-10 - Primary Valve Cobble Creek Upper at 30216 104th Ave SE 8 2024 40 40 1 3 411-11 - Secondary Valve 2 4 411-12 - Relief Valve 1.5 4 411-20 - Primary Valve 104th Ave SE/SE 302nd St. Cobble Creek Lower 6 1994 10 4 3 411-21 - Secondary Valve 2 4 411-22 - Relief Valve 1.5 4 412-10 - Primary Valve 298th Pl SE & 109th Ave SE 6 2011 27 2 3 412-11 - Secondary Valve 2 4 412-12 - Secondary Valve 2 4 412-20 - Primary Valve 300 Block SE & 108th Ave SE 6 2005 40 21 1 3 412-21 - Secondary Valve 2 4 412-22 - Secondary Valve 2 4 511-10 - Primary Valve SE 304th St. & 108th Ave. SE 6 2016 32 1 3 511-11 - Secondary Valve 2 4 511-20 – Primary Valve Cobble Creek Lower at 10230 304th Pl SE 6 1994 10 1 3 511-21 – Secondary Valve 2 4 511-22 – Relief Valve 1.5 4 Page 145 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-9 Valve ID # PRV Location Description Valve Size (inches) Install Date (year) Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) 512-10 – Primary Valve SE 304th St & 110th Pl SE 6 2018 34 1 3 512-11 – Secondary Valve 2 4 512-12 – Secondary Valve 2 4 611-30 - Primary Valve Carriage Square 8 2018 34 1 3 611-31 - Secondary Valve 3 4 611-32 - Secondary Valve 3 4 711-10 - Primary Valve Amberview North 8 1986 2 5 3 711-11 – Secondary Valve 2 4 711-20 - Primary Valve Amberview South 8 1986 2 5 3 Valley Service Area 1110-10 - Primary Valve 25th St SE & K St SE 10 1987 40 3 6 3 1110-20 - Secondary Valve 4 4 Lakeland Service Area 1309-10 - Primary Valve Mill Pond Dr SE & Oravetz Rd SE 10 1980 40 -4 6 3 1309-11 - Secondary Valve 3 4 1309-12 - Secondary Valve 3 4 1309-13- Secondary Valve 1 4 1310-10 - Primary Valve Mill Pond Dr SE & Mill Pond Loop SE 10 1980 -4 6 3 1310-11 - Secondary Valve 3 4 1310-12 - Secondary Valve 2 40 4 1310-13 - Secondary Valve 1 4 1409-10 - Primary Valve Oravetz Rd SE & Lakeland Hills Way SE 8 1990 6 5 3 1409-11 - Secondary Valve 4 4 1409-12 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1409-13 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1409-20 - Primary Valve 47th St SE & Lakeland Hills Way SE 8 1992 8 5 3 1409-21 - Secondary Valve 4 4 1409-22 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1409-23 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1409-30 - Primary Valve Lakeland Hills Way SE & 51st St SE 10 2004 20 3 3 1409-31 - Secondary Valve 3 4 1409-32 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1409-40 - Primary Valve 10 1988 4 5 3 Page 146 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-10 Valve ID # PRV Location Description Valve Size (inches) Install Date (year) Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) 1409-41 - Secondary Valve Mill Pond Dr SE & Lakeland Hills Way SE 3 4 1409-42 - Secondary Valve 3 4 1409-43 - Secondary Valve 1 4 1410-10 - Primary Valve 5018 Mill Pond Dr SE 10 1980 -4 6 3 1410-11 - Secondary Valve 3 4 1410-12 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1410-20 - Primary Valve 52nd St SE & East of Mill Pond Dr SE 8 1992 8 5 3 1410-21- Secondary Valve 4 4 1410-22- Secondary Valve 2 4 1410-23- Secondary Valve 2 4 1410-30 - Primary Valve Nathan Ave SE & Highland Dr SE 8 1992 8 5 3 1410-31- Secondary Valve 4 4 1410-32- Secondary Valve 2 4 1410-33- Secondary Valve 2 4 1410-40 - Primary Valve 5203 Quincy Ave SE 8 1995 40 11 4 3 1410-41- Secondary Valve 4 4 1410-42- Secondary Valve 2 4 1410-43- Secondary Valve 2 4 1509-10 - Primary Valve Terrace View Lower 10 2007 23 3 3 1509-11- Secondary Valve 3 4 1509-12- Secondary Valve 3 4 1509-20 - Primary Valve Terrace View Middle 10 2007 23 3 3 1509-21- Secondary Valve 3 4 1509-22- Secondary Valve 3 4 1509-30 - Primary Valve Terrace View Upper 10 2007 23 3 3 1509-31- Secondary Valve 3 4 1509-32- Secondary Valve 3 4 1509-40 - Primary Valve Terrace View Dr SE & Alexander Pl SE 10 2007 23 3 3 1509-41- Secondary Valve 3 4 1509-42- Secondary Valve 3 4 1510-10 - Primary Valve Lakeland Hills Way SE & Evergreen Way SE 8 1994 10 4 3 1510-11- Secondary Valve 4 4 1510-12- Secondary Valve 2 4 Page 147 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-11 Valve ID # PRV Location Description Valve Size (inches) Install Date (year) Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) 1510-13- Secondary Valve 2 4 1411-10 - Primary Valve 56th St SE at Bennett Ave SE 6 2011 27 2 3 1411-11- Secondary Valve 2 4 1411-12- Secondary Valve 2 4 1411-20 - Primary Valve 5310 Bennett Ave SE 6 2010 26 2 3 1411-21- Secondary Valve 2 4 1411-22- Secondary Valve 2 4 1411-30 - Primary Valve Kersey Way SE & 50th St SE 8 2015 31 2 3 1411-31- Secondary Valve 2 4 1411-32- Secondary Valve 2 40 4 1411-40 - Primary Valve 2305 54th St SE 10 2015 31 2 3 1411-41- Secondary Valve 3 4 1411-42- Secondary Valve 3 4 1411-50 - Primary Valve 5253 Wesley Ave SE 6 2015 31 2 3 1411-51- Secondary Valve 2 4 1411-52- Secondary Valve 2 4 1412-10 - Primary Valve 5539 Franklin Ave SE 6 2012 28 2 3 1412-11- Secondary Valve 2 4 1412-12- Secondary Valve 2 4 Academy Service Area 1011-30 - Primary Valve 2003 Auburn Way S 8 2006 40 22 3 3 1011-31 - Secondary Valve 3 4 1011-32 - Secondary Valve 3 4 1111-10 - Primary Valve Riverwalk Dr SE & Howard Rd SE 6 2006 22 3 3 1111-11 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1111-12 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1111-20 - Primary Valve 2204 27th St SE 6 1997 13 3 3 1111-21 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1111-22 - Secondary Valve 2 4 1114-10 - Primary Valve 4500 Auburn Way South 8 2006 22 3 3 1114-11 - Secondary Valve 3 4 1114-12 - Secondary Valve 3 4 Page 148 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-12 Figure 3-5 shows the locations of water main breaks and leaks that have required repair since 2014. A total of 93 repairs have been completed during this timeframe and include water main break and leak repairs, water main appurtenance repairs, service lines repairs, and repairs due to damage caused by construction contractors. Figure 3-5 | Water Main Leak and Break Repair Locations from 2014-2024 Page 149 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-13 Figure 3-6 shows the locations of low pressure and water quality (odor and discolored water) complaints received since 2014. Figure 3-6 | Low Pressure, Odor, and Discolored Water Complaints from 2014-2024 Page 150 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-14 A summary of the customer complaints by category is presented in Table 3-4. Overall, there has been only one odor complaint within the last ten years. Pressure complaints and water quality complaints have remained fairly consistent, with the fewest number of complaints being made in 2023. Table 3-4 | Summary Customer Complaints Category 20141 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Water Quality (Appearance) 0 40 47 23 14 55 48 47 27 9 Odor 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pressure 6 9 16 19 12 8 4 11 8 10 Total 9 50 63 42 26 63 52 58 35 19 Note: 1. Data in 2014 is incomplete due to the City transitioning to Cartegraph Asset Management. 3.1.2 Water Source Facilities The City uses a combination of groundwater wells and springs as supply sources for the water system. The pumping capacity, remaining useful life, condition and criticality of the City’s groundwater wells are summarized in Table 3-5. The City’s two spring sources, Coal Creek Springs and West Hill Springs, are not included in Table 3-5 since both these sources operate by gravity and have no on-site pumping equipment. Condition ratings are assigned based on the 2013 Water Facilities Evaluation Study. A detailed description of each water source facility, including both springs and groundwater wells, and planned improvements is provided following Table 3-5. A summary of the pumping or production capacity of each source, including the springs, is included in Section 2.6 of Chapter 2. Discussion of the City’s current water rights for each water source is provided in Section 3.4.1. Table 3-5 | Source of Supply Well Pump Inventory Facility Name Capacity (MGD) No. of Pumps Pump Type Install Year Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) Valley Service Area Well 1 3.02 1 Vertical Turbine 2016 40 32 2 2 Well 2 1.61 1 Centrifugal 2023 39 3 1 Well 3A Not in Service Well 3B Not in Service Well 4 3.74 1 Centrifugal 1985 40 30 1 3 Well 6 1.73 1 Vertical Turbine 1999 15 4 1 Well 7 Not in Service Lakeland Service Area Well 5 0.94 1 Submersible 1983 40 -1 7 3 Well 5A 0.26 1 Submersible 1990 6 7 2 Well 5B Not in Service Page 151 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-15 3.1.2.1 Coal Creek Springs Coal Creek Springs is a primary water supply for the City due to its production capacity. This source is more economical to operate than other sources as it can provide a large volume of water and does not require pumping for extraction. Much of the spring’s collector system, including the south and middle collectors, was constructed in 1964. A third collector (the north collector) was added in 1998 to enhance system performance and to provide increased reliability. Currently, the flow from this collector is by gravity, however a buried manhole structure was installed in the line to provide space for a future pump station that could increase production. Each collector is connected to an overflow structure before connection to a 24-inch transmission line that conveys flow to the Howard Road Corrosion Control Treatment (CCT) Facility where the water is treated for corrosion and is then pumped to Reservoir 1. Between the Coal Creek Springs headworks and the Howard Road CCT Facility is a single connection that supplies potable water to Game Farm Wilderness Park. This transmission main is in good condition, however a suspected leak on the 24-inch steel transmission main crossing the White River was identified in a facility evaluation study completed in 2014. It was later identified that there was not a leak, but the evaluation results were caused by river turbulence due to portions of the pipe being exposed along the riverbed. The City is currently constructing a project that replaces the river crossing with new transmission piping suspended from a utility and pedestrian bridge; the project will be completed in 2024 and is identified in Chapter 8. In recent years, the production capacity of Coal Creek Springs has been reduced. A maximum instantaneous production rate up to 4,500 gpm is currently feasible, however a more consistent functional production capacity of 3,500 gpm is currently achieved (approximately 52 percent of the water right capacity). The City is currently investigating the cause of reduced production and potential solutions. A capital project is planned to rehabilitate Coal Creek Springs once a solution is identified; the project is discussed further in Chapter 8. 3.1.2.2 West Hill Springs Although the use of West Hill Springs as a potable water supply dates to before 1907, most of the current facilities and equipment were constructed after 1960. More recent improvements include replacement of the collection boxes, as recommended in the 1995 Comprehensive Water Plan, and partial fencing of the watershed, as recommended by the 2000 Water Comprehensive Plan. The spring’s existing transmission main is constructed of 10-inch diameter cast iron piping and has experienced two breaks. The City plans to replace approximately 1,250 linear feet of the transmission main with 12-inch diameter ductile iron pipe in an upcoming capital project identified in Chapter 8. 3.1.2.3 Well 1 Well 1 was constructed in 1960 and underwent substantial renovation in 2016, significantly improving the overall facility condition. Renovations included transmission piping to Howard Road CCT Facility, site improvements, a new well house, new pumping system, disinfection with sodium hypochlorite, on -site emergency power, and upgraded electrical and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) controls. The new well pumping system is a two-stage, vertical turbine pump with a capacity of 2,100 gpm, driven by a 100-HP motor and controlled by a variable frequency drive (VFD). Supply from Well 1 will be routed along the recently constructed 16-inch transmission main and conveyed to the Howard Road CCT Facility. Page 152 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-16 3.1.2.4 Wells 2 & 6 Well 2 was constructed in 1970 and the well and well house were replaced in 2000 with a new masonry building and pumping equipment as part of the City’s corrosion control strategy. The facility built in 2000 also houses Well 6, which was built in 1999. Within the facility is a two -stage 1,115 gpm centrifugal pump powered by a 125-HP motor, installed in 2023 (Well 2), and a two-stage, vertical-turbine pump driven by a 200-HP motor (Well 6). The pumping capacity of Well 6 has been reduced in recent years to a typical production rate of 1,200 gpm due to fouling of the well screen that requires occasional cleaning. The wells discharge to a 14-inch transmission main to Fulmer Field CCT Facility for treatment prior to distribution. Since the Fulmer Field CCT Facility is required to re-pump the water from Wells 2 and 6 into the Valley Service Area and to Reservoir 2, Wells 2 and 6 are functional only with operation of the Fulmer Field CCT Facility. Chlorination and emergency power for both Wells 2 and 6 are housed in the Fulmer Field CCT Facility. In 2023 the City completed an interim replacement of the pump at Well 2. Full replacement of Well 2 is planned as a capital project discussed further in Chapter 8. Additionally, rehabilitation work completed in 2013 and 2014 indicated that it would be beneficial to clean and rehab both wells on a regular basis. As such, the City initiated a program for regular cleaning of the wells established on a 3-year cycle which is discussed further in Chapter 8. 3.1.2.5 Wells 3A & 3B Wells 3A and 3B are located at the same site, off 37th Street SE on the extension of E Street SE. The wells are approximately 50 feet apart and were constructed in 1983 and 1984 respectively. Each well is equipped with a four-stage, centrifugal pump driven by a 125-HP motor, each with a maximum pumping capacity of 1,650 gpm when operated individually. A standby generator capable of running one pump at a time is available on site. The system is equipped with an automatic transfer switch. Currently, Wells 3A and Well 3B are not operated because they produce water that contains high concentrations of manganese. Since the wells were taken offline, the chlorination facilities have been removed. If operated, the wells pump directly into the Valley Service area distribution system. The City plans to construct treatment for these wells as part of the “Wells 3A/3B Treatment” project discussed further in Chapter 8. 3.1.2.6 Well 4 Well 4 was originally constructed in 1985, was rebuilt in 2012, and is currently undergoing significant upgrades to mechanical and electrical equipment, including well pump piping, valve replacement, and control panel replacement. Once the upgrades are complete this source will be considered in excellent condition. The well is equipped with a 2,600-gpm, four-stage, centrifugal, turbine pump driven by a 300- HP motor. Well 4 pumps directly to a 16-inch transmission main that can either convey water to Reservoir 1 or to distribution through a PRV. Well 4 is an important supply for the southern end of the City’s Retail Water Service Area (RWSA). Operation of the well is normally controlled by the water level in Reservoir 1. 3.1.2.7 Well 5 Well 5 is one of three City wells that were constructed to serve the Lakeland Hills Development within the City’s Lakeland Service Area. Well 5 pumps directly into the Lakeland Service Area distribution system. The well was constructed in 1983 and is equipped with a seven-stage submersible turbine pump, driven by a Page 153 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-17 125-HP motor. The well facility was assessed to be in poor condition in the 2013 Water Facilities Evaluation Study. The City plans to upgrade the facility as part of the Well 5/5A Upgrades project discussed in Chapter 8. 3.1.2.8 Well 5A Well 5A is the second well serving the Lakeland Service Area and was constructed in 1990 to supplement Well 5. The well pumps directly into the Lakeland Service Area distribution system. The well is equipped with a ten-stage submersible turbine pump, driven by a 60-HP motor and has on-site chlorination facilities. A manual transfer switch is provided to allow operation of Well 5A using a portable emergency generator. The well facility was assessed to be in poor condition in the 2013 Water Facilities Evaluation Study. The City plans to upgrade the facility as part of the Well 5/5A Upgrades project discussed in Chapter 8. 3.1.2.9 Well 5B Well 5B was constructed in 2005 with a 600 gpm pump. Once this source came on-line, the City discovered the aquifer was not recovering, so the well was taken out of service in 2006 and has not been operated since. The City has no plans to operate this well within the planning horizon. 3.1.2.10 Well 7 Well 7 was constructed in 1997 and was originally equipped with a 3,500-gpm variable-stage, vertical- turbine pump driven by a 500-HP motor. Well 7 is configured to pump directly to the Fulmer Field CCT Facility through a 16-inch transmission main. The treated water is then re-pumped into the Valley Service Area. If necessary, Well 7 can pump untreated water directly to the Valley Service Area through a PRV. The well was taken out-of-service in 2012 due to high manganese concentrations. The City has planned capital projects to expand the treatment capacity and treat manganese at Fulmer Field CCT Facility to accommodate flows from Well 7 so operation of this facility can be reinstated. The projects to provide treatment and back-up power for Well 7 are discussed in Chapter 8. 3.1.2.11 Algona Well 1 In 1996, the City acquired the water rights for Algona Well 1 as a condition of the wholesale agreement with the City of Algona (Algona). Due to pump operational problems, Algona Well 1 was removed from service. The 500-gpm pump and associated piping have been removed from the well house and the building has been demolished, but the well casing is still intact, and the well is plugged. The City has a capital project identified in Chapter 8 to study the well and options for potential use or relocation. 3.1.3 Water Treatment Facilities The City’s water treatment facilities provide chlorination and corrosion control. An inventory of the water system’s treatment facilities, including the treatment type, capacity, remaining useful life, condition, and criticality is provided in Table 3-6. Condition ratings are assigned based on the 2013 Water Facilities Evaluation Study. A detailed description of each water treatment facility and planned improvements is provided following Table 3-6. Page 154 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-18 Table 3-6 | Water Treatment Facility Inventory Facility Name Treatment Type Treatment/ Dosing Capacity Install Date Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) Coal Creek Springs Gas Chlorination 0.75-0.80 mg/L 1976 35 -13 3 2 West Hill Springs Gas Chlorination 0.75-0.80 mg/L 1992 15 5 3 Fulmer Field CCT Facility Hypochlorite 0.95 mg/L 2002 35 13 5 2 Corrosion/Ai r-Stripping 11.88 MGD 1 Howard Road CCT Facility Corrosion/Ai r-Stripping 8.06 MGD 2004 15 5 1 Terrace View Booster Pump Station Re- chlorination 0.75 mg/L 2010 21 3 2 Well 1 Hypochlorite 0.75-0.80 mg/L 2016 27 2 2 Well 4 Hypochlorite 0.75-0.80 mg/L 2016 27 2 3 Well 5A Hypochlorite 0.75-0.80 mg/L 1990 1 3 2 3.1.3.1 Chlorination Facilities 3.1.3.1.1 Coal Creek Springs Chlorination The Coal Creek Springs chlorination station was built in 1976 and achieves 4-log treatment of the supply. The chlorination station is housed in a masonry building approximately 300 feet north of the collectors and is in fair condition. As a major source of water for the system, Coal Creek Springs is used to maintain chlorine residuals in the Academy Service Area and south end of the Valley Service Area. This chlorination station is equipped with two chlorinators. Gaseous chlorine is stored on site in a separate room. Alarms from the chlorination equipment are transmitted back to the Water Control Center at the M&O Facility. A chlorine residual analyzer provides high and low alarms to the M&O Facility. Chlorine is dosed into the water at a range of 0.75-0.80 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and is adjusted based on the chlorine residual measured in the Academy and the south end of the Valley Service Area. The City has a capital project planned to replace the chlorination building and upgrade the chlorination equipment from chlorine gas to hypochlorite disinfection. This project is discussed further in Chapter 8. 3.1.3.1.2 West Hill Springs Chlorination The West Hill Springs Chlorination Facility was constructed in 1992. Water produced at West Hill Springs continuously flows from the collection boxes to the on-site chlorination station, housed in a wood building, where gas chlorine is metered continuously to treat the water. Chlorine dosage typically ranges from 0.75 – 0.80 mg/L and is adjusted based on the measured chlorine residual in the north end of the Valley Service Area. From the chlorination station, the water flows by gravity into the Valley Service Area. Page 155 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-19 3.1.3.1.3 Well 1 Liquid sodium hypochlorite treatment was installed at Well 1 in 2016. The chlorine dosage typically ranges from 0.75 - 0.80 mg/L. A residual monitoring system is tied into the City’s existing SCADA system. The City plans to replace the liquid hypochlorite system with an on-site chlorine generation system (OSEC) to better accommodate seasonal changes to chemical demands and reduce chemical waste. This project is discussed further in Chapter 8. 3.1.3.1.4 Wells 2 and 6 Water produced at Wells 2 and 6 is treated and chlorinated at the Fulmer Field CCT Facility prior to distribution. 3.1.3.1.5 Well 4 Well 4 was equipped with a liquid sodium hypochlorite chlorination system in 2016. The chlorine dosage typically ranges from 0.75 – 0.80 mg/L. The City plans to replace the liquid hypochlorite system with an on- site chlorine generation system (OSEC) to better accommodate seasonal changes to chemical demands and reduce chemical waste. This project is discussed further in Chapter 8. 3.1.3.1.6 Well 5 There is currently no chlorination provided for water produced at Well 5. This City has a capital project discussed in Chapter 8 that will include the addition of a chlorination facility to Well 5. 3.1.3.1.7 Well 5A Well 5A was equipped with a liquid sodium hypochlorite chlorination station in 1990. The chlorine dosage typically ranges from 0.75 – 0.80 mg/L and is adjusted based on the chlorine residual measured in the Lakeland Service Area. 3.1.3.1.8 Fulmer Field CCT Facility The Fulmer Field CCT Facility was constructed in 2004. Chlorination at Fulmer Field CCT, along with B Street Intertie, is a major source of chlorine residual in the north end of the Valley Service Area and in the Lea Hill Service Area and is achieved using an on-site chlorine generation system. The existing on-site chlorine generation cell was replaced in 2012, but the system was identified as being in poor condition and sourcing replacement parts for repairs has become increasingly more difficult. A capital project to replace the entire on-site generation system is planned and discussed further in Chapter 8. The Fulmer Field CCT Facility treats the water from Wells 2, 6, and 7 (when operational). Chlorine is introduced into the system prior to the air-stripping towers at a dose of approximately 0.95 mg/L. The chlorine is adjusted based on measured chlorine residual at the station analyzer. The treated water is then stored in the clearwell and boosted into the distribution system and Reservoir 2. If needed, the chlorine can be manually introduced into the clearwell rather than prior to the towers. 3.1.3.1.9 Terrace View Booster Pump Station (BPS) The Terrace View BPS was equipped with a liquid sodium hypochlorite chlorination system in 2010, adding 6 percent solution to the discharge piping of the station at an approximate dose of 0.75 mg/L. Page 156 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-20 3.1.3.1.10 Intertie Pump Station Through the First Amendment to Interlocal Agreement No. 2 for the Lea Hill Intertie project executed in 2017, Covington Water District (CWD) terminated its rights or obligations to Interlocal Agreement No. 2 or the First Amendment and Lake Meridian Water District (LMWD) continues to receive wholesale water from the City, as needed, on an interruptible basis. The chlorination equipment was removed from the Intertie Pump Station since the intertie is not used on regular basis. 3.1.3.2 CCT Facilities To limit the corrosion of lead and copper in the system, the City treats major supplies. The treatment process increases the pH of the water, which reduces the solubility of lead and copper, allowing the water to comply with the Lead and Copper Rule. The goal of the CCT facilities is to adjust the water leaving the facility to a pH of approximately 7.5. 3.1.3.2.1 Fulmer Field CCT Facility The Fulmer Field CCT Facility also adjusts the pH of the water from its sources to approximately 8.0 by air - stripping in three 33,000 gallon air-stripping towers to provide corrosion control treatment. Three 10,000 cubic feet per minute (CFM) blowers provide air. As the carbon dioxide is stripped from the water, the treated water is stored in the clearwell and boosted through four booster pumps back into the distribution system and Reservoir 2. The firm capacity of the facility is 11.88 MGD. 3.1.3.2.2 Howard Road CCT Facility The Howard Road CCT Facility was constructed in 2004. It has a life expectancy of an additional 15 years and is generally in fair condition. This facility is housed in a masonry building and treats the water from Coal Creek Springs and Well 1. The pH of the water from Coal Creek Springs and Well 1 is then adjusted to approximately 7.8 by air-stripping in two 33,000 gallon air-stripping towers. Two 9,300 CFM blowers provide air. The treated water is then stored in the clearwell at the facility and re-boosted through three booster pumps to Reservoir 1 and the Valley Service Area. The firm capacity of the facility is 8.06 MGD. 3.1.4 Storage Facilities The City currently maintains a total of 15.7 million gallons (MG) of water storage in eight water reservoirs located throughout the system. Storage reservoirs are present in each of the City’s Service Areas. The location of each storage reservoir is shown in Figure 3-1. A summary of the City’s storage reservoirs, as well as the type of storage tank, installation date, remaining useful life, condition and criticality is provided in Table 3-7. Condition ratings are assigned based on the 2013 Water Facilities Evaluation Study. The storage volumes provided in Table 3-7 represent the maximum tank volume; however, the City commonly operates the reservoirs at below the maximum levels. A detailed description of reservoir and planned improvements is provided following Table 3-7. Page 157 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-21 Table 3-7 | Inventory of Storage Reservoirs Reservoir Name Storage Volume (MG) Type Install Date Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) Valley Service Area Reservoir 1 5.0 Prestressed Concrete 1975 100 45 5 2 Reservoir 2 3.6 Prestressed Concrete 1975 45 3 2 Lea Hill Service Area Reservoir 4A 1.0 Steel Standpipe 1965 70 11 3 2 Reservoir 4B 1.5 Steel Standpipe 1983 29 4 2 Lakeland Service Area Reservoir 5 1.0 Steel Standpipe 1981 70 27 2 3 Reservoir 6 1.0 Steel Standpipe 2012 58 2 3 Academy Service Area Reservoir 8A 1.2 Steel Standpipe 1973 70 19 3 3 Reservoir 8B 1.5 Steel Standpipe 1980 26 3 3 3.1.4.1 Reservoir 1 Reservoir 1 is located at the southeast end of the Valley Service Area and is the primary storage location for water produced at Coal Creek Springs and pumped from the Howard Road CCT Facility. Reservoir 1 can also be filled by water produced at Well 4. The reservoir was constructed in 1975 and is a covered, pre- stressed concrete tank with a capacity of 5 MG. Reservoir 1 is 184.5 feet in diameter and has an overflow elevation of 269 feet. Academy Pump Station 3 draws water from Reservoir 1 to feed the Academy Service Area. Reservoir 1 also serves the Valley Service Area through Control Valve 1. Control Valve 1 is essential to limit flow and maintain adequate supply to the Valley Service Area. Reservoir 1 was last inspected and cleaned on March 15, 2023. Recommended improvements identified in 2013 Water Facilities Evaluation Study are planned to be completed as part of the “Reservoir Capital Improvements” project discussed further in Chapter 8. 3.1.4.2 Reservoir 2 Reservoir 2 is located on the northeast side of the City’s Water Service Area and serves the Valley Service Area. The reservoir was constructed in 1975 and is a buried, pre-stressed concrete tank with public tennis courts on the concrete roof. The reservoir has a maximum storage capacity of 3.6 MG, has a diameter of 143 feet and an overflow elevation of 252.7 feet. Reservoir 2 is filled by the water sources located in the Valley Service Area and is also filled from Reservoir 1 through Control Valve 1. Reservoir 2 was last inspected and cleaned on March 13, 2023. A capital project is planned to replace the fill and drain valves associated with the reservoir; the project is discussed further in Chapter 8. This project will also resolve improvements identified in the 2022 sanitary survey. Page 158 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-22 3.1.4.3 Reservoirs 4A and 4B Storage in the Lea Hill Service Area is provided in two steel standpipe reservoirs located in the northeast corner of the City’s RWSA, Reservoir 4A and Reservoir 4B. The reservoirs have capacities of 1.0 MG and 1.5 MG respectively. Reservoir 4A was constructed in 1965 with a diameter of 46 feet and an overflow elevation of 578.5 feet. Reservoir 4B was constructed in 1983 with a diameter of 58 feet and an overflow elevation of 579.6 feet. Water is supplied to the Lea Hill reservoirs from the City’s Valley Service Area through the Green River Pump Station and Lea Hill Pump Station. The reservoirs were last inspected and cleaned in June and April of 2018. A capital project is currently installing seismic control valves on the outlet piping from both reservoirs to prevent catastrophic flow during a seismic pipe failure; the project is discussed further in Chapter 8. Additionally, required improvements identified in the 2022 Sanitary Survey will be completed as part of the Reservoir Repair and Replacements Program also discussed in Chapter 8. 3.1.4.4 Reservoir 5 Reservoir 5 is one of two reservoirs providing storage for the Lakeland Service Area. The reservoir was constructed in 1981 and has a total capacity of 1.0 MG. The reservoir is filled by Well 5, Well 5A, and the Terrace View BPS. Reservoir 5 is steel standpipe with a 53.25-foot diameter and an overflow elevation of 638.5 feet. The reservoir was last cleaned and inspected in 2019 and the interior and exterior were last painted in 2016 as part of routine maintenance. 3.1.4.5 Reservoir 6 Reservoir 6 is in the Lakeland Service Area within the boundary of the Lakeland 697 pressure zone but is connected to distribution piping for the Lakeland 630 pressure zone. Reservoir 6 is a steel standpipe constructed in 2012 and has a total capacity of 1.0 MG. This reservoir has a diameter of 63.4 feet and an overflow elevation of 638.9 feet. The reservoir is filled by Well 5, Well 5A, and the Terrace View BPS. The reservoir was last cleaned and inspected in 2019. 3.1.4.6 Reservoir 8A and 8B Reservoirs 8A and 8B are steel standpipes that provide storage for the Academy Service Area. The reservoirs are normally operated in parallel, functioning as one large reservoir. Reservoir 8A has a diameter of 52.75 feet and a total storage volume of 1.2 MG and was constructed in 1973. Academy Reservoir 8B has a diameter of 60 feet and a total storage volume of 1.5 MG and was constructed in 1980. Both reservoirs have an overflow elevation of 544 feet. Academy Pump Station 3 fills the reservoirs. The reservoirs were last cleaned and inspected in October 2019. A capital project is currently installing seismic control valves on the outlet piping from both reservoirs to prevent catastrophic flow during a seismic pipe failure; the project is discussed further in Chapter 8. Additionally, required improvements identified in the 2022 Sanitary Survey will be completed as part of the Reservoir Repair and Replacements Program also discussed in Chapter 8. 3.1.5 Pump Station Facilities The City operates and maintains several pump stations to move water throughout the distribution system and to provide water at the required service pressures. An inventory of the City’s pump stations is provided in Table 3-8 and locations are shown in Figure 3-1. Condition ratings provided in Table 3-8 are assigned based on findings from the 2013 Water Facilities Evaluation Study. Page 159 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-23 Table 3-8 | Pump Station and Booster Pump Station Inventory Facility Name Firm Capacity (gpm) Firm Capacity (MGD) Install Date Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) Lea Hill Service Area Intertie Pump Station (Wholesale) 3,510 5.05 1999 40 15 3 4 Lea Hill BPS 300 0.432 1999 15 3 3 Lea Hill Pump Station 1,200 1.73 1965 -19 6 3 Green River Pump Station 3,498 5.04 1999 15 3 2 Valley Service Area Game Farm Park Pump Station 50 0.07 1988 40 4 7 4 Lakeland Service Area Lakeland Hills BPS 4,205 6.06 2012 40 28 2 2 Terrace View BPS 1,000 1.44 2010 26 2 2 Fulmer Field CCT Facility 8,250 11.88 2004 20 3 1 Howard Road CCT Facility 5,600 8.06 2004 20 4 1 Academy Service Area Academy Pump Station 3 2,100 3.02 2023 40 39 1 1 Academy East BPS 3,040 4.38 2014 30 2 2 3.1.6 Facility Back-Up Power An inventory of the City’s existing facilities with backup power accommodation is provided in Table 3-9. Of the City’s twelve water sources, only Wells 5 and 7 are currently without a standby power source. Standby power will be added to both wells as part of capital projects discussed in Chapter 8. Back-up power for Wells 2 and 6 is housed at the Fulmer Field CCT Facility. The Game Farm Park Pump Station, Lea Hill BPS, and Intertie Pump Station are the only pump stations without a standby power source or connection. Backup power will be added to the Lea Hill BPS as part of a capital project discussed further in Chapter 8. The Game Farm Park Pump Station is a small facility that serves a recreational area and does not serve residential or commercial properties, therefore back-up power is not a critical element. Table 3-9 | Back Up Power Inventory Generator Location Generator Type and Size Install or Purchase Date Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) Fulmer Field CCT Facility On-site, 1000 kW 2001 25 2 4 3 Howard Road CCT Facility On-site, 600 kW 2004 5 3 3 Academy East BPS On-site, 600 kW 2010 11 2 3 Page 160 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-24 Generator Location Generator Type and Size Install or Purchase Date Design Life (years) Remaining Useful Life (years) Condition Rating (Bigger # = Worse Condition) Criticality Rating (Bigger # = Less Critical) Academy Pump Station 3 On-site, 450 kW 2023 24 1 3 Green River Pump Station On-site, 515 kW 2004 5 2 3 Lakeland Hills BPS On-site, 300 kW 2012 13 2 3 Lea Hill Pump Station On-site, 250 kW 1964 -35 6 3 Terrace View BPS On-site, 250 kW 2010 11 2 3 Well 1 Portable, 230 kW 2014 15 2 3 Well 3A/3B On-site, 210 kW 1983 -16 5 3 Well 4 On-site, 450 kW 2016 17 2 3 Well 5A Portable, 230 kW 1992 -7 4 3 Well 5B On-site, 400 kW 2005 6 3 4 Coal Creek Springs On-site, 20 kW 1964 -35 6 3 3.1.7 Facility Monitoring and Control Primary monitoring and operation of the City’s water system and facilities is conducted via a SCADA computerized control system. A software program called “AVEVA” works in association with SCADA to provide real time graphical display of system data, set points, and alarms for staff monitoring and control. The City’s SCADA system controls are centralized at the Public Works M&O Facility. Major upgrades of the City’s SCADA system were complete in 2015 and again in 2024, and the system regularly undergoes updates as facility upgrades or improvements are completed. 3.1.8 2022 Sanitary Survey Findings The City has already taken corrective actions and will continue to resolve all deficiencies identified in the 2022 Sanitary Survey, as summarized in Table 3-10. Table 3-10 | Summary of 2022 Sanitary Survey Findings Issues/Recommended Improvements Required Action Sources and Treatment Well 3A Offline due to manganese issues -- Well 3B Offline due to manganese issues -- Well 5 Water supply lines to chlorine solution tanks must be provided with either air gaps or reduced pressure backflow assemblies to eliminate potential cross connections. This deficiency was mislabeled by DOH, This should have been for Well 4. A letter from the DOH acknowledging the error was received on October 17, 2022. Pump to waste line should terminate above grade. Will be addressed in Well 5/5A Upgrades project included in CIP; refer to Chapter 8. Well 5A Water supply lines to chlorine solution tanks must be provided with either air gaps or reduced pressure backflow assemblies to eliminate potential cross connections. Completed. On September 21, 2022, a reduced pressure backflow assembly was installed at Well 5A, on the water supply line to the chlorine tank. Raise casing to terminate above grade or provision of sump pump or alarms that activate when water accumulates in vault. In the meantime, the vault City implemented an inspection program in October 2022. Page 161 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-25 Issues/Recommended Improvements Required Action should be inspected weekly and immediately following significant storm events. Will be addressed further in Well 5/5A Upgrades project included in CIP; refer to Chapter 8. Well 7 Offline due to manganese issues -- Storage Reservoir 2 Reservoir overflow should not be connected directly to any drain, sanitary sewer, or storm sewer. Will be addressed in Reservoir 2 improvements project included in CIP; refer to Chapter 8. Reservoir 4A Reservoir vents should open downward to prevent windblown debris from entering tank. Will be completed as part of City's annual Reservoir Repair and Replacement program or Reservoirs 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation project; refer to Chapter 8. Reservoir overflow should not be connected directly to any drain, sanitary sewer, or storm sewer. Will be completed as part of City's annual Reservoir Repair and Replacement program or Reservoirs 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation project; refer to Chapter 8. Reservoir 4B Reservoir overflow should not be connected directly to any drain, sanitary sewer, or storm sewer. Will be completed as part of City's annual Reservoir Repair and Replacement program or Reservoirs 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation project; refer to Chapter 8. Reservoir 8A Reservoir overflow screen must be repaired Completed. On September 13, 2022, the overflow screen at Reservoir 8A was repaired. Reservoir vents should open downward to prevent windblown debris from entering tank. Will be completed as part of City's annual Reservoir Repair and Replacement program or Reservoirs 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation project; refer to Chapter 8. Reservoir 8B Reservoir overflow screen must be repaired Completed. On September 13, 2022, the overflow screen at Reservoir 8B was repaired. Reservoir vents should open downward to prevent windblown debris from entering tank. Will be completed as part of City's annual Reservoir Repair and Replacement program or Reservoirs 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation project; refer to Chapter 8. 3.2 Water Quality The quality of drinking water in the United States is regulated by the EPA. Under provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) established in 1974, the EPA is allowed to delegate primary enforcement responsibility for water quality control to each state. In the State of Washington, DOH is the agency responsible for implementing and enforcing the drinking water regulations. For the State to maintain the authority to implement requirements under the SDWA, it must adopt drinking water regulations that are at least as stringent as federal regulations. In meeting these requirements, the State has published drinking water regulations that are contained in Chapter 246-290 of the WAC. Page 162 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-26 As a Group A system, the City is responsible for monitoring and complying with all applicable SDWA and WAC regulations pertaining to source water and distribution system water quality. The purpose of this section is to document the water system’s water quality compared to the above drinking water standards, satisfying the requirements of WAC 246-290-100(4)(e)(ii). The City also owns and operates the Braunwood satellite system located in southeast Auburn in the Braunwood development, also known as the Hidden Valley Acres development. This system is classified as a Group A - Community Water System by DOH. This system is not discussed further in this chapter since it is a small satellite system that is regularly monitored by the City as required and has not had water quality issues as documented in the City’s annual water quality reports for the system. This section includes the following: ➢ Water quality and treatment objectives ➢ Analysis of source water quality ➢ Analysis of distribution system water quality ➢ Recent regulatory changes 3.2.1 Water Quality Treatment and Objectives The treatment objectives of the City are to treat source water to contaminant concentrations below the MCLs established by the EPA and WAC. Historically, the City has relied on groundwater supplied from wells and springs, which have been determined to be not under the direct influence of surface waters (DOH 2004 for Coal Creek Springs). For these water sources, the City is required to meet the EPA’s Groundwater Rule (GWR). The City treats water from all groundwater and spring sources, except for Well 5. The City’s water treatment facilities provide chlorination and corrosion control. A summary of the required operator certifications for each type of facility is provided in Table 3-11. Table 3-11 | Summary of Operator Certifications Treatment Facility Required Operator Certifications Corrosion Control Treatment (CCT) Facilities Water Distribution Manager 4 (WDM-4) and Water Treatment Plant Operator (WTPO) Chlorination Facilities WDM-4 The City began using surface water in 2012 through the B-St Wholesale Intertie with the City of Tacoma (Tacoma). This supply, referred to as the Regional Water Supply, originates from the Green River and the Howard Hansen Dam. Since the City receives treated water as a wholesale purchaser, it is not required to meet the Surface Water Treatment Rule. Tacoma maintains compliance with the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Rule, Long Term 1 and Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rules; and the Filter Backwash Recycling Rule. The City has not purchased water for consumption from Tacoma since 2016. 3.2.2 Analysis of Source Water Quality 3.2.2.1 Raw Water Quality The City only samples post-treatment water except for Well 5, which does not currently have treatment or chlorination. Water quality data for Well 5 is provided in Table 3-12. Page 163 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-27 3.2.2.2 Finished Water Quality Monitoring of inorganic chemical and physical parameters varies by source but is typically required once per 36-month compliance period, however, the City typically monitors these constituents every 12 months (annually) in July. Samples are collected from each source following treatment. A summary of the maximum detected concentrations for monitoring data from 2015 through 2022 is provided in Table 3-12. During this time, none of the MCLs published by the EPA were exceeded; all samples were below required limits. Asbestos sampling is usually required once per 36-month compliance period. However, the City has a waiver that requires sampling once every nine years at three distribution system sample sites. No data was collected during the study period. The City is expected to sample again in 2028. Annual VOC sampling is required for Wells 2 and 6, which are both currently represented by the Fulmer Field CCT Facility. All active sources are disinfected with chlorine prior to entering the distribution system except for Well 5, which serves the Lakeland Service Area. Monitoring data for 2015 through 2022 for inorganic constituents, physical parameters, SOCs, and VOCs were reviewed and is summarized in Table 3-12. All values are post-treatment, except for Well 5 since water from this source is not treated. Wells 3A, 3B, 5B, and 7 were not used during this period and were therefore not sampled. Table 3-12 | EPA Primary Drinking Water Standards Results from 2015 through 2022 Constituent MCL Units Maximum Detected Concentration From 2015 Through 20221 (mg/L) Coal Creek Springs West Hill Springs Well 1 Well 4 Well 5 Well 5A Fulmer Field CCT Facility2 EPA Primary Drinking Water Standards Arsenic 0.01 mg/L 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 Barium 2 mg/L 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Cadmium 0.005 mg/L 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Chromium 0.1 mg/L 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 Mercury 0.002 mg/L 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 Selenium 0.05 mg/L 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 Beryllium 0.004 mg/L 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 Nickel3 - mg/L 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Antimony 0.006 mg/L 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 Thallium 0.002 mg/L 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Cyanide 0.2 mg/L 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 Fluoride 4.0 mg/L 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Nitrite-N 1 mg/L 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Nitrate-N 10 mg/L 1.7 3.6 2.4 1.4 1.9 0.4 1.7 Total Nitrate/Nitrite4 10 mg/L 1.7 3.6 2.4 1.4 1.9 0.5 1.7 EPA Secondary Drinking Water Standards5 Iron 0.3 mg/L 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.626 0.16 0.1 0.1 Manganese 0.05 mg/L 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.032 Silver 0.1 mg/L 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Chloride 250 mg/L 5 8 5 4 6 3 9 Sulfate 250 mg/L 9 15 12 12 11 6 14 Zinc 5 mg/L 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 State Regulated Characteristics Sodium 20 mg/L 6 8 7 7 10 6 12 Conductivity 700 µmhos/cm 150 254 184 152 275 133 224 Page 164 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-28 Constituent MCL Units Maximum Detected Concentration From 2015 Through 20221 (mg/L) Coal Creek Springs West Hill Springs Well 1 Well 4 Well 5 Well 5A Fulmer Field CCT Facility2 Turbidity 1 NTU 0.4 1.5 9.6 5.8 1.2 0.4 3.1 Color 15 Color Units 5 5 10 5 5 5 5 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)7 600 mg/L N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A State Unregulated Lead8 0.015 mg/L 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.018 0.001 0.001 0.001 Copper 1.3 mg/L 0.02 0.3 0.02 0.2 0.02 0.02 0.02 Hardness9 - mg/L 66 122 83 100 130 62 100 Notes: 1. Based on monitoring conducted between 2015 and 2022. Wells 3A, 3B, and 5B were not in use during this time period and no moni toring was conducted. 2. The Fulmer Field CCT Facility was monitored in 2015, 2018,2020, 2021, and 2022, it replaces monitoring of Wells 2, 6, and 7. 3. There is no state or federal MCL, but Washington state has a detection reporting limit of 0.005 mg/L. 4. EPA has set a treatment goal of Total Nitrate at 10 mg/L. 5. EPA does not enforce these "secondary maximum contaminant levels" (SMCLs). They are established as guidelines to assist public water systems in managing their drinking water for aesthetic considerations, such as taste, color, and odor. These contaminants are not considered to present a risk to human health at the SMCL. 6. Iron levels in Well 4 exceeded the Secondary Drinking Water Standards in 2015 but have since all been below the MCL. 7. N/A - not applicable, no testing conducted; testing for total dissolved solids is only required if the specific conductivity is greater than 700 micomhos per centimeter (umhos/cm). 8. On November 30, 2023, the EPA announced the proposed Lead and Copper Rule Improvements, which would lower the Lead Action Lev el from 0.015 mg/L to 0.010 mg/L if finalized in October 2024. 9. No MCL, as hardness is not a regulated characteristic. 3.2.2.3 Water Quality and Treatment Technique Violations There were no water quality treatment violations from 2015 through 2022. 3.2.3 Analysis of Distribution System Water Quality 3.2.3.1 Seasonal Water Quality Changes Water quality within the distribution system is relatively consistent throughout the year. The Valley Service Area distribution water experiences low pH during the winter, however no changes are implemented to offset seasonal variations. 3.2.3.2 Distribution Water Quality Objectives The City collects 100 samples at 70 dedicated sampling sites for total and fecal coliform monitoring. Sampling is conducted at one quarter of the routine sample locations each week during the first four weeks of a month. The City also monitors weekly for total and fecal coliform at Coal Creek Springs and West Hill Springs at their respective collector vaults, as well as after treatment, and at several additional sites to support operations on a weekly basis. The City uses two types of disinfectant for treatment, chlorine gas and liquid sodium hypochlorite, which both produce free chlorine residuals in the distribution system. Average chlorine residuals throughout the distribution system ranged from 0.57 to 0.71 mg/L from 2015 through 2022, as summarized in Table 3-13. Although the range of chlorine residual varies throughout the year, the range of chlorine residual is relatively consistent from year to year. Planned improvements to chlorination facilities at Well 1 and Well 4 are expected to help maintain a more consistent chlorine residual level within the water system. Page 165 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-29 Table 3-13 | Total Chlorine Residuals Results from 2015 through 2022 Year Sample Results (mg/L) Average Range 2015 0.71 0.40 - 1.09 2016 0.64 0.37 – 0.89 2017 0.58 0.32 – 0.79 2018 0.57 0.30 – 0.78 2019 0.59 0.33 – 0.77 2020 0.57 0.33 – 0.80 2021 0.58 0.36 – 0.78 2022 0.59 0.40 – 0.77 The Stage 1 Disinfection By-Product Rule (DBPR) monitoring was superseded in 2012 with Stage 2 DBPR monitoring because the City’s population exceeded 50,000 people. The City conducts monthly sampling within the distribution system to determine the concentration of fluoride. This sampling is in addition to the inorganic source monitoring required by DOH. The City does not add fluoride to their water. The City of Tacoma does fluoridate their water and is wholesale supplier to the City, but the City has not purchased water for consumption from Tacoma since 2016. Sampling is conducted for informational purposes only and to answer customer questions regarding natural fluoride in the City’s water. Should the City purchase water from Tacoma, this information would also be used to monitor the blending of different water sources within the distribution system. In the event the City purchases water from Tacoma via the Cascade Water Alliance, such as during a shortage or other such operational constraint, the City will monitor and report distribution system disinfection residuals daily. These samples will be taken at the same time and place as the City’s routine coliform sampling. The City conducted both Stage 1 and Stage 2 DBPR monitoring since the last water system plan (WSP). Table 3-14 provides a summary of the sample results from 2015 through 2022. The City’s Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs) and Haloacetic Acid 5 (HAA5) monitoring has been conducted once per year during the month with the warmest water temperature (i.e., July or August). All samples were well below the concentrations that DOH uses to determine whether a water system qualifies for reduced monitoring (0.080 mg/L for TTHMs and 0.060 mg/L for HAA5). Table 3-14 | Summary of Disinfection By-Product Rule Monitoring Results from 2015 through 2022 Year TTHM Concentration (μg/L)2 HAA5 Concentration (μg/L)2 Range for LRAA1 Compliance Range for LRAA1 Compliance 2015 2.6 – 19.0 < 80 Not Detected – 4.8 < 60 2016 2.2 – 23.1 < 80 Not Detected – 6.0 < 60 2017 1.7 – 15.0 < 80 1.1 – 6.9 < 60 2018 6.7 – 15.1 < 80 Not Detected – 6.9 < 60 2019 ND < 80 0.2 – 0.3 < 60 2020 7.5 – 11.95 < 80 Not Detected – 3.66 < 60 2021 6.45 – 17.62 < 80 1.25 – 12.41 < 60 2022 9.03 – 10.41 < 80 Not Detected < 60 Notes: 1. Local running annual average. Page 166 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-30 2. Microgram per liter (μg/L). Corrosion control treatment (CCT) is required for the water produced at Coal Creek Springs, Well 1, Well 2, Well 6, and Well 7. Per the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR), the City is required to collect at least 30 water samples per 36-month compliance period in alignment with reduced lead and copper monitoring requirements of WAC 246-290. Sample results from 2015 through 2022 are presented in Table 3-15. Since the CCT facilities were constructed, the lead and copper levels have been well below the action level. DOH granted the City a (b)(3) exemption on August 17, 2021. This exemption, under 40 CFR Part 141.81(b)(3), eliminates the requirement for the City to conduct optimal water quality parameter (OWQP) sampling throughout the distribution system. Instead, the City continues to focus on lead and copper sampling at designated monitoring sites to meet compliance requirements. A copy of the City’s exemption letter from DOH is included as Appendix F. Table 3-15 | Summary of Lead and Copper Sampling Results from 2015 through 2022 Constituent Range of Results from 2015 through 2022 Copper Concentrations (mg/L) Copper Concentration Range <0.02 – 0.3 Copper 90th Percentile 0.091 Lead Concentrations (mg/L) Lead Concentration Range <0.001-0.018 Lead 90th Percentile <0.001 3.2.3.3 Water Quality and Treatment Technique Violations There were no water quality violations in the distribution system from 2015 through 2022. 3.2.4 Recent Regulatory Changes The EPA established a health advisory for drinking water of 70 parts per trillion (ppt) for perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), two commonly found Perfluorinated compounds (PFAS). When both compounds are found in the water, the combined health advisory is also 70 ppt. The Washington State Board of Health (Board) adopted rule changes to chapter 246-290 WAC, Group A Public Water Supplies and WAC 246-390, Drinking Water Laboratory Certification and Data Reporting. The newly adopted rules became effective on January 1, 2022. The rule establishes the administrative processes for setting drinking water quality standards as State Action Levels (SAL) and state MCLs. The rule establishes SALs for five PFAS contaminants: PFOA, PFOS, perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), and perfluorobutane sulfonic acid (PFBS). The rule requires Group A community and non-transient noncommunity public water systems to test for PFAS. For those Group A water systems that have detections of PFAS, but do not exceed the SAL, the rule requires additional ongoing monitoring, with the frequency of monitoring based upon the detected level in comparison to the SAL. It also establishes reporting, recordkeeping, and consumer confidence report requirements. For those Group A water systems that exceed the SAL, the rule requires follow-up actions such as monitoring, public notification, additional recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. SALs for regulated PFAS compounds are shown in Table 3-16 with results from the City’s latest samples. Most results indicated that the PFAS compounds were not detected (ND), being they were below detectable limits. PFBS was detected at Well 1, Coal Creek Springs, and West Hill Springs, however the levels are far Page 167 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-31 below regulated levels. In more recent results received in May 2024, all samples were below detection limits for all facilities and the City was approved for a 3-year testing schedule. Furthermore, in April 2024, the EPA announced the first National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for six PFAS. This established individual MCLs for PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, PFNA, and Hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA) and a Hazard Index MCL for PFAS mixtures containing at least two or more of PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, and PFBS. The EPA also finalized MCLGs for these PFAs, which can be seen alongside the MCLs in Table 3-16. The regulation requires that public water systems must monitor for these PFAS and must complete initial monitoring by 2027, followed by ongoing compliance monitoring. Water systems must provide the public with information on the PFAS levels in the drinking water beginning 2027. Public water systems must implement solutions by 2029 to reduce PFAS if monitoring shows that drinking water levels exceed the MCLs. Page 168 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-32 Table 3-16 | PFAS State Action Levels and Monitoring Data PFAS Compound SAL (ng/L) MCL (ng/L) MCLG (ng/L) Maximum Detected Concentration (ng/L)1 Well 1 Fulmer Field CCT Facility Well 3A Well 3B Well 4 Well 5 Well 5A Well 5B Coal Creek Springs West Hill Springs PFOA 10 4.0 0 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND PFOS 15 4.0 0 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND PFHxS 65 10 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND PFNA 9 10 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND PFBS 345 - - 2.8 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 3.1 3.0 HFPO-DA - 10 10 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Mixtures containing two or more of PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, and PFBS - 13 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Notes: 1. Nanograms per liter (ng/L). 2. Not detected (ND). 3. Hazard Index – unitless. Page 169 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-33 3.3 Design Standards The City’s most recent Engineering Design Standards are available on the City’s website and are provided as Appendix P. Table 3-17 highlights keys standards that are used to evaluate the capacity of the City’s water system, summarizing both DOH criteria and City criteria. The City’s water quality design standards follow the design standards set forth by the EPA and DOH, as discussed in Section 3.2. Table 3-17 | System Capacity Analysis Criteria Evaluation Type Evaluation Criteria Agency’s Standard Water Reliability Recommendations Multiple Source 2 or more supply sources are available DOH Backup Power Source of supply pump stations have power connections to two independent primary public power sources, have in-place auxiliary power available, and/or maintain adequate gravity standby storage DOH Surface Water Reliability Firm watershed yield for surface water provides 98% reliability to meet normal, anticipated system demands. DOH Groundwater Reliability Factor of safety is applied to well pumping test safe yield determination. DOH Water Source Source Capacity MDD while replenishing Fire Suppression Storage (FSS) within 72-hrs (24-hr source pumping may be assumed). DOH ADD with largest source out of service. DOH MDD in a pumping period of 20 hours or less of pumping. DOH MDD with the largest active water source out of service. City Pump Stations Capacity - Open System (sufficient storage in zone) ADD with largest pump out of service. DOH MDD with all pumps in service. MDD with largest pump out of service. City Fire Flow is met from storage reservoir. Capacity - Closed System (no/insufficient storage in zone) PHD with largest pump out of service. DOH MDD + Fire Flow at a pressure of at least 20 psi at all points throughout the distribution system. PHD + Fire Flow with largest pump out of service. City Standby power with capacity to run with any single pump out of service. Page 170 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-34 Evaluation Type Evaluation Criteria Agency’s Standard Storage Facilities Total Storage Capacity Sum of operational, equalization, standby, fire suppression, and dead storage. DOH Operating Storage (OS) The volume of water before sources turn on. DOH (pump off elev. – pump on elev.) x gal/ft Equalizing Storage (ES) (PHD – maximum supply capacity) x 150 min DOH Min. pressure of 30 psi. Must be provided when source pumping capacity cannot meet the peak hourly demand. Standby Storage (SB) Min. standby storage of 200 gallons per ERU. DOH Min. pressure of 20 psi. Standby storage volume equal to one day of MDD for the pressure zone(s) served. Fire Suppression Storage (FSS) (required fire flow rate) x (duration in minutes) DOH Min. pressure of 20 psi. Nested storage (same storage for Standby and Fire Suppression Storge) requires written consent of fire protection authority. Dead Storage (DS) Volume that cannot provide minimum design pressure (20 psi) to all customers. DOH Volume below the outlet pipe and cannot be used because of hydraulic limitations. City Distribution System Minimum Pressures PHD at no less than 30 psi. DOH MDD + Fire Flow at no less than 20 psi. Maximum Pressures Add individual PRVs for ADD pressures more than 80 psi. DOH Max. target pressure of 80 psi in water distribution system. City Maximum Velocity No more than 8 feet per second (fps) under PHD conditions. DOH No more than 8 fps in distribution mains and 5 fps in transmission mains under PHD conditions. No more than 18 fps under MDD+FF conditions. City Minimum Pipe Size 6-inch diameter in residential areas and 8-inch diameter in commercial areas, unless a hydraulic analysis justifies another size. DOH Single-Family Residential minimum 8-inch diameter and Industrial/Commercial/Multi-Family minimum 12-inch diameter. City Telemetry Each parcel receiving water service shall have its own meter City Meters shall be located as close to the water main from which the service is taken as possible, distance not to exceed 50 feet. Meters shall be placed in landscape strips, behind the sidewalk, or at the right-of-way limits in that order of availability. Meters in landscaped or unimproved areas shall be set 2 inches above the finished grade. Maximum Valve Spacing Maximum 400-foot spacing and at the intersection of lateral lines in all zones. City Hydrant Spacing Single-Family Residential maximum 600-foot spacing. City Industrial/Commercial/Multi-Family maximum 300-foot spacing. Fire Flow & Duration Residential Minimum 1,500 gpm at 2 hours. City Multi-Family Residential Minimum 2,500 gpm at 3 hours. Commercial Industrial Page 171 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-35 3.4 Capacity Analysis This section provides an analysis of legal and physical capacity of the water system based on the system’s available water rights, sources, treatment, storage, and distribution components. 3.4.1 Water Rights A summary of the City’s current water rights is presented in Table 3-18. The maximum instantaneous allowable flow for each source (Qi) is in units of gpm. The total annual withdrawal for each source (Qa) is in units of acre-feet per year. The City does not have any interruptible water rights. Table 3-18 | Summary of Existing Water Rights Water Right Primary Qi (gpm) Primary Qa (acre-feet/year) Coal Creek Springs 6,732 9,410 Well 1, 6, & 7 2,200 1,120 Well 2, 6, & 7 2,400 1,360 Well 3A & 3B, 6, & 7 2,800 3,600 Well 4, 6, and 7 2,800 3,600 Wells 5, 5A, 5B, &5C 1,000 720 Well 5A 167 0 Algona Well 500 175 Braunwood Well1 20 6.5 West Hill Springs2 625 1,010 TOTAL 19,244 21,002 Notes: 1. The Department of Ecology considers Braunwood a standalone non-municipal satellite water system. 2. Water from West Hill Springs operates through water right claim S1-049354CL. A claim is an assertion that a water right was created pre- code (1917 for surface water and 1945 for groundwater). In addition to the water rights presented above, the City also has a wholesale agreement with the City of Tacoma and can purchase water through two interties as discussed in Chapter 1, Section 1.6.1. These two interties are also considered to be supply facilities. The City also has several emergency interties with adjacent purveyors. 3.4.1.1 Analysis Criteria Supply facilities must be reliable and provide sufficient water at pressures that meet the requirements of WAC 246-290-230. The capacity of supply facilities in a pressure zone with adequate storage must be sufficient to provide water at a rate that is equal to or greater than the MDD of the zone being served. This approach assumes that demands greater than the MDD will be supplied using equalizing storage. According to Section 3.10.5 and Section 5.4 of the 2020 DOH Water System Design Manual, water system sources must be capable of supplying MDD and replenishing depleted within 72-hours (assuming continuous pumping), provide MDD in a pumping period of 20 hours or less, and provide ADD with the largest source out of order. The City’s standards have a more stringent requirement to provide MDD with the largest active source out of service. Page 172 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-36 3.4.1.2 Analysis Results The City’s water supply (production) capacity compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria are summarized in Table 3-19. It is worth noting that the water supply (production) capacity is not synonymous with the supply water rights. The MDD and ADD values are based on the demand projections included in Chapter 2 and include wholesale supply projections for the City of Algona. Demand allocation for the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) Fish Hatchery and LMWD are not included. LMWD is not included since they do not rely on the City as their main source of water and have an interruptible wholesale agreement. Demand from the MIT Fish Hatchery is also not included since it is unknown when this facility will be constructed, however the analysis presented in Table 3-19 shows that the City has sufficient surplus supply to support this demand when it comes to fruition. The FSS flow rate is calculated as the sum of the FSS for each service area presented in Section 3.4.2.3.2, which totals 797 gpm, divided over a 72-hour period. The results presented in Table 3-19 demonstrate that the City has the supply facilities necessary to meet demand projections under current and future projections for all required criteria. Table 3-19 | Supply Analysis with Largest Source Out of Service Description 2024 Scenario 2034 Scenario 2044 Scenario Required Supply (gpm) FSS Replenished in 72-hours 797 797 797 Maximum Day Demand1, gpm 8,657 9,751 11,068 Average Day Demand1, gpm 4,899 5,518 6,263 Available Supply (gpm) Largest Source (QL) – Tacoma Interties 3,555 3,555 3,555 Largest Active Source – Coal Creek Springs2 3,500 3,500 3,500 Total Sources (Qt)3,4 15,610 15,610 15,610 DOH Criteria: MDD while replenishing FSS within 72-hrs (24-hr source pumping may be assumed) Surplus / (Deficit) of Supply, gpm 6,156 5,062 3,746 DOH Criteria: ADD with largest source out of service Surplus / (Deficit) of Supply, gpm 7,156 6,537 5,792 DOH Criteria: MDD in a pumping period of 20 hours or less of pumping Surplus / (Deficit) of Supply, gpm 4,352 3,257 1,941 City Criteria: MDD with largest active water supply source out of service Surplus / (Deficit) of Supply, gpm2 3,453 2,359 1,042 Notes: 1. Current analysis does NOT include a separate allocation for wholesale customers who have not purchased water from the City since 2019 or earlier (i.e., MIT or LMWD). 2. The City’s largest active source is Coal Creek Springs since the City has not purchased water from Tacoma since 2016. 3. Total sources are: Well 1, 2, 4, 5, 5a, and 6 (7,955 gpm), Coal Creek Springs (3,500 gpm), West Hill Springs (600 gpm), and two Tacoma Interties (3,555 gpm). 4. Supplies do NOT include emergency interties with CWD (1,736gpm) or LMWD ( 1,736 gpm). The City’s Water Rights Self-Assessment Form is provided in Appendix I and was used to assess the City’s water rights water rights and includes supply that is available to the City through firm wholesale interties with Tacoma. The form includes a comparison of the available water rights to the existing, 10-year and 20- year demand projections for the “High Demand Scenario” presented in Chapter 2. The calculations presented in the Water Rights Self-Assessment Form conclude that the City’s existing water rights are anticipated to be adequate to meet the current, 10-year, and 20-year demand projections. Page 173 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-37 The City does not have all the infrastructure required to withdraw from all water rights (i.e., Wells 3A, 3B, 5B, and 7 are not currently operational). Additionally, some sources have underlying aquifer or infrastructure restrictions that limit the capacity of the source (i.e., Well 2, Well 6, and Coal Creek Springs). Several facility improvement projects are necessary for the City to maximize water production capacity to meet future demands, and planned supply related capital projects to meet this need are discussed further in Chapter 8. 3.4.2 Physical Capacity Analysis This section includes an analysis of the physical capacity of the City’s distribution system. The specific components analyzed include: ➢ Pump Station Capacity Analysis o Open Pressure Zones: Zones with storage reservoirs o Closed Pressure Zones: Zones without storage ➢ Storage Capacity Analysis ➢ Hydraulic Analysis of the Distribution System ➢ System Analysis based on ERUs To complete the physical capacity analysis, the projected demands calculated in Chapter 2 were utilized for the 2024 scenario (existing conditions), 2034 scenario (10-year projections) and 2044 scenario (20-year projections). When evaluating facilities under fire flow conditions, the largest fire flow demand was utilized in each Service Area. The fire flow required for single family residential customers is 1,500 gpm for two hours and all other customer types have a requirement of 2,500 gpm for two hours. There are select buildings throughout the system that require fire flow capacity in the water system that exceeds 2,500 gpm for two hours as determined by the Fire Marshal; these individual locations and their fire flow requirements are summarized in Table 3-20. Table 3-20 |Buildings in Auburn with High Fire Flow Requirements ID # Location Description Address Service Area Flow Required (gpm) 1 RPS Distribution Center 3702 C St. NE Valley 4,000 2 Emerald Downs 2300 Emerald Downs Drive Valley 3,000 3 Panattoni Warehouse 816 44th ST NW Valley 4,000 4 Span Alaska Transportation Inc. 3815 W Valley Highway N Valley 3,125 5 AMB Valley Distribution Center 2202 Perimeter Road SW Valley 4,000 6 Grace Community Church 1106 12th Street SE Valley 3,750 7 Riverside High School 501 Oravetz Road SE Valley 3,000 8 Wesley Homes Senior Housing 10805 SE 320th Street Lea Hill 4,000 9 Auburn Elementary School at Lakeland 1020 Evergreen Way SE Lakeland 3,125 10 Academy Campus 5000 Auburn Way South Academy 4,000 11 MIT Casino Expansion 2402 Auburn Way South Academy 2,625 3.4.2.1 Pump Station Analysis: Open Pressure Zones This section evaluates the pumping capacity of the water system on a zone-by-zone basis with consideration for pump stations between zones and supply wells pumping directly into the pressure zones Page 174 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-38 that contain a storage reservoir. All reduced pressure zones are included in the open zone analysis, as they are ultimately fed by gravity from a reservoir. Pressure zones that do not include a storage facility are analyzed as a closed zone. 3.4.2.1.1 Valley Service Area The Valley Service Area is the largest service area in the water system and consists of two pressure zones: Valley 288 and Valley 242. The Valley 288 pressure zone is a transmission zone that does not directly serve any customers. Valley 242 is the largest pressure zone in the RWSA and is draws supply from the following facilities: ➢ Wells 2 and 6 via the Fulmer Field CCT Facility ➢ Coal Creek Springs and Well 1 via the Howard Road CCT Facility with transmission through Valley 288 ➢ Well 4 with transmission through Valley 288 ➢ West Hill Springs Table 3-21 provides an overview of the total pump station capacity into the Valley Service Area compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria. The results presented in Table 3-21 demonstrate that the City has adequate pumping capacity within the open pressure zones of the Valley Service Area to meet current and future demand projections for all required criteria. Table 3-21 | Pumps Station Capacity for Valley Service Area Open Pressure Zones Description Valley 2024 Scenario Valley 2034 Scenario Valley 2044 Scenario Required Capacity (gpm) FSS Replenished in 72-hours 222 222 222 Maximum Day Demand, gpm 6,266 7,161 8,252 Average Day Demand, gpm 3,546 4,052 4,670 Available Capacity (gpm) Largest Pump (QL), gpm 2,800 2,800 2,800 Total Pumping Capacity (Qt), gpm 19,400 19,400 19,400 DOH Criteria: Reliable Capacity (ADD + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 15,854 15,348 14,730 DOH Criteria: Total Capacity (MDD + replenish FSS in 72-hours) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 13,134 12,239 11,148 City Criteria: MDD + largest pump out of service Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 10,334 9,439 8,348 3.4.2.1.2 Lea Hill Service Area Water supply for the Lea Hill Service Area is provided by the Lea Hill Pump Station and the Green River Pump Station. In 2014, the City added wholesale water supply from Tacoma through the 132nd Ave SW intertie, however the City has not purchased water for consumption from Tacoma since 2016. The intertie and pump stations feed the Lea Hill 563 pressure zone, which includes Reservoirs 4A and 4B. Therefore, Page 175 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-39 the Lea Hill and Green River Pump Stations were evaluated based on the open zone criteria. Table 3-22 provides a summary of the pump station capacity into the Lea Hill Service Area compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria. The results presented in Table 3-22 demonstrate that the City has adequate pumping capacity within the open pressure zones of the Lea Hill Service Area to meet current and future demand projections for all required criteria. Table 3-22 | Pump Station Capacity for Lea Hill Service Area Open Pressure Zones Description Lea Hill 2024 Scenario Lea Hill 2034 Scenario Lea Hill 2044 Scenario Required Capacity (gpm) FSS Replenished in 72-hours 222 222 222 Maximum Day Demand, gpm 1,231 1,281 1,333 Average Day Demand, gpm 696 725 755 Available Capacity (gpm) Largest Pump (QL), gpm 1,166 1,166 1,166 Total Pumping Capacity (Qt), gpm 6,6641 6,6641 6,6641 DOH Criteria: Reliable Capacity (ADD + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 5,968 5,939 5,909 DOH Criteria: Total Capacity (MDD + replenish FSS in 72-hours) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 5,433 5,383 5,331 City Criteria: MDD + largest pump out of service Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 4,267 4,217 4,165 Note: 1. The Green River Pump Station has a firm capacity of 3,498 gpm (largest pump out of service) and the Lea Hill Pump Station has a firm capacity of 1,200 gpm (largest pump out of service). The largest pump at Green River and Lea Hill PS have 1,166 gpm and 800 gpm capacity, respectively. Therefore, the firm and total pumping capacity of both pump stations is 4,698 gpm (two pumps out of service) and 6,664 gpm (all pumps in service), respectively. 3.4.2.1.3 Lakeland Service Area The Lakeland Service Area is supplied from the Upland Well Field (Wells 5 and 5A) and by sources in the Valley Service Area using the Terrace View BPS. The Terrace View BPS supplies the Lakeland 630 pressure zone from the Valley Service Area, which is then distributed through the Service Area. Since the Lakeland 630 pressure zone contains two reservoirs (Reservoirs 5 and 6), the Terrace View BPS was evaluated based on the open zone criteria. Table 3-23 provides a summary of the pump station capacity into the Lakeland Service Area compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria. The results presented in Table 3-23 demonstrate that the City has adequate pumping capacity within the open pressure zones of the Lakeland Service Area to meet current and future demand projections for all required criteria. Table 3-23 | Pump Station Capacity for Lakeland Service Area Open Pressure Zones Description Lakeland 2024 Scenario Lakeland 2034 Scenario Lakeland 2044 Scenario Required Capacity (gpm) FSS Replenished in 72-hours 130 130 130 Maximum Day Demand, gpm 629 719 823 Average Day Demand, gpm 356 407 466 Available Capacity (gpm) Page 176 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-40 Description Lakeland 2024 Scenario Lakeland 2034 Scenario Lakeland 2044 Scenario Largest Pump (QL), gpm 500 500 500 Total Pumping Capacity (Qt), gpm 1,500 1,500 1,500 DOH Criteria: Reliable Capacity (ADD + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 1,144 1,093 1,034 DOH Criteria: Total Capacity (MDD + replenish FSS in 72-hours) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 871 781 677 City Criteria: MDD + largest pump out of service Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 371 281 177 3.4.2.1.4 Academy Service Area The Academy Service Area is supplied from the Valley Service Area using Academy Pump Station 3. The pump station operates based on levels in Reservoirs 8A and 8B located in the Academy 531 pressure zone. Table 3-24 provides a summary of the pump station capacity into the Academy Service Area compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria. The results presented in Table 3-24 demonstrate that the City has adequate pumping capacity within the open pressure zones of the Academy Service Area to meet current and future demand projections for all required criteria. Table 3-24 | Pump Station Capacity for Academy Service Area Open Pressure Zones Description Academy 2024 Scenario Academy 2034 Scenario Academy 2044 Scenario Required Capacity (gpm) FSS Replenished in 72-hours 222 222 222 Maximum Day Demand, gpm 531 591 658 Average Day Demand, gpm 300 334 373 Available Capacity (gpm) Largest Pump (QL), gpm 700 700 700 Total Pumping Capacity (Qt), gpm 2,800 2,800 2,800 DOH Criteria: Reliable Capacity (ADD + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 2,500 2,466 2,427 DOH Criteria: Total Capacity (MDD + replenish FSS in 72-hours) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 2,269 2,209 2,142 City Criteria: MDD + largest pump out of service Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 1,569 1,509 1,442 3.4.2.2 Booster Pump Station Analysis: Closed Pressure Zones The City operates a closed zone in each of its Service Areas. Closed zones do not have a storage reservoir directly serving the zone and are required to supply the peak hour demand (PHD) and fire flow via a BPS. The BPS serving each closed pressure zone was evaluated using the closed zone criteria as defined by DOH. 3.4.2.2.1 Lakeland Hills BPS The Lakeland Service Area has two closed pressure zones served by the Lakeland Hills BPS: Lakeland 697 and Lakeland 670. Table 3-25 provides a summary of the BPS capacity into the Lakeland closed pressure Page 177 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-41 zones compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria. The results presented in Table 3-25 demonstrate that the City has adequate pumping capacity within the closed pressure zones of the Lakeland Service Area to meet current and future demand projections for all required criteria. Table 3-25 | BPS Capacity for Lakeland Service Area Closed Pressure Zones Description Lakeland 670 & 697 2024 Scenario Lakeland 670 & 697 2034 Scenario Lakeland 670 & 697 2044 Scenario Required Capacity (gpm) Fire Flow Required, gpm 3,125 3,125 3,125 Maximum Day Demand, gpm 231 261 296 Peak Hour Demand, gpm 372 419 476 Available Capacity (gpm) Largest Pump (QL), gpm 3,125 3,125 3,125 Total Pumping Capacity (Qt), gpm 7,330 7,330 7,330 DOH Criteria: Firm Capacity (no storage; PHD + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 3,833 3,786 3,729 DOH Criteria: Reliable Capacity (no storage; MDD + FSS + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 3,974 3,944 3,909 City Criteria: PHD+ FSS + largest pump out of service Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 708 661 604 3.4.2.2.2 Academy East BPS The Academy Service Area has one closed zone served by the Academy East BPS: Academy 585. Table 3-26 provides a summary of the BPS capacity into the Academy closed pressure zone compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria. The results presented in Table 3-26 demonstrate that the City has adequate pumping capacity within the closed pressure zones of the Academy Service Area to meet current and future demand projections for all required criteria. Table 3-26 | BPS Capacity for Academy Service Area Closed Pressure Zone Description Academy 585 2024 Scenario 2 Academy 585 2034 Scenario Academy 585 2044 Scenario Required Capacity (gpm) Fire Flow Required, gpm 2,500 2,500 2,500 Maximum Day Demand, gpm 87 98 111 Peak Hour Demand, gpm 140 158 179 Available Capacity (gpm) Largest Pump (QL), gpm 1,250 1,250 1,250 Total Pumping Capacity (Qt), gpm 4,290 4,290 4,290 DOH Criteria: Firm Capacity (no storage; PHD + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit) of Supply, gpm 2,900 2,882 2,861 DOH Criteria: Reliable Capacity (no storage; MDD + FSS + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 1,703 1,692 1,679 City Criteria: PHD+ FSS + largest pump out of service Page 178 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-42 Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 400 382 361 3.4.2.2.3 Lea Hill BPS The Lea Hill Service Area has one closed zone served by the Lea Hill BPS: Lea Hill 648. Table 3-27 provides a summary of the BPS capacity into the Lea Hill closed pressure zone compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria. The results presented in Table 3-27 indicate that the Lea Hill BPS is currently deficient and cannot meet the required criteria for existing or future demands. Table 3-27 | BPS Capacity for Lea Hill Service Area Closed Pressure Zone Description Lea Hill 648 2024 Scenario Lea Hill 648 2034 Scenario Lea Hill 648 2044 Scenario Required Capacity (gpm) Fire Flow Required, gpm 2,500 2,500 2,500 Maximum Day Demand, gpm 110 124 141 Peak Hour Demand, gpm 178 200 227 Available Capacity (gpm) Largest Pump (QL), gpm 1,500 1,500 1,500 Total Pumping Capacity (Qt), gpm 1,800 1,800 1,800 DOH Criteria: Firm Capacity (no storage; PHD + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 122 100 73 DOH Criteria: Reliable Capacity (no storage; MDD + FSS + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm (810) (824) (841) City Criteria: PHD+ FSS + largest pump out of service Surplus / (Deficit), gpm (2,378) (2,400) (2,427) The Intertie Pump Station shares a building with the Lea Hill BPS and contains pumps which were originally purposed to serve the intertie for wholesale supply to CWD and LMWD. Since CWD and LMWD no longer rely on the City as their primary water source, the City plans to complete facility modifications so the pumps at the Intertie Pump Station can serve the Lea Hill 648 pressure zone. This project is discussed further in Chapter 8 and will resolve the deficiencies identified in Table 3-27. 3.4.2.2.4 Game Farm Park Pump Station The Valley Service Area has one closed zone served by the Game Farm Park Pump Station: Game Farm Park (no assigned pressure zone name). Table 3-28 provides a summary of the BPS capacity into the Valley closed pressure zone compared with demand projections and DOH and City criteria. The results presented in Table 3-28 indicate that the Game Farm Park Pump Station is currently deficient and cannot meet the required criteria for existing or future demands. The Game Farm Park Pump Station provides service to a park restroom facility, two fire hydrants, and individual RV campsites. As this is a small BPS with the single purpose of providing service to a recreational area, and there are no residential or commercial property connections supplied by this facility, no actions are planned to resolve this deficiency. The DOH and City criteria are geared towards providing reliable service for residents and businesses and are not applicable for this minor facility. The City has reviewed this condition with the Fire Marshal, and no exceptions were taken. As further development progresses in and around the Game Farm Park Pump Station, modifications will be considered to address the deficiency. Page 179 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-43 Table 3-28 | BPS Capacity for Game Farm Park Closed Pressure Zone Description 2024 Game Farm 2034 Game Farm 2044 Game Farm Required Capacity (gpm) Fire Flow Required, gpm 1,500 1,500 1,500 Maximum Day Demand, gpm 0.4 0.4 0.4 Peak Hour Demand, gpm 0.6 0.6 0.7 Available Capacity (gpm) Largest Pump (QL), gpm 1,000 1,000 1,000 Total Pumping Capacity (Qt), gpm 1,050 1,050 1,050 DOH Criteria: Firm Capacity (no storage; PHD + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm 49 49 49 DOH Criteria: Reliable Capacity (no storage; MDD + FSS + largest pump out of service) Surplus / (Deficit), gpm (450) (450) (451) City Criteria: PHD+ FSS + largest pump out of service Surplus / (Deficit), gpm (1,451) (1,451) (1,451) 3.4.2.3 Storage Analysis This section evaluates the City’s existing water storage facilities to determine if there is sufficient capacity to meet existing and future storage requirements of the system. 3.4.2.3.1 Components of Storage The City currently maintains a total of 15.7 MG of water storage in eight reservoirs located throughout the service area. Each Service Area has two reservoirs, providing redundancy for cleaning and maintenance. Historically, the City has evaluated each Service Area independently. However, new sources, pump stations, and PRV facilities now allow for reliable and redundant operation of the system as an interconnected whole, rather than as separate Service Areas. The storage analysis reflects the new operational ability by allowing sharing of emergency storage between the Service Areas. The existing infrastructure and customer expectations still require that other storage components, such as FSS, be stored in individual Service Areas. Water storage requirements are typically defined by the following components: operational storage, equalizing storage, standby storage, fire suppression storage, and dead storage. A description of each storage component and the criteria used to evaluate the capacity of the City’s reservoirs is as follows: ➢ Operational Storage: Operational storage is used to supply the water system under normal demand conditions and provides pump protection to avoid frequent starting and stopping of pumps for pump stations that are used to fill reservoirs. The operational storage is calculated per the DOH Design Manual as the pump supply firm capacity (in gpm) times 2.5-minutes. ➢ Equalizing Storage: When the source pumping capacity cannot meet the periodic daily (or longer) peak demands placed on the water system, equalizing storage must be provided as a part of the total storage for the system and must be available at 30 psi to all service connections. The criteria for determining the equalizing storage requirements for the City’s system is based on the equalizing calculation in the DOH Design Manual (refer to equation 7-1). ➢ Standby Storage: Standby storage is the portion of the reservoir used to supply the water system when supply facilities are out of service. DOH allows water systems with multiple sources to require that standby volume be supplied with the largest supply source out of service but recommends a Page 180 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-44 minimum standby storage of 200 gallons per ERU in the system. The City calculates standby storage as the maximum volume required to supply all ERUs at least 235 gallons (based on the DOH minimum times an 18 percent factor of safety). ➢ Fire Suppression Storage (FSS): FSS is the portion of the reservoir with sufficient volume to supply water to the system at the maximum rate and duration required to extinguish a fire at the building with the highest fire flow requirement. The required volume of the FSS is the product of the fire flow rate and duration of the system’s maximum fire flow requirement. ➢ Dead Storage: Dead storage is the bottom portion of the reservoir that cannot be used because water is stored at an elevation that is too low to provide sufficient system pressure (below 20 psi at the highest elevation served by the reservoir). This unusable storage occupies the lower portion of many ground-level standpipe-type reservoirs. When the highest service elevation is not the limiting factor, the City defines dead storage as being 1-foot above the reservoir inlet elevation for operational reasons. The City’s reservoir storage requirements depend on the water system’s configuration, seasonal and daily variation in water-use patterns, and the reliability of various water system components. This section describes the five components of storage, summarizes the existing system’s capacity to meet the storage needs of each Service Area, and makes recommendations to address identified storage deficits. Figure 3-7 | Illustration of Reservoir Storage Components 3.4.2.3.2 Storage Analysis Results The storage available in the four Service Areas was evaluated to confirm each is provided with the required usable Operational, Equalizing, Fire Suppression, and Emergency Storage volumes. Reflecting the interconnectedness of the system, excess storage in higher Service Areas (i.e., Lea Hill, Lakeland and Academy) can be used in the Valley Service Area and vice vers a through use of the system pump stations. The storage analysis compares the required storage, based on the criteria in Table 3-17, and the available storage. The FSS for each region was calculated using 4,000 gpm for four hours except for Lakeland, which used 3,125 gpm for three hours based on buildings with the highest fire flow requirement in each Service Area (see Table 3-20). Table 3-29 summarizes the existing 2024 storage analysis and results. The results indicate a deficit in the Lea Hill Service Area, however, this deficit is offset by surplus storage available in other Service Areas. Page 181 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-45 Table 3-29 | System-Wide Storage Analysis for the 2024 Scenario Description RWSA 2024 Academy 2024 Lakeland 2024 Lea Hill 2024 Valley 2024 Usable Storage (MG) Maximum Storage Capacity 15.86 2.72 2.06 2.48 8.60 Algona Reserve Storage Capacity1 0.28 -- 0.28 -- -- Algona Proposed Storage Capacity2 0.17 -- 0.17 -- -- Dead Storage 1.50 0.06 0.44 0.36 0.64 Total Usable Storage 14.08 2.66 1.34 2.12 7.96 Required Storage (MG) Operational Storage 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.03 Equalizing Storage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Standby Storage (Emergency) 9.10 0.56 0.66 1.29 6.59 FSS (Emergency) 3.44 0.96 0.56 0.96 0.96 Total Required Storage 12.59 1.53 1.22 2.26 7.58 Surplus/ (Deficit) Storage 1.49 1.13 0.12 (0.14) 0.38 Notes: 1. The water supply interlocal agreement (IA3) between the City of Algona and the City of Auburn was updated in 2016. Through th is updated agreement, Algona elected to financially participate in Lakeland Reservoir 6 to obtain a total share of 280,000-gallons of storage capacity. The agreement stipulates that if the City experiences any failure or decreased capacity, the supply of water to Algona may be decreased by the same percentage that is experienced by the City. 2. Algona has also requested an additional 170,000 gallons of storage capacity (anticipated to begin in 2025) by financially participating in the planned Reservoir 3. Table 3-30 summarizes the 2034 storage analysis and results (10-year projections). The results indicate a deficit in the Lea Hill, Lakeland, and Valley Service Areas, however, this deficit is offset by surplus storage available in other Service Areas. Additionally, the deficit in the Lakeland Service Area may not be realized based on the City’s terms and conditions of the IA3 agreement with Algona. Table 3-30 | System-Wide Storage Analysis for the 2034 Scenario Description RWSA 2034 Academy 2034 Lakeland 2034 Lea Hill 2034 Valley 2034 Usable Storage (MG) Maximum Storage Capacity 15.86 2.72 2.06 2.48 8.60 Algona Reserve Storage Capacity1,2 0.45 -- 0.45 -- -- Dead Storage 1.50 0.06 0.44 0.36 0.64 Total Usable Storage 13.91 2.66 1.17 2.12 7.96 Required Storage (MG) Operational Storage 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.03 Equalizing Storage 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 Standby Storage (Emergency) 10.26 0.62 0.76 1.35 7.53 FSS (Emergency) 3.44 0.96 0.56 0.96 0.96 Total Required Storage 13.77 1.59 1.34 2.32 8.52 Surplus/ (Deficit) Storage 0.14 1.07 (0.17) (0.20) (0.56) Notes: 1. The water supply interlocal agreement (IA3) between the City of Algona and the City of Auburn was updated in 2016. Through th is updated agreement, Algona elected to financially participate in Lakeland Reservoir 6 to obtain a total share of 280,000-gallons of storage capacity. The agreement stipulates that if the City experiences any failure or decreased capacity, the supply of water to Algona may be decreased by the same percentage that is experienced by the City. 2. Algona has also requested an additional 170,000 gallons of storage capacity by financially participating in the planned Reservoir 3, bringing the total storage capacity to 450,000 gallons. Page 182 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-46 The 2044 storage analysis was performed to determine the ability of the proposed storage facilities to meet the future storage requirements in 2044, based on projected demands. The analysis results indicate that the existing storage facilities do not have sufficient capacity to meet the future demands of the system based on the demand projections presented in Chapter 2. The City is currently planning a new reservoir in the Valley Service area to address these future deficiencies in the 20-year time frame. Table 3-31 summarizes the buildout 2044 storage analysis. Table 3-31 summarizes the 2044 storage analysis and results (20-year projections). The results indicate an overall deficit in the RWSA, spurred largely by the projected growth within the Valley Service Area in the 20-year horizon. Table 3-31 | System-Wide Storage Analysis for the 2044 Scenario Description RWSA 2044 Academy 2044 Lakeland 2044 Lea Hill 2044 Valley 2044 Usable Storage (MG) Maximum Storage Capacity 15.86 2.72 2.06 2.48 8.60 Algona Reserve Storage Capacity1,2 0.45 -- 0.45 -- -- Dead Storage 1.50 0.06 0.44 0.36 0.64 Total Usable Storage 13.91 2.66 1.17 2.12 7.96 Required Storage (MG) Operational Storage 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.03 Equalizing Storage 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 Standby Storage (Emergency) 11.64 0.69 0.87 1.40 8.68 FSS Storage (Emergency) 3.44 0.96 0.56 0.96 0.96 Total Required Storage 15.18 1.66 1.48 2.37 9.67 Surplus/ (Deficit) Storage (1.27) 1.00 (0.31) (0.25) (1.71) Notes: 1. The water supply interlocal agreement (IA3) between the City of Algona and the City of Auburn was updated in 2016. Through th is updated agreement, Algona elected to financially participate in Lakeland Reservoir 6 to obtain a total share of 280,000-gallons of storage capacity. The agreement stipulates that if the City experiences any failure or decreased capacity, the supply of water to Algona may be decreased by the same percentage that is experienced by the City. 2. Algona has also requested an additional 170,000 gallons of storage capacity by financially participating in the planned Reservoir 3, bringing the total storage capacity to 450,000 gallons. Since most of the future storage deficiency is in the Valley Service Area, a new storage reservoir is planned in the northeastern portion of the Service Area (Valley 242 pressure zone). The reservoir is a planned capital project to be completed in the 20-year horizon and is discussed further in Chapter 8. The Lea Hill PS has sufficient capacity to transfer standby storage from Valley to Lea Hill. In addition, there are multiple PRVs which can be used to transfer water from the Academy and Lakeland Service Areas back to Valley to utilize excess standby storage in those areas. No other projects are necessary to resolve this deficiency. 3.4.2.4 Distribution and Transmission Capacity Analysis This section evaluates the City’s existing distribution and transmission mains to determine if the water pipelines are sized and looped adequately to provide the required flow and pressures to meet existing and future system conditions. The evaluation used an updated version of the City’s computerized hydraulic water system model and InfoWater Pro, a GIS-based modeling software developed by Autodesk (formerly Innovyze). The model was updated to accurately reflect the City’s existing water system and verified against Page 183 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-47 field hydrant test data. Results from the model were used to evaluate the existing system and identify deficiencies. 3.4.2.4.1 Model Update The following updates were made to the City’s hydraulic model prior to conducting the capacity analyses: ➢ Facility updates ➢ Pipeline network updates ➢ Elevation updates ➢ Demand updates Each update is described in further detail below. Facility Updates Existing facilities within the hydraulic model were reviewed and updated based on information provided by the City. The facilities reviewed included groundwater wells, springs, interties with adjacent water systems, potable water reservoirs, pump stations, treatment facilities, flow control valves, and PRVs. The following documents were used to confirm the accuracy of the facility information within the hydraulic model: ➢ Interlocal agreements ➢ Record drawings ➢ PRV calibration records ➢ Pump curves ➢ SCADA data ➢ Operations and maintenance data Pipeline Network Updates The existing pipeline network within the hydraulic model was compared to the City’s existing GIS data to locate areas where pipelines may have been missing in the model. In addition, the pipeline material type was added to the model to match data available from GIS to more accurately reflect the existing distribution system. Elevation Updates Node elevations within the model were updated using United States Geological Survey (USGS) Digital Elevation Model (DEM). The DEM is a tile of the 3-Dimenional Elevation Program (3DEP) with data that is updated regularly and distributed in geographic coordinates in units conforming with the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). All elevation values are in meters and, over the cont iguous United States, are referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). The assigned elevations were converted to feet when applied to the model. In addition to the general elevation update of the model nodes, the record drawings of the water reservoirs were used to verify the bottom and overflow elevations of the reservoirs within the model. Where necessary based on date, the as-built elevations were corrected to NAVD88 values, as some of the reservoirs were constructed using National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29). A conversion of 3.51 feet was used to update elevations from NGVD 29 to NAVD 88. Page 184 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-48 Demand Updates Demands in the model were updated using the City’s customer billing database . The meters were geolocated based on the customer’s address and assigned to the closest model junction. No demands were allocated to transmission pipelines or facility nodes (i.e., pump station, reservoirs, etc.). Approximately 10 percent of the demand was unable to be allocated using this method. The remaining demand and non- billed usage, like DSL and construction meters, was distributed uniformly throughout the model by applying a scaling factor to match the 2022 production data. The demand sets in the model sought to distribute the demand projections provided in Chapter 2. A scaling factor was then applied to all demand nodes to equal the demand projection in years 2024. As discussed in Chapter 2, TAZ data was used to determine growth projections and the future water demand. Based on the TAZ data, each Service Area was split between focused growth areas and non-growth areas. Future demands were allocated equally across all current demand nodes within the focused growth and non-growth areas of each Service Area. Demand peaking factors from Chapter 2 were used to adjust demands to MDD for the fire flow analyses and PHD for the pressure analysis. 3.4.2.4.2 Model Calibration To verify and calibrate the hydraulic model, the City collected field hydrant testing data. A map of the hydrant testing locations and testing plan is included in Appendix K. The City also collected static pressure at the test locations to verify the hydraulic grade line (HGL) of specific areas of the water system. In addition to the hydrant tests results, the boundary conditions of the water system facilities at the time of each test were provided. The boundary conditions were used to calculate the demand observed during each test. The boundary conditions were also entered into the model for each hydrant test to accurately simulate the system conditions during the hydrant test. At most locations, hydrants were operated to stress the system to identify required changes to the boundary conditions and pipe roughness factors (C-factors) within the hydraulic model. A fire flow calibration scenario was set up within the hydraulic model and each of the hydrant test locations was simulated. Appendix K provides the field flow data compared to the flow data input into the model and a comparison of the static pressures and pressure drops observed at each hydrant test. Table 3-32 summarizes the final Hazen Williams C-factors used during the calibration based on piping material. Table 3-32 | Final C-Factors for Piping Materials Material C-Factor Cast Iron 90-120 Concrete 120 Ductile Iron 120 HDPE 130 PVC 130 RCP 120 Steel 120 Unknown 115 Page 185 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-49 Valley Service Area A total of 16 hydrant tests were conducted in the Valley Service Area, however the results from one test were excluded as the static pressure was not recorded. The static pressure and pressure drop in the calibrated model is now within 5 psi, or less, of the observed data for each of the hydrant tests. Lea Hill Service Area A total of nine hydrant tests were conducted in the Lea Hill Service Area. The static pressure and pressure drop in the calibrated model is now within 5 psi, or less, of the observed data for each of the hydrant tests. The HGL from the hydrant testing was higher than the reported HGL in the hydraulic model for the Lea Hill 462 pressure zone. The PRV setpoints were referenced to confirm the higher HGL observed during the hydrant testing. As such, the naming for the pressure zone was updated to Lea Hill 480. The update and supporting calculations are included in Appendix K. Academy Service Area A total of five hydrant tests were conducted in the Academy Service Area. The static pressure and pressure drop in the calibrated model is now within 5 psi, or less, of the observed data for each of the hydrant tests. The HGL from the hydrant testing was higher than the reported HGL in the hydraulic model for the Academy 350 and Academy 445 pressure zones. The PRV setpoints were referenced to confirm the higher HGL observed during the hydrant testing. As such, the naming for each pressure zone was updated to Academy 400 and Academy 470 respectively. The updates and supporting calculations are included in Appendix K. Lakeland Service Area A total of ten hydrant tests were conducted in the Lakeland Service Area, however the results from one test were excluded as the recorded static pressure was determined to be incorrect. The static pressure and pressure drop in the calibrated model is now within 5 psi, or less, of the observed data for each of the hydrant tests. The HGL from the hydrant testing varied from the reported HGL in the hydraulic model for the Lakeland 440, Lakeland 441, Lakeland 446, and Lakeland 485 pressure zones. The PRV setpoints were referenced to confirm the HGLs observed during the hydrant tests. As such, the naming for each pressure zone was updated as follows: ➢ Lakeland 440 pressure zone was split into two pressure zones: Lakeland 450 and Lakeland 405. ➢ Lakeland 441 pressure zone was updated to Lakeland 385 ➢ Lakeland 446 pressure zone was updated to Lakeland 415 ➢ Lakeland 485 pressure zone was updated to Lakeland 455. The hydrant test for Lakeland 575 was not simulated in the model as observed in the field since a static pressure of 101 psi was recorded during the hydrant test. According to the PRV setpoints, the HGL on the test date was anticipated to be an error. The City re-checked the hydrant on February 8, 2024, and a static pressure of 69 psi was recorded. It was concluded that the original hydrant test data was inaccurate, and the test was voided. The Lakeland 575 pressure zone was updated to Lakeland 560 instead based on the PRV setpoints and static pressure reading completed in February 2024. The updates and supporting calculations are included in Appendix K. Page 186 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-50 3.4.2.4.3 Hydraulic Analysis PHD Analysis During PHD conditions, the water system must maintain a minimum pressure of 30 psi at all service nodes, a maximum velocity of 8 fps in wall water mains, and a maximum velocity of 5 fps in all transmission mains in accordance with DOH and City standards. The hydraulic model was set up to evaluate pressures and velocities throughout the system under PHD conditions for the 2024 (existing conditions), 2034 (10-year), and 2044 (20-year) scenarios. The results of this analysis are shown in Figure 3-8, Figure 3-9, and Figure 3-10 respectively. The results of this analysis indicate that all areas of the water system meet these requirements under existing and future conditions. Page 187 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-51 Figure 3-8 | 2024 PHD Scenario – Pressure and Velocity Page 188 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-52 Figure 3-9 | 2034 PHD Scenario – Pressure and Velocity Page 189 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-53 Figure 3-10 | 2044 PHD Scenario – Pressure and Velocity Page 190 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-54 Fire Flow Analysis The fire flow analysis assesses each hydrant node in the hydraulic model to determine the available fire flow while maintaining a minimum residual pressure of 20 psi throughout the respective pressure zone. To complete the analysis, the water elevation in each reservoir was set to top of dead storage (below operational, equalizing and standby storage) per DOH recommendations. In addition, the system demands were set to MDD for each scenario (2024, 2034 and 2044). For each node, the modeled available fire flow was compared to its target fire flow requirement as follows: ➢ Single Family Residential Meters: 1,500 gpm of fire flow required. ➢ All Other Meters (i.e., multi-family, commercial, etc.): 2,500 gpm of fire flow required. ➢ Specific Buildings with Higher Fire Flow Requirements: Assessed individually per Table 3-20. Fire flow requirements were assigned to the model nodes based on account class ifications of the assigned water meters. Where multiple meters with different account class ifications were assigned to the same node, the highest fire flow requirement was assigned to the node. The hydrant locations provided in the City’s GIS system do not correspond to the exact location of the hydrant node in the model. Therefore, the nodes that were predicted to have fire flow below what is required were checked based on their proximity to the nearest hydrant to verify whether the appropriate hydrant could provide the required fire. As shown in Figure 3-11 the results of this analysis indicated that multiple areas of the system under current and future demand conditions have fire flow deficiencies. A summary of the proposed pipeline improvements to resolve the deficiencies is shown in Figure 3-12 and summarized in Table 3-33. Figure 3-12 also includes on-going projects currently being completed by the City or developers. Valley Service Area Multiple deficiencies are identified in the Valley Service Area. The highest priority project assists with raising the HGL of the highest critical node on the west side of the RWSA. This project will increase the available fire flow at most of the western failure locations. The remaining improvements assist with specific failure locations by upsizing water mains experiencing significant headloss. Additionally, a new PRV facility is proposed to rezone a portion of the Valley 242 pressure zone to the Academy 350 pressure zone to resolve deficiencies in the area. This PRV facility will also allow storage transfer from the Academy Service Area where this is surplus storage to the Valley Service Area to resolve the 2034 storage deficit projections. This project is discussed further in Chapter 8. Lakeland Service Area There were no failure locations identified within the Lakeland Service Area for the existing and future demand conditions. Lea Hill Service Area Multiple deficiencies are identified in the Lea Hill Service Area. The highest priority project in this area is to rezone a portion of Lea Hill 563 pressure zone to the Lea Hill 648 pressure zone. In addition, deficiencies were noted in the northern part of Lea Hill 563, in the vicinity of 112th Avenue, 290th Street, 295th Street, and 293rd Street. These pipelines were replaced recently and provide an available fire flow of approximately 1,350 gpm after the rezoning of the Lea Hill 563 pressure zone is comp leted. Therefore, a project was not proposed in this area and was confirmed with the Fire Marshal. The remaining improvements assist with specific failure locations by upsizing water mains experiencing significant headloss. Page 191 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-55 Figure 3-11 | MDD+FF Deficiency Locations for 2024, 2034 and 2044 Scenarios Page 192 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-56 Figure 3-12 | Capital Improvement Projects Addressing Fire Flow Deficiencies Page 193 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-57 Academy Service Area Multiple deficiencies are identified in the Academy Service Area. The planned Oak Vista Development provides a significant increase in available fire flow in Academy 585 pressure zone. The remaining improvements assist with specific failure locations by upsizing pipelines with high predicted headloss. Table 3-33 | Prioritized Pipeline Improvements to Address Fire Flow Deficiencies Project Priority Service Area Project ID Summary of Deficiency Summary of Improvements 1 Valley P-FF-VLY-8 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 500 gpm Replace existing with 3,200 LF of 16-inch diameter piping. 2 Lea Hill P-FF-LH-3 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,000 gpm Replace existing with 690 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 3 Lea Hill P-FF-LH-7 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,000 gpm. Replace existing with 180 LF of 8-inch diameter piping. Move hydrant connection to higher zone. 4 Lea Hill P-FF-LH-5 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,000 gpm Replace existing with 1,080 LF of 12-inch diameter piping and 1,170 LF of 16-inch diameter piping. 5 Valley P-FF-VLY-15 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,000 gpm Replace existing with 1,320 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 6 Valley P-FF-VLY-6 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,000 gpm Replace existing with 3,590 LF of 8-inch diameter piping. 7 Valley P-FF-VLY-7 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,500 gpm Replace existing with 7,9840 LF of 8-inch diameter piping and 4,380 LF of 12-inch piping. 8 Valley P-FF-VLY-13 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,000 gpm Replace existing with 1,290 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 9 Valley P-FF-VLY-12 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,000 gpm Replace existing with 1,440 LF of 8-inch diameter piping and 550 LF of 12-inch piping. 10 Lea Hill P-FF-LH-1 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,500 gpm Replace existing with 4,540 LF of 8-inch diameter piping. 11 Lea Hill P-FF-LH-2 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,500 gpm Replace existing with 1,300 LF of 8-inch diameter piping. 12 Lea Hill P-FF-LH-6 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,500 gpm Replace existing with 2,470 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 13 Academy P-FF-ACA-2 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,500 gpm. Replace existing with 590 LF of 8-inch diameter piping. 14 Academy P-FF-ACA-1 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,500 gpm. Replace existing with 500 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 15 Lea Hill P-FF-LH-4 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 1,500 gpm Replace existing with 340 LF of 8-inch diameter piping. 16 Valley P-FF-VLY-9 2024 Scenario: Multiple hydrants less than 1,500 gpm Replace existing with 190 LF of 8-inch diameter piping and 5,765 LF of 12-inch piping. 17 Valley P-FF-VLY-14 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 510 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 18 Valley P-FF-VLY-2 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 910 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. Page 194 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-58 Project Priority Service Area Project ID Summary of Deficiency Summary of Improvements 19 Valley P-FF-VLY-17 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 170 LF of 8-inch diameter piping and 1,270 LF of 12-inch piping. 20 Valley P-FF-VLY-4 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 2,610 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 21 Valley P-FF-VLY-10 2024 Scenario: 4-inch Cast Iron near 1,500 gpm dead end Replace existing with 320 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 22 Valley P-FF-VLY-3 2024 Scenario: Hydrant less than 1,500 gpm available. Replace existing with 1,010 LF of 8-inch diameter piping and 660 LF of 12-inch piping. Complete P-FF-VLY-8 has higher priority for initial improvement in this area. 23 Valley P-FF-VLY-1 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 960 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 24 Valley P-FF-VLY-11 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 1,630 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 25 Valley P-FF-VLY-16 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 390 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 26 Valley P-FF-VLY-5 2024 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 750 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 27 Academy P-FF-ACA-3 2044 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 380 LF of 12-inch diameter piping. 28 Academy P-FF-ACA-4 2044 Scenario: Hydrants less than 2,500 gpm Replace existing with 1,040 LF of 16-inch diameter piping. 3.4.2.5 System Capacity Analysis Results Chapter 2 of this WSP calculated the ADD ERU planning value to be at 182 gallons per day per Equivalent Residential Units (gpd/ERU) and an MDD ERU planning value of 322 gpd/ERU. An analysis of the water system’s overall physical capacity in terms of ERU using DOH Worksheet 4-1 is provided in Appendix V. Demand projection values include retail customer demands, distribution system losses, authorized unbilled consumption, and wholesale demand from Algona. Projections for the MIT Fish Hatchery and LMWD are not included. LMWD is not included since they do not rely on the City as their main source of water and have an interruptible wholesale agreement. Demand from the MIT Fish Hatchery is also not included since it is unknown when this facility will be constructed or what the actual demands will be. The results of the ERU analysis included in Appendix V are summarized in Table 3-34. The analysis indicates that the existing system has sufficient capacity to serve the current and projected water demands through 2034 (10-year planning horizon). Under 2024 and 2034 demand conditions, storage is the limiting system component for growth and development. In 2044 (20-year planning horizon) storage is deficient, which is consistent with the analysis findings summarized in Section 3.4.2.3 and is planned to be resolved with a new reservoir project included in Chapter 8. Page 195 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-59 Table 3-34 | System Capacity Analysis in ERU Basis Description of Capacity Parameter 2024 2034 2044 Demands per ERU Basis Average Day Demand, gpd/ERU 182 182 182 Maximum Day Demand, gpd/ERU 322 322 322 Peak Hour Demand, gpd/ERU 518 518 518 Projected Retail Customer Demand, ERUs 38,731 43,626 49,515 Algona (Firm Wholesale) Projected ADD, ERUs 2,005 2,120 2,246 Algona (Firm Wholesale) Projected MDD, ERUs 2,150 2,274 2,409 Total ERUs Required for Qa Analysis (ADD), ERUs 40,736 45,746 51,761 Total ERUs Required for Qi and Qs Analysis (MDD), ERUs 40,881 45,900 51,924 Source Capacity (Qi) Total Supply Capacity, Qi (20 hours of pumping), gpd 23,092,800 23,092,800 23,092,800 Maximum Day Demand, gpd/ERU 322 322 322 Maximum Supply Capacity, ERUs 71,744 71,744 71,744 Projected MDD Demand, ERUs 40,881 45,900 51,924 Remaining Qi Capacity Surplus/(Deficit), ERUs 30,863 25,845 19,820 Water Rights (Qa) Supply Capacity, Qa (Total), gpd 18,749,377 18,749,377 18,749,377 Average Day Demand, gpd/ERU 182 182 182 Maximum Supply Capacity, ERUs 102,938 102,938 102,938 Projected ADD Demand, ERUs 40,736 45,746 51,761 Remaining Qa Capacity Surplus/(Deficit), ERUs 62,202 57,192 51,177 Pumping Capacity (Qs) Total Pumping Capacity, Qs (20 hours of pumping), gpd 18,732,000 18,732,000 18,732,000 Maximum Day Demand, gpd/ERU 322 322 322 Maximum Supply Capacity, ERUs 58,196 58,196 58,196 Projected MDD Demand, ERUs 40,881 45,900 51,924 Remaining Pumping Capacity Surplus/(Deficit), ERUs 17,315 12,297 6,272 Storage Capacity Maximum Usable Storage Capacity, MG 14.08 13.91 13.91 Available Standby and Equalization Storage Capacity, MG 10.58 10.44 10.42 Standby Storage Requirement, gal/ERU 235 235 235 Equalizing Storage Requirement, gal/ERU - - - Maximum Storage Capacity, ERUs 45,038 44,442 44,335 Projected Retail System ERUs 38,731 43,626 49,515 Remaining Storage Capacity Surplus/(Deficit), ERUs 6,308 816 (5,181) System Capacity Analysis Summary Limiting Component of System Capacity Surplus/ (Deficit), ERUs 6,308 816 (5,181) Page 196 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-60 3.4.3 New Source of Supply Analysis The City has a pending water right application for 13,443 acre-feet from the existing Wells 6 and 7 and a future Well 8. The location of the future Well 8 has not been determined but is expected to be located near Wells 6 and 7. Flows from future Well 8 would be treated at the Fulmer Field CCT Facility. It is anticipated that water quality from Well 8 would be similar to Wells 6 and 7 and may require manganese treatment. Calculations presented in the Water Rights Self-Assessment Form (Appendix I) conclude that the City’s existing water rights are anticipated to be adequate to meet the current, 10-year, and 20-year demand projections for maximum instantaneous flows (Qi) and total annual withdrawal (Qa). The City has established a policy of maintaining the capability to supply the MDD while the largest water source is out of service. The system analysis documented in this chapter confirms that, with projected demands over the 20-year planning period, the City will maintain the capability to meet MDD with the largest pumping source is out of service with the use of the Tacoma interties as an available source. Mitigation obligations due to the proposed water right for Wells 6, 7, and 8 are listed below and are described in detail in the Conceptual Mitigation Plan (Appendix S): ➢ Mitigation of impacts to Green River, ➢ Mitigation of impacts to White River, and ➢ Mitigation of impacts to Mill Creek. Water Use Efficiency measures described in Chapter 4 will be applied to the expanded supplies from Wells 6 and 7 and the new supply from Well 8 if the pending water right is approved. Aside from the pending water right application, the City has several projects planned over the 20-year horizon to improve supply production or fully utilize their existing water rights, as discussed in Section 3.1.2. 3.5 Summary of System Deficiencies Table 3-35 provides a summary of the system deficiencies described in this chapter. Proposed improvements include pump station improvements, storage improvements, and distribution system improvements. Total project costs and the anticipated source of funding for each project are provided in Chapter 8. Table 3-35 | Summary of System Deficiencies CIP Improvement Classification of Deficiency Description of Project Solution Location in WSP Where Deficiency is Identified Location in WSP Where Analysis Demonstrates Deficiency will be Addressed by Project Supply Improvements Reliability, Resiliency • Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation • Well 2 Replacement • Well 2 and Well 6 Cleaning Program • Wells 5/5A Upgrades • Well 7 Back-up Power • Algona Well 1 Study Section 3.1.2 Section 3.1.2 and Chapter 8 Page 197 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn System Analysis and Asset Management Page 3-61 CIP Improvement Classification of Deficiency Description of Project Solution Location in WSP Where Deficiency is Identified Location in WSP Where Analysis Demonstrates Deficiency will be Addressed by Project Treatment Improvements Reliability • Wells 3A/3B Treatment • Well 5 Chlorination • Well 7 Treatment • Coal Creek Springs Chlorination Building Replacement • Wells 1 and 4 On-site Chlorination Improvements • Fulmer Field CCT Facility Chlorination Improvements Section 3.1.3 Section 3.1.3and Chapter 8 Storage Improvements Growth, Fire Flow, Reliability, Resiliency • Reservoir 2 Valve Improvements • Reservoirs 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation • Additional storage in the Valley Service Area Section 3.1.4 and Section 3.4.6 Section 3.1.4, Section 3.4.6, and Chapter 8 Pump Station Improvements Reliability, Fire Flow • Modifications to Lea Hill BPS/Intertie PS Section 3.4.5 Section 3.4.5 and Chapter 8 Distribution Improvements Growth, Fire Flow • Coal Creek Springs Transmission Improvements • West Hill Springs Transmission Improvements • Replacing and upsizing pipelines where needed Section 3.1.2 and Section 3.4.7 Section 3.1.2, Section 3.4.7, and Chapter 8 Page 198 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-1 CHAPTER 4 Water Use Efficiency Program The purpose of this chapter is to describe the water system’s program to improve water use efficiency (WUE). WUE contributes to the long-term water supply reliability and promotes good stewardship of the state’s water resources. This chapter addresses the following topics. 4.1 Source and Service Metering 4.2 Distribution System Leakage 4.3 Water Use Efficiency Program 4.4 Water Use Efficiency Savings 4.5 Climate Change Resiliency Table 4-1 lists the requirements of the WUE Rules from the DOH 2020 Water Use Efficiency Guidebook and reflects the City’s level of compliance with these requirements. Table 4-1 | WUE Rule Requirements Category Requirement City of Auburn Compliance Status Meters Meter all sources. Yes, all sources are metered. Meter all service connections. Yes, all services are metered. Data Collection Provide annual consumption by customer class. Yes, provided in Section 2.2.2. Provide “seasonal variations” consumption by customer class. Yes, provided in Section 2.5. Evaluate reclaimed water opportunities. Yes, provided in Section 4.3.5. Consider water use efficiency rate structure. Yes, the City has an inverted block rate structure to promote conservation. Provide monthly and annual production for each source. Yes, provided in Section 2.3.1. Distribution System Leakage Calculate annual volume and percent using formula defined in WUE Rules. Yes, distribution leakage is calculated and reported in Section 4.2. Report annually: annual leakage volume, annual leakage percent, and for systems not fully metered, meter installation progress and leak minimization activities. Yes, distribution leakage is reported to DOH on an annual basis. Develop water loss control action plan (if leakage is over 10% for 3-year average). N/A, system has a 3-year average water loss of less than 10%. Goals Establish measurable (in terms of water production or usage) conservation goals and re-establish every 6 years. Provide schedule for achieving goals. Yes, measurable goals were established via a public process. See Section 4.3.3. Use a public process to establish goals. Page 199 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-2 Category Requirement City of Auburn Compliance Status Report annually on progress. Yes, report submitted annually to DOH. WUE Program Describe existing conservation plan. Yes, see Section 4.3. Estimate water saved over last 6 years due to conservation program. Yes, see Section 4.3.1. Describe conservation goals. Yes, see Section 4.3.3. Implement or evaluate 1-12 measures, depending on size. Nine measures for City of Auburn. Yes, see Section 4.3.4. Describe conservation programs for next 6 years including schedule, budget, and funding mechanism. Yes, see Section 4.3.6. Describe how customers will be educated on efficiency practices. Yes, see Section 4.3.4. Estimate projected water savings from selected measures. Yes, see Section 4.4. Describe how efficiency program will be evaluated for effectiveness. Yes, see Section 4.3.1. Estimate leakage from transmission lines (if not included in distribution system leakage). N/A, transmission line leakage included in distribution system leakage as system does not have true transmission lines. Demand Forecast Provide demand forecast reflecting no additional conservation. Yes, provided in Section 4.4. Provide demand forecast reflecting all “cost effective” evaluated measures. Performance Reports Develop annual report including goals and progress towards meeting them, total annual production, annual leakage volume and percent and, for systems not fully metered, status of meter installation and actions taken to minimize leakage. Yes, reports will be submitted annually to DOH. Submit annually by July 1 to DOH and customers and make available to the public. 4.1 Source and Service Metering 4.1.1 Source Meters Source meters, also known as production meters, measure the amount of water emitted from the City’s springs and wells. Each of the City’s sources are metered to measure the amount of water produced. The meters are calibrated annually by an outside contractor under the direction of the Water Operations Supervisor to ensure an accurate accounting of water produced. If a meter cannot be calibrated properly, it is replaced with a new one. Propeller source meters are being replaced with electromagnetic (MAG) meters in conjunction with planned capital improvements projects, or as the budget allows. Page 200 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-3 Table 4-2 | Source Meter Details Source Meter ID Manufacturer Meter Type Meter Size Years in Service Date of Last Calibration Coal Creek Springs Siemens Magnetic 24-inch 26 August 2023 West Hill Springs Siemens Magnetic 10-inch 10 Unknown Algona Well 1 N/A N/A Not in use Not in use Not in use Valley Well 1 Siemens Magnetic 12-inch 14 August 2023 Valley Well 2 Siemens Magnetic 10-inch 24 August 2022 Valley Well 3A Sparling Turbine Not in use Not in use Not in use Valley Well 3B Sparling Turbine Not in use Not in use Not in use Valley Well 4 Siemens Magnetic 12-inch 391 August 2023 Lakeland Well 5 Sparling Turbine 8-inch 411 August 2023 Lakeland Well 5A Siemens Magnetic 4-inch 34 August 2023 Lakeland Well 5B Siemens Magnetic Not in use Not in use Not in use Valley Well 6 Siemens Magnetic 12-inch 241 August 2023 Valley Well 7 Sparling Turbine Not in use Not in use Not in use Note: 1. Years in service assumed to be from source’s original construction date. 4.1.2 Service Meters Water meters are installed on every service line to measure the quantity of water used by a customer per WAC 246-290-496 and City Code Chapter 13.06.320. All new direct service connections must be metered at the time-of-service activation per WAC 246-290-496(2)(d). All meters shall remain the property of the City and shall not be removed except by the City. In all cases where meters are lost, damaged or broken by carelessness, negligence, or willful actions of owners/operators of premises, they shall be rep laced or repaired by or under the direction of the City. The actual cost of repairs or replacement of meters will be charged against the owners/operators. In case of nonpayment of fees, fines, charges, or penalties, the water shall be shut off and will not be turned on until all charges are paid. In 2015, the City began installing an Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system, as a part of the Water Meter and Billing System Improvements project, which was completed in 2018. With the new AMI system, the City automatically receives meter reads via radio transmission and can integrate the data into the billing software. The benefits of an AMI system include increased accuracy and efficiency, early leak detection, and improved customer service. The AMI system is anticipated to have a 20-year life, including the system components and batteries in the radios. In conjunction with the AMI system installation, the City also completed a meter changeout in 2018. Since 2015, the City has installed 15,156 meters, ranging in size from ¾ inch to ten inches. Meter replacement will be on a 20-year program to coincide with the AMI system. Large source meters and three-inch and larger commercial meters will be tested and calibrated annually. Small meters (less than three inches) are not calibrated. All new service connections under three inches, in addition to repairs, retrofits or replacements of existing services, are typically conducted by Water Distribution Staff unless unusual circumstances arise. Meter Page 201 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-4 services consist of meters, meter vaults, meter boxes, service lines, valves, setters, re -setters, and other associated equipment. ➢ Small Meters (3/4 to two inch) o Replacement Cost: $700 - $1,620 o New Installation Cost: $550 - $1,500 ➢ Large Meters (three to eight inch) o Replacement Cost: $3,300 - $12,000 o New Installation Cost: $2,800 - $11,500 The City uses master meters when beneficial to the City and its customers. Master meters are used at certain locations such as mobile home parks, the Auburn Business Park (formerly the Federal General Services Administration Property), and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) commercial properties. 4.1.2.1 Large Meters Large meters are used to measure water consumption by customers with significant demand requirements. They are usually employed by the following customer classes. ➢ Commercial ➢ Farms or Parks – Irrigation ➢ Schools ➢ Multifamily Complexes ➢ Industrial / Manufacturing Businesses ➢ Wholesale Customers ➢ Municipal Buildings Large meters are defined as water meters three inches or larger and new meters are installed by contractors rather than City maintenance staff. There are a total of 127 large meters in the City’s system. All large meters are calibrated for accuracy each year, usually between the months of April and June, as part of the City’s System Loss Program. Calibration of large meters is conducted by an outside contractor, but two maintenance staff members under the direction of the Water Distribution Supervisor assist in the process. If a meter cannot be calibrated, it is replaced with a new one by City maintenance staff. 4.2 Distribution System Leakage Distribution System Leakage (DSL) represents the difference between production and documented water use (retail, wholesale, and authorized unmetered). It may include inaccurate master and service connection meters, unaccounted-for non-revenue water use, pipeline leakage, and unauthorized use. DSL does not include authorized water usage such as water used for fire protection, flushing, construction, and other maintenance and operations practices. However, to be credited, this must be accounted for by meterin g or estimating using credible means. The DSL is calculated as the difference between the total amount of water produced and the sum of water sold plus any authorized unmetered water usage. The City’s estimated DSL for 2015 through 2022 is presented in Chapter 2, Table 2-11. For the City’s water system, the 2022 three-year rolling average DSL was 6.7 percent of total production (corrected value submitted by the City to DOH in 2024). This falls below the DOH requirement that the three-year average DSL be under ten percent to minimize water waste. Page 202 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-5 The City is committed to maintaining DSL below the required ten percent and is actively working to identify and minimize DSL. To minimize DSL, the City has ongoing leak detection, meter calibration, and an active repair and replacement program for water system infrastructure, as detailed in Chapter 6 – Operations and Maintenance. The City completes a leak detection study of 25 percent of the water distribution system every year to detect and fix leaks. Additionally, the City has recently increased its effor ts to reduce non- payment of bills and water theft. The City recently completed a major SCADA system upgrade in 2024. These investments should significantly increase the City’s ability to measure DSL both temporally and geographically. The resulting information may allow the City to better target its WUE activities to reduce DSL. 4.2.1 Water Audits The City has implemented AMI throughout the system, completing installations between 2015 and 2018. AMI is a tool that improves the effectiveness of the WUE Program measures, providing detailed water use data for each customer that allows the City to better understand water use patterns and target WUE Program measures to specific customers. Data can be sent in real-time or stored for several weeks or months. Potential AMI capabilities vary depending on the chosen hardware and software however, most systems can aid in the WUE Program. Below is a summary of how the City can use the AMI data. ➢ Advanced algorithms and metering data will allow the City to identify customer leaks. ➢ Advanced metering will provide cost savings in the Leak Detection and Repair and Service Meter Replacements programs. ➢ Advanced metering will aid in the City’s efforts to reduce non-payment of bills and water theft. ➢ By comparing production and customer water use, DSL can be evaluated in greater temporal and geographic detail. For example, DSL may be calculated by month or for a given service area. ➢ Advanced metering data will help the City identify groups of customers to target for WUE measures and can be used to track the effectiveness of the measures for the same customers. ➢ Advanced metering data will allow additional reporting options to educate customers, such as their peak water use. The City reports DSL annually; refer to Appendix M for the previous three annual WUE reports. The newly installed AMI system will provide substantial benefits for the WUE Program and improve savings, further outlined in Section 4.4 of this chapter. 4.3 Water Use Efficiency Program In 2003, the Washington State Legislature passed the 2003 Municipal Water Law (MWL) which added a requirement that water purveyors use water efficiently. This law was expanded in January 2007 with the WUE Rule and has since been updated. WUE requirements are listed under WAC 246-290 and include: ➢ Publicly establishing a water savings goal. ➢ Evaluating water use efficiency opportunities specific to each community. ➢ Developing a WUE planning program. ➢ Meter installation on all customer connections by January 22, 2017. ➢ Achieve a standard of no more than ten percent water loss, on a three-year rolling annual average. ➢ Annual reporting on WUE progress. Page 203 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-6 The City’s WUE Program provides for efficient water use and supports continued growth. This program fulfills all the necessary requirements of DOH. The selected program measures will allow the City to meet its WUE goals, resulting in decreased water demand. Measures are interrelated and will help the City achieve its goals to both reduce average water use and peak water use per customer. Public education measures (showing water use in bills, workshops, school outreach, fairs/trade shows, etc.) will continue to be a focus of the WUE Program to increase customer awareness and knowledge of WUE opportunities. Public education is needed to support the City’s other WUE measures and to support reductions in both average and peak water use. Continued appliance rebates and shower head giveaways help customers implement what is learned in the public education campaign. With the implementation of AMI, it is expected that the City and customers will be able to identify more water loss reduction opportunities than previously possible. Therefore, customer and City leak detection, water audits, and meter repair and replacement may have a prominent role in the 2024-2034 WUE Program. The program will also continue to provide financial disincentives for excessive water use through metering and WUE pricing. This aspect of the program is likely to help reduce peak water usage further. These measures will result in the City being able to achieve its WUE goals, which includes reduced demand. The 2024-2034 WUE Program will be a continuation of the City’s successful existing WUE Program. The program has also been updated to leverage the City’s investments in improved SCADA, leak detection, and AMI. The 2024 Plan complies with regulations as set forth in WAC 246-290-830 and DOH’s 2020 Water Use Efficiency Guidebook. This section summarizes the program’s goals, demand and supply side measures, reclaimed water, and DSL. The projected demand with the conservation goals, program budget, and cost savings are also presented. 4.3.1 Program Requirements The WUE requirements emphasize the importance of measuring water usage and evaluating the effectiveness of the City’s program. There are three fundamental requirements of a WUE Program that the City follows. ➢ Planning Requirements – Municipal water suppliers are required to: o Collect data. o Forecast demand. o Evaluate WUE measures. o Calculate DSL. o Implement a WUE Program to meet their goals. ➢ Distribution Leakage Standard – Municipal water suppliers are required to meet a distribution system leakage standard to minimize water loss from their distribution system. ➢ Goal setting and performance reporting – Municipal water suppliers are required to set WUE goals through a public process and report annually to their customers and DOH. The DOH requires that the City estimate the amount of water saved through implementation of the system’s WUE program over the last six years. Table 4-3 shows the average day demand per-capita from 2017 to 2022. Water use per-capita dropped from 112 gpd per capita in 2017 to 103 gpd per capita in 2022. The net water savings over this period equates to approximately 195.2 million gallons or 39.0 million gallons per year. This was calculated by multiplying the population for each individual year (over the six-year period) by the difference in calculated savings in gpd per capita year after year. The result was then multiplied by the total days in each year. Annual totals were summed for the entire six-year period. Page 204 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-7 Table 4-3 | Annual Average Day Demand (gpd) per Capita1 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 112 109 106 100 105 103 Note: 1. Average day demand per capita was calculated by dividing the Average Day Demand from Table 2-9 by the population served from Table 2-1 and converting to gpd. 4.3.2 Mandatory Measures The WUE Program includes supply side measures that the City implements to understand and control leakage including new meters, leak detection surveys, and water audits. Per the WUE requirements, the following measures shall be continued for the 2024-2034 WUE program. ➢ Install production (source) meters. ➢ Install consumption (service) meters. ➢ Perform meter calibration. ➢ Implement a water loss control action plan to control leakage if the three-year rolling average exceeds ten percent. ➢ Educate customers about water use efficiency practices. Additionally, the following measures that must be evaluated are: ➢ Rates that encourage water demand efficiency (discussed in Chapter 9) ➢ Reclamation opportunities (discussed below) The City has complied with these requirements in the past and will continue to comply with these regulations. 4.3.3 Program Goals Per the WAC 246-290-830(4)(a), all water purveyors with 1,000 or more connections were required to set efficiency goals through a public process. The City’s 2024-2034 Conservation Program builds upon the goals and framework established through the public process conducted in July 2009, during which the City’s water conservation goals were developed and posted to the City’s website for public review, in alignment with WAC 246-290-830(4)(a). This process ensured transparency and community engagement in shapin g measurable conservation objectives. The goals established in 2009, including a 1 percent reduction per year in Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) values, continue to guide the City’s Conservation Program today. These goals emphasize efficient water usage and public education. The 2024-2034 Program incorporates updates to comply with WUE regulations and address evolving community needs, as detailed in Section 4.3.4. The City has chosen to focus on implementing voluntary measures to decrease both the average and peak water usage. The 2024 program has established the following goals. ➢ Water Use per ERU Goal: Decrease the planning ERU value (gpd/ERU) one percent annually from the current planning ERU value of 182 gpd/ERU, which is the 75th percentile of eight years of Page 205 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-8 historical data (2015 – 2022). Revaluate goal when the planning ERU value reaches less than 172 gpd/ERU. o To be conservative, an ERU planning value higher than the average was used by the City for demand forecasting. The 75th percentile of the eight-years of data was used to select the planning ERU value of 182 gpd. This methodology is consistent with the City’s 2015 Plan. The ERU value of 182 gpd is seven percent lower than the 2015 Plan’s ERU planning value of 195 gpd per ERU. ➢ MDD/ADD Peaking Factor: Decrease the planning peaking factor from the current 1.77, which is equal to the 75th percentile of eight years of historical data (2015-2022), to a planning peaking factor of less than 1.68, the average peaking factor from 2015-2022. ➢ Distribution System Leakage: Maintain three-year average DSL under ten percent to minimize water waste. ➢ Customer Support: Provide the service and support necessary to those water customers expressing a desire to conserve water as a part of their environmental ethic and as a means of minimizing water bills. The WUE Program measures, as summarized below, are designed to help meet these established goals. 4.3.4 2024-2034 Demand-Side Program Measures To encourage WUE and support customers, the City has incorporated program measures that target demand reductions. Under the WUE requirements, a program measure may include water efficient devices, actions, business practices, or policies that promote efficient water use. With 14 measures as part of the 2024 Program, the City exceeds the minimum DOH requirement of nine measures. WUE measures can target specific customer classes or a combination of customer classes. The City’s demand -side program measures are summarized below. 1. School Outreach: The City will continue to participate in programs arranged to educate students on efficient water usage as requested by schools. 2. Speakers’ Bureau: The City will seek speaking opportunities to discuss efficient water use with a wide audience spectrum. Topics could include water efficient fixtures and appliances, curbing seasonal peak demands, lawn watering practices, etc. 3. Program Promotion: The City will seek opportunities for social media, television, and/or radio public service announcements for WUE and submit news articles to local papers and Auburn Magazine on efficient water usage especially during the spring and summer months. 4. Theme Shows/Fairs: The City hosts an annual Kids Day fair. The fair includes a wide range of activities for all ages of kids. As part of the fair, the City has fun , water-related activities and provides water efficiency brochures and other materials. The City will conduct outreach at other Theme Shows/Fairs if requested. Water saving device kits are distributed to interested single-family and multiple-family residential customers. 5. Water Audits: The City will conduct a water audit upon the request of a customer, including industrial, commercial, and institutional customers. The audits will review items such as: Page 206 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-9 recirculation of cooling water, reuse of cooling and process water, reuse of treated wastewater, efficient landscape irrigation, low water using fixtures, fixing leaks, and process modifications. 6. Customer Leak Detection: The City identifies potential leaks through investigation of the water meter upon request of customers. The City runs multiple reports in the AMI system to analyze data and investigate water meters to identify leaks. 7. Bills Showing Consumption History: The City will continue to provide customer bills showing the previous year’s water usage. The City provides water usage information from AMI on the customers e-portal. 8. Water Saving Device Kits: The City will participate in distribution of water use efficiency kits through education events such as speakers’ bureaus, theme shows, fairs, and through bill insert request forms. 9. WUE Pricing: The City has an inverted block rate structure for single-family residential customers to encourage WUE. The City will consider WUE in future cost of service/rate studies. Studies should determine the most appropriate water structures and rate levels to achieve the City’s WUE goals, while generating sufficient revenues for utility operations. It is recommended that the studies consider uniform rates by class, inverted block rates, seasonal rates, and excess use rates. 10. Water Efficient Toilet Rebate Program: The City will continue to provide rebates to customers that replace old toilets with new high-efficiency toilets through their Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) WaterSense Toilet Rebate program. 11. Low-Flow Shower Heads Giveaways: The City gives away free low-flow shower heads at the Utility Billing Counter. 12. School Outdoor Water Use Reduction: The City will target schools to reduce their outdoor water consumption. Water audits and education on the benefits of replacing inefficient irrigation systems or landscaping (including turf) will be conducted. 13. City Water Use Reduction: The City will audit the water use of City accounts to identify both indoor and outdoor water saving opportunities. The Water Utility staff will help educate City account holders on WUE; however, no water budget has been allocated to implement water saving devices at City facilities. 14. Rainwater Harvesting: The City will evaluate implementation of a rainwater harvesting (rainwater reclamation) promotion program as a means to reduce irrigation water usage by commercial, public, and residential customers. The City’s Stormwater Utility’s requirements to use Low Impact Development (LID) measures, where feasible, strives to keep rainwater on the property, further reducing irrigation demands. It is important to note that in addition to the water cost savings for the WUE measures, other benefits result, both to the utility and to its customers, from WUE activities. Such additional benefits could include: ➢ Significant customer energy savings because water heaters are the second largest energy users in the home. Hot water use can be reduced by almost one-third by cost-effective WUE measures, such as water efficient fixtures and appliances. Significant energy savings can also occur for industrial processes requiring water heating and other power uses. Page 207 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-10 ➢ Efficient landscaping and irrigation techniques save on maintenance costs. ➢ Reductions in water production decrease energy required by utilities to treat and distribute water and to collect and treat wastewater. Chemical costs are also reduced in water and wastewater operations. ➢ System measures could provide substantial benefits in addition to water production cost savings including: o Identification of non-revenue water could result in recovery of unbilled revenue (inaccurate meters) and reduced unauthorized water usage (theft). o Leak detection helps prevent major main breaks, which could result in significant repair costs. o Leak detection reduces a utility’s liability due to prevention of potential property damage. o Repair and/or replacement of service and source meters allows a utility to recover unbilled water revenues. 4.3.5 Reclaimed Water According to WAC 246-290-100 and the WUE requirements, water systems with over 1,000 connections must collect and evaluate information on reclaimed water opportunities. The City is committed to wastewater reuse and rainwater reclamation, as stated in its official water system policies summarized in Appendix A. The City participates in the King County reclaimed water program, which completed a Reclaimed Water Comprehensive Plan in 2012. Additionally, the City has completed the King County Water Reclamation Evaluation Checklist, included as Appendix L. Currently, there are no reclaimed water users in the City. The City considers the most likely candidates for use of reclaimed water to be the irrigation customer class. Since the City conveys all sewage to King County’s regional sewerage system, there is not an opportunity for the City to sell reclaimed water without significant capital investments to develop a reclaimed water distribution system, and there is not currently an alternative reclaimed water source in the area. The City will implement reclaimed water as a conservation measure and include these savings in the demand projections when specific opportunities arise. The City, in conjunction with King County, may develop projects or consider participation in water reuse projects and programs developed by adjacent purveyors and others as appropriate. The efforts may include demonstration or pilot projects developed in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. 4.3.6 WUE Budget The City has established a budget for each program measure from 2023 to 2029, as required per WAC 246- 290-810 4.e, shown in Table 4-4. WUE measures are funded through rates. Table 4-4 | Annual WUE Budget Measure 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 School Education (NPDES & Water) $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 Conservation Public Education/ WQ Report $6,350 $6,350 $6,350 $6,350 $6,350 $6,350 $6,350 Page 208 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-11 Toilet Rebates & Low-flow Shower Heads $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 $11,000 Large Meter Test/Repair/Replace $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 WSP Update (WUE) $22,000 - - - - - - Total $89,350 $67,350 $67,350 $67,350 $67,350 $67,350 $67,350 4.4 Water Use Efficiency Savings The WUE Program primarily provides cost savings in two ways, reducing demand and reducing DSL. Reducing demand may reduce or delay capital projects for additional supply and expanded distribution infrastructure. Reducing DSL can provide additional revenue, as well as increase the efficiency of supplying existing water uses. Additionally, advanced metering will provide cost savings in the Leak Detection and Repair and Service Meter Replacements programs. The City has completed a cost analysis of their proposed WUE Program using historical data and projected annual water savings. Table 4-5 shows projected demands with and without annual water savings. This analysis maintains the target water use efficiency goal of one percent reduction per year in the planning ERU value. This goal will be reached through implementation of the proposed program measures. These reductions in demand can be translated into tangible benefits once realized, such as more time before new sources must be developed, increased ERUs that can be served by the existing water infrastructure, and cost savings in power and water treatment. Table 4-5 | Demand Forecast With and Without Projected WUE Savings Year ADD (mgd) MDD (mgd) Without WUE With WUE Savings % Savings Without WUE With WUE Savings % Savings 2024 7.05 6.98 0.07 1% 12.47 12.34 0.12 1% 2025 7.14 6.99 0.14 2% 12.61 12.36 0.25 2% 2026 7.22 7.00 0.22 3% 12.76 12.38 0.38 3% 2027 7.31 7.01 0.29 4% 12.91 12.39 0.52 4% 2028 7.39 7.02 0.37 5% 13.06 12.41 0.65 5% 2029 7.48 7.03 0.45 6% 13.22 12.43 0.79 6% 2030 7.57 7.04 0.53 7% 13.38 12.44 0.94 7% 2031 7.66 7.05 0.61 8% 13.54 12.46 1.08 8% 2032 7.75 7.06 0.70 9% 13.70 12.47 1.23 9% 2033 7.85 7.06 0.78 10% 13.87 12.48 1.39 10% 2034 7.95 7.07 0.87 11% 14.04 12.50 1.54 11% 4.5 Climate Change Resiliency In 2023, the Washington State Legislature passed House Bill 1181, which requires all group A community public water systems serving 1,000 or more connections to include a climate resilience element in water system plans initiated after June 30, 2025. Though this requirement is not yet in effect, the following section is included to initiate discussion and planning for climate resilience and to supplement the Climate Element being incorporated into the City’s 2024 Comprehensive Plan update. Page 209 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-12 4.5.1 Expected Climate Changes for the City of Auburn Climate is a key factor driving water use as temperature, precipitation, and other climate-driven weather patterns affect irrigation, and commercial and industrial cooling. Auburn’s maritime climate is characterized by wet cool winters and dry warm summers. The City’s temperate climate is largely protected from continental weather by the Cascade Mountains to the east. According to the publication Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Washington State, Washington State is projected to experience decreases in snowpack, increases in stream temperatures, and widespread changes in streamflow timing, flooding, and summer minimum flows. Climate change is expected to cause more frequent summer water shortages, especially in fully allocated watersheds with little management flexibility. The average spring snowpack in Washington is projected to decline by 38 percent to 46 perce nt by the 2040s1. To estimate the impact of this change in climate on the City’s water demands, results from the Water Supply Forum’s 2009 Regional Water Supply Outlook (WSF 2009 Outlook) were used. The impacts of climate change on sources that rely on groundwater are mostly unknown due to the variability between aquifers and site-specific effects, such as recharge rates. Continued increases in average annual and seasonal air temperatures in the Puget Sound are projected due to climate change, as well as increases in extreme heat. Projected changes in annual precipitation are generally minor, although summer precipitation is projected to decrease and heavy rainfall events are projected to become more severe2. No changes to demand projections were made for the 20-year planning period to account for potential climate change due to the uncertain magnitude and timing of local effects. However, it is recognized that demands have the potential to increase in the future given these changes. In the event the City experiences an increase in demand, to understand the scale of the impact, the City will run a model of the City water system that would compute firm yield from inputted streamflow data, replacing historic inflows with projected inflows from three climate change scenarios as described by the WSF 2009 Outlook. Those climate change scenarios for King County are provided in Table 4-6. Table 4-6 | Predicted Increase in Demand from Baseline Due to Climate Change1 Climate Change Scenario 2005 2020 2030 2040 Baseline 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Warm 3.5% 4.4% 4.9% 5.4% Warmer 4.6% 4.9% 5.8% 7.4% Warmest 4.8% 6.2% 7.6% 9.5% 4.5.2 Extreme Weather Events and Significant Challenges To meet the requirements for risk and resilience assessments in America’s Water Infrastructure Act (AWIA) of 2018, the City completed a Risk and Resilience Analysis (RRA) in December 2020 using the EPA’s Vulnerability Self-Assessment Tool (VSAT). VSAT was developed to serve as an all-hazards assessment tool for water and wastewater utilities of all sizes and addresses malevolent acts, dependency/proximity 1 Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Washington State: Technical Summaries for Decision Makers (uw.edu) 2 *2009RegionalWaterSupplyOutlook.pdf (amazonaws.com) Page 210 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-13 threats, and natural hazards. Through this effort, the City has identified the following assets as the most vulnerable to flood hazards. ➢ Coal Creek Springs aquifer ➢ Coal Creek Springs and West Hill Springs piping ➢ Valley Aquifer (Wells 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 6, 7) ➢ Green River and Lea Hill pump stations ➢ Distribution System Climate change exacerbates existing challenges with flooding, landslides, droughts, wildfire, and other natural hazards by potentially changing the frequency, intensity, and duration of these events. Heavier rainfall increases the threat of flooding. In addition to immediate flood threats, flood waters can damage and contaminate wells and water treatment plants resulting in short-term outages and increased risk of waterborne diseases in drinking water. Higher levels of pathogens in runoff from areas around drinking water wells and surface water intakes from flooding of the wells themselves. In October 2018, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius (OC). Warming of 1.5OC is projected to decrease summer streamflow in the Puget Sound by 23 percent. Average temperatures in 2015 were 2.7OC warmer than pre-industrial era temperatures which resulted in low summer streamflow and warmer waters3. According to the King County Climate Change GIS map “Summer Runoff: Change, 2040s”, summer (July-September) runoff in the City of Auburn is expected to decrease by 2.4 percent by the 2040s from historical conditions (1970-1999)4. The WSF 2009 Outlook believes the region is reasonably well prepared for drought, however further actions could improve drought preparation. During droughts, water supplies may fall short of meeting demands, especially in summer months. In the past, water utilities in the Puget Sound have adapted to fluctuations in water supplies from droughts through reservoir management and system adaptations such as long-term conservation programs and short-term demand curtailments1. Warming of 1.5OC is also expected to bring larger and more frequent wildfires, which could disrupt regional water supplies. Significant water quality impairments from a wildfire include increased turbidity and introduction of radionuclides, metals, and fire-retardant chemicals5, although impacts to the City’s water quality is not likely as there are not surface water sources. The City can maintain existing emergency interties to mitigate wildfires that affect adjacent systems more severely than the City’s. While the City contains land that is considered Wildland-Urban Interface, the United States Forest Service has classified the City as either Very Low or Non-burnable in its Potential Wildfire Hazard GIS map (2020)6. 4.5.3 Assessment of Actions to Protect System In the face of continued warming, there are actions the City can take to improve the resiliency of the water system from the impacts of climate change. Below are possible short-term and long-term actions for the City to consider. The short-term measures can improve resiliency within three to five years while the long- term measures may require decades to be fully implemented5. 3 NoTimeToWaste_CIG_Feb2019.pdf (uw.edu) 4 https://climate-kingcounty.opendata.arcgis.com/maps/bab86832a962416cbdbb35644dacb11b 5 Phase2SummaryReport20180731FINAL.pdf (amazonaws.com) 6 https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/usfs::wildfire-hazard-potential-version-2020-classified-image-service/explore?location=47.307822%2C- 121.937736%2C10.98 Page 211 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Water Use Efficiency Program Page 4-14 4.5.3.1 Short-Term Actions Source Inventory: Identify sources that will remain online in the event of a 100-year or 500-year flood. Utilize GIS or other mapping tools to create a map to visualize which sources are at risk of inundation in such events. Develop protocols for isolating these sources. Determine how sources could be used for critical health and safety following an extreme weather event and how these sources relate to emergency shelters and critical facilities, such as hospitals. Groundwater Supplies: Develop new groundwater supplies or augment existing groundwater supplies to improve drought resiliency and offset challenges posed by the wetter winters and drier summers expected with warming temperatures. Establish models to understand the effects of drier summers and increased risk of drought on groundwater supplies. Evaluate impacts of lower snowpack levels in the Cascade Mountains on aquifer recharge. Wildfire Mitigation: Evaluate fire-fighting capacity for open space areas such as Game Farm Park and Wilderness Area. Interaction with Research Community: Build and sustain routine interactions with the research community on the subject of climate change and water supply. Consider opportunities to fund water-industry research with direct application to water supplies in western Washington. Explore opportunities to have imbedded persons, such as employing a scientist with climate change expertise. Rate Factors: Implement less frequently used rate factors, such as a rate for drought periods, to encourage lower demands. Floodproofing: Build flood barriers such as levees and dikes to protect critical infrastructure. Elevate critical equipment or place it within waterproof containers or foundation systems. Power Supplies: Extreme weather events can cause power outages. Consider alternative or on-site power supplies to provide resiliency during such events. 4.5.3.2 Long-Term Actions Monitor Aquifer Conditions: Establish a program of long-range monitoring of aquifer recharge and water levels as affected by climate change. Assess risk of saltwater intrusion. Establish models to assess source redundancy in extreme drought events. Green Infrastructure: Apply green infrastructure strategies to collect and manage stormwater. Regional or water-shed scale plans for stormwater management can be more cost effective than individual plans. Water Use Efficiency: Continue to invest in and evaluate WUE programs to reduce water consumption and improve efficiency. Consider partnering with King County to assess reclamation and reuse programs to augment non-potable water demands. Water Rights: Invest in permanent or mobile infrastructure to ensure access to all available water rights to maximize available sources. Page 212 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Source Water Protection Page 5-1 CHAPTER 5 Source Water Protection The City relies on groundwater sources to meet current water supply demands. This chapter’s objective is to update the City of Auburn’s (City’s) program to protect and improve source water used by the City. As the City’s sources only include groundwater wells and springs which are not under the influence of surface water, a Watershed Control Program is not required. This chapter addresses the following topics: 5.1 Sanitary Control Area 5.2 Wellhead Protection Program 5.1 Sanitary Control Area Sanitary Control Areas (SCAs) have been established for each of the City’s water sources per WAC 246-290- 135(2). An SCA is the front-line protection against contamination of the water source. The standard SCA for wells has a minimum radius of 100 feet from the wellhead. The standard SCA for spring sources has a minimum radius of 200 feet from the spring head. All City water sources have SCAs that were established and approved by DOH, and are documented in the susceptibility forms provided in Appendix T. All properties within the SCA for each water source are under the City’s ownership and control. 5.2 Wellhead Protection Program DOH has developed regulations that require Group A water systems using groundwater sources to develop and implement a Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP) in accordance with WAC 246-290-135. The basic elements required of a WHPP are: ➢ Assessment of initial groundwater susceptibility (physical susceptibility to contamination) for each water supply source, ➢ Delineation of the wellhead protection area (WHPA) that directly contributes groundwater to each water supply well, ➢ Identification of potential sources of contamination within each WHPA, ➢ Documentation of notification to owner/operators of known or potential hazards, and ➢ Development of spill prevention plans and water contingency plans that minimize or eliminate the possibility of contamination to the groundwater supply and development of options for maintaining water supply in the event the aquifer contributing to a source is contaminated. The City maintains its WHPP for 12 groundwater sources. A WHPP was prepared in 2014 for the City’s 2015 WSP; this remains the current WHPP for the City. The purpose of the WHPP is to help prevent the City’s water supply from becoming contaminated and to develop contingency and emergency response procedures in case one or more sources are lost due to contamination. This is accomplished by providing Page 213 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Source Water Protection Page 5-2 WHPAs around public groundwater sources, identifying existing groundwater contamination sources, and managing potential groundwater contamination sources prior to their entry into the drinking water system. The WHPP provides tasks for the City to implement wellhead protection and the City prioritizes those tasks by criteria such as available staff, time to complete, cost, and urgency due to limited available resources. The City maintains an annual operating budget for implementing tasks related to the wellhead protection program, as well as identifying and monitoring potential new hazards. The City allocates budget annually for the Water Resources Protection Program, as discussed in Chapter 8. 5.2.1 Susceptibility Assessment Susceptibility Assessment Forms have been completed by the City and submitted to the DOH. The forms are provided in Appendix T. The DOH’s susceptibility assessment rating for each source is summarized in Table 5-1. Table 5-1 | Source Susceptibility Assessment Ratings Issued by DOH Source Susceptibility Rating Coal Creek Springs High West Hill Springs High Well 1 Moderate Well 2 High Well 3A Low (Off-line) Well 3B Low (Off-line) Well 4 Low Well 5 Low Well 5A Low Well 5B Low (Off-line) Well 6 High Well 7 High (Off-line) 5.2.2 Wellhead Protection Area Delineation The WHPA defines the area around a groundwater source that has the potential to contaminate the source. This area is based on the source’s capture zones, which are the zones of the source aquifer and ground surface that can contribute water to the source in six months, one year, five years, or ten years. The City’s 2014 WHPP largely replaced the initial plan created in 2000. The study area, physiographic settings, and WHPAs were defined in the 2000 WHPP and remain valid. Capture zones were delineated using a three- dimensional particle-tracking program with a steady-state head distribution created by a numerical model. The established WHPAs are shown in Figure 5-1. Page 214 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Source Water Protection Page 5-3 Figure 5-1 | Wellhead Protection Area Map Page 215 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Source Water Protection Page 5-4 5.2.3 Contaminant Source Inventory and Notification of Findings A summary of potential contaminant sources for the City’s water sources was updated in April 2024. The Contaminant Source Inventory (CSI) was updated utilizing Ecology’s Facility/Site ID database. The contaminant sources are organized by water source and time travel zones, and are included in Appendix T. DOH requires notifications be sent to landowners with potential contaminant sources, as well as state and local agencies, of the CSI findings. Letters and WHPA maps were mailed to landowners in June 2024; copies of the notification letter template and maps that were sent to landowners are included in Appendix T. State and local agencies use the CSI findings and WHPAs to help prioritize local and state pollution control outreach, to provide incentives to landowners for risk reduction, and to support local land -use planning decisions. DOH requires that state and local emergency responders be notified of the WHPAs, results of the susceptibility assessment, CSI findings, and the contingency plan. Copies of the notifications sent to emergency responders and regulatory agencies, as well as the WHPA maps, are included in Appendix T. A list of state and local agencies that were sent notifications letters, along with the date of the notification is summarized in Table 5-2. Table 5-2 | State and Local Agencies Notified of CSI Findings Agency Notification Date Washington Department of Ecology June 2024 Washington State Department of Health Southwest Regional Office June 2024 King County Public Health June 2024 Auburn Police Department June 2024 East Pierce Fire and Rescue June 2024 King County Fire Protection District 31 June 2024 Mountain View Fire and Rescue June 2024 South King Fire and Rescue June 2024 Valley Regional Fire Authority June 2024 5.2.4 Contingency Plan The City developed a Water Source Loss Mitigation Plan (City of Auburn Standard Operating Procedure 5.2.1) to address how the water system will provide consumers with adequate supply of potable water in the event one or more sources become temporarily or permanently unavailable; this plan is included in Appendix T. Should one water source be unavailable, the City has sufficient capacity across the remaining sources and interties to supply potable drinking water to its customers; water supply availability is evaluated in greater detail in Chapter 3. Page 216 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-1 CHAPTER 6 Operations and Maintenance Program This chapter provides an overview of the City of Auburn’s (City) Water Utility organization , operations and maintenance (O&M). The purpose of the chapter is to document existing procedures and to identify areas where improvements or changes could enhance system operation. The following topics are addressed in this chapter: 6.1 Water System Management and Personnel 6.2 Operations and Preventive Maintenance 6.3 Comprehensive Water Quality Monitoring 6.4 Emergency Preparedness and Response 6.5 Safety Procedures 6.6 Cross Connection Control Program 6.7 Sanitary Survey Findings 6.8 Customer Complaint Response Program 6.9 Recordkeeping and Reporting 6.10 Summary of O&M Deficiencies and Recommended Improvements 6.1 Water System Management and Personnel 6.1.1 Mission Statement The mission statement of the City’s Water Utility is to provide for the efficient, environmentally sound , and safe management of the existing and future water system within the City’s service area. 6.1.2 Department Overview The Water Utility is responsible for providing potable water to the City’s customers that meets or exceeds the recognized standards of today and the future by efficiently administering, operating, and maintaining the water supply. The Water Utility will also continue to enhance its customer service through public education and information. A primary responsibility of the Water Utility is implementing the Comprehensive Water Plan (Plan). 6.1.3 Internal and External Factors The objective of the Water Utility is based on compliance with internal and external factors. An internal Work Plan Overview is generated at the beginning of each work year with a review process at the end of the year. The Work Plan Overview describes budget goals, performance measures, engineering tasks, Page 217 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-2 capital projects, and maintenance and operations tasks. External factors include adoption of goals, recommendations, and standards established by the following regulatory or professional practice agencies: ➢ Washington State Department of Health (DOH) ➢ Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) ➢ American Public Works Association (APWA) ➢ Association of Washington Cities (AWC) ➢ Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ➢ American Water Works Association (AWWA) ➢ Washington Cities Insurance Authority (WCIA) ➢ Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington (MRSC) ➢ United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 6.1.4 Water Utility Division Organization The Auburn Water Utility is operated as a utility enterprise under the direction of the Public Works (PW) Director. Specific Water Utility Management Responsibilities within the PW Department fall under either the Utilities-Water Section of Engineering Services or the Water Division of Maintenance and Operations Services. The Utilities-Water Section of Engineering Services is responsible for comprehensive water system planning, development of a Capital Improvement Program (CIP), as well as programming the design, construction, and inspection of projects related to the water system. The Water Division of Maintenance and Operations Services is responsible for operating and maintaining the water system, performing daily operation and inspection, water quality monitoring as required by DOH, and line management of the Water Utility. The organization of the Water Utility is shown within the Public Works Organizational chart in Figure 6-1. The responsibilities of each staff within the Utilities-Water Section of Engineering Services, including professional and technical support staff from within Engineering Services that are not specifically within the Water Utility are summarized below. ➢ Utilities Engineering Manager and Water Utility Engineer: Primarily responsible for development of the comprehensive water plans, water capital facility plan, annual project budgeting, technical design, and construction standards, “as-built” drawings, and designs, utilized in the construction of the water systems facilities. They also provide technical computations, water modeling and other analysis required to support system operation. Additional responsibilities include engineering, consultant contracts, capital projects planning, and customer assistance with City code, drawings, and permits. ➢ Water Quality Programs Coordinator: Assist with the Water Quality and Water Conservation Programs and is responsible for compiling DOH sampling data and verifying DOH sampling was conducted per the sampling schedule. Page 218 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-3 Figure 6-1 | Auburn Water Utility Organizational Chart Page 219 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-4 ➢ City Engineer: Responsible for issuance of the City’s Design and Construction Standards. Responsible for the management and the design and construction of capital projects managed by Project Engineers, including consultant-designed projects and construction contractors. Under the direction of the City Engineer, GIS Specialists are responsible for the transfer of data from “as-built” drawings to the GIS database. GIS is a mapping software that records and locates infrastructure related to the water system. GIS Specialists are also responsible for provision of maps and statistics to staff within the PW Department. ➢ Utilities Technician: Assist with certain permit-related activities involving the water system. The Technician is also responsible for customer inquiries, assistance with applications, tracking water system usage for reporting, and updating and updating water system records. ➢ Utilities Civil Engineer: Review City capital improvements and development projects pertaining to water system improvements and provides customer assistance regarding projects and permit activities. Personnel lists for Engineering and Maintenance and Operation (M&O) staff that are responsible for daily operations are summarized in Table 6-1 and Table 6-2. Operations staff provide daily O&M of wells, corrosion control treatment facilities, pump stations, and reservoirs. They also implement the cross connection control program and provide locating services for all City utilities. Distribution staff maintains the complete distribution system including water mains, valves, hydrants, pressure reducing stations, and meters. The City has a mayor-council form of government; therefore, the PW Director reports to the Mayor. The City Council provides oversight of the Water Utility regarding policy, planning, and management of the water system. 6.1.5 Communication System The City maintains a robust communication system to contact Water Utility personnel during normal work hours and after hours. This system is necessary to respond to customer requests, routine maintenance, or emergency situations. Maintenance staff vehicles and other rolling stock are all equipped with radios and personnel carry cellular phones. The Water Utility also has access to an inventory of portable emergency use radio units, should they be required. A Standby Call-Out Program was initiated in 2006 to ensure that coverage for after -hours response was guaranteed. One staff member in Operations and one staff member in Distribution always carry a dedicated cell phone during their off hours. Standby duration runs for one week before responsibility is rotated to the next staff member on the roster. Water problems involving service leaks, quality issues, main breaks, broken hydrants, etc., that occur outside normal working hours, are reported through the City’s 911 emergency response system. An “Emergency Call-Out List” is provided to the emergency operators who will attempt to contact the designated standby Water Distribution or Water Operations employee, based on the type of service required. If contact cannot be made, the operator will contact the designated Standby Public Works Maintenance and Operation Manager. Page 220 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-5 Table 6-1 | Water Operations and Distribution Staff and Certifications Position Primary Function(s) Certification(s)1 Water Manager Management Water Distribution Manager 4 Water Operations Field Supervisor Management (Operations) Water Distribution Manager 4, Water Treatment Plant Operator 1, Cross Connection Specialist Water Distribution Field Supervisor Management (Distribution) Water Distribution Manager 3 Maintenance Lead (Distribution) Management (Distribution) Water Distribution Manager 2 Cross Connection Control Specialist Cross Connection Control & Backflow Assembly Tester Water Distribution Manager 1, Cross Connection Specialist, Backflow Assembly Tester Distribution Specialist Distribution Operations Maintenance Water Distribution Manager 1 Maintenance Worker II / Locator Operations & Distribution Maintenance N/A Maintenance Worker I Operations & Distribution Maintenance N/A There are 12 staff members on the On-Call Manager Standby List and one of them has call-out responsibility for an entire week until it rotates to the next staff member. The 12 staff positions on the Standby List are: ➢ Water Manager ➢ Water Distribution Supervisor ➢ Water Operation Supervisors ➢ Sanitary Sewer and Storm Drainage Manager ➢ Sanitary Sewer Supervisor ➢ Storm Drainage Supervisor ➢ Streets and Vegetation Manager ➢ Street Supervisor ➢ Vegetation Supervisor ➢ Fleet/General Service Manager ➢ Maintenance & Operations (M&O) Support Supervisor ➢ M&O Services General Manager There are also three other maintenance staff members on standby that can be called out as needed. The staff members are employed by Sanitary Sewer Division, Storm Drainage Division, and Street Division. The 911 operator also has phone access to the other Public Works staff, if the situation warrants it. Telemetry alarms that occur after hours are handled by an automated Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) alarm and an automated dialer for notification called WIN911. The SCADA alarm calls standby staff from the WIN911 list. If no one responds within 15 minutes, then WIN911 calls the Water Operations standby staff on the call out list. The system will continue to cycle through the roster of seven employees until contact is made. 6.1.6 Operator Certification Program The Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-292, requires minimum standards for the certification status of water operators. Also, the City has recognized the value of having a knowledgeable and well - trained staff operating the Water Utility and encourages employees to obtain the highest level of certification available. The City currently serves a population of greater than 50,000, which classifies their Page 221 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-6 distribution system into a group 4 according to WAC 246-292-040. Certifications required per staff role are summarized in Table 6-1. The City pays for annual certification fees, provides time and tuition for certification training courses, and allows time for certification examinations. In addition, the City provides opportunities for staff to obtain continuing education units (CEUs) to maintain certification. Professional growth requirements for certification CEUs are monitored and maintained by the Washington Certification Services. 6.1.7 Education and Training Program Continuing educational opportunities are fundamental for staff in the Water Utility. The Water Utility training budget is funded to support staff in maintaining their technical awareness and skill sets. Seminars, conferences, and college coursework: 1) broaden their knowledge and 2) allow them to network with other professionals involved in Water Utility work. Subjects include cross connection control, pumps, motors, pressure reducing valves, hydrants, chlorination, generators, forklift training, confined space, first aid, CPR, electrics, and other essential topics. Most staff are tasked with specific job functions during their normal work shift and the consistent nature of the work allows them to complete their jobs in a very professional and efficient manner. However, all staff are rotated through an active cross training program to cope with employee absences such as vacation, sickness, retirement, and termination. 6.2 Operations and Preventive Maintenance The City’s water system is comprised of pump stations, chlorination stations, corrosion control facilities, reservoirs, springs, and wells. Figure 1-3 presented in Chapter 1 provides an overview map of the major existing system facilities. These components all work together to ensure that water is available to meet customer demands. Primary operation of the water system is maintained via the SCADA computerized control system. AVEVA software works in association with SCADA to provide real time graphical display of system data for staff interpretation and control. The SCADA system is often referred to as the Telemetry system based on one of the definitions of Telemetry (the science and technology of the transmission and measurement of data from a distant source). The City’s SCADA system is monitored in the Public Works M&O Building, 1305 C Street SW, and responsibility for the system related to the Water Utility falls under the Water Manager and associated staff. Some of the functions that SCADA monitors, records, and controls include: ➢ Reservoir levels ➢ Source meter production ➢ Pumps ➢ Motors ➢ Valves ➢ Chlorination ➢ Pressures: Low, High, Discharge, Suction ➢ Alarms: Intrusion, Fire, Generator Run, Low Fuel, Overflows, Failures, Turbidity Status reports are continuously received via radio and information regarding system demand is used to determine system activation. The SCADA system includes logic programming which automates the process; however, Operations staff can manually override most computer decisions , if necessary. The alarm infrastructure is linked to WIN911 for after-hour call-out and response. Page 222 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-7 All data monitored by the SCADA system is electronically recorded by a computer server maintained by the Innovation & Technology (IT) Department. A back-up copy is made each evening to ensure that records are retrievable should hardware or software failures occur. SCADA records are available to all PW staff via the City’s computer server. Access and control of the system is relegated to two dedicated computer terminals at the M&O Building. The computer terminal that houses SCADA is password protected and entry into the building is keycard access controlled. The SCADA software and historical data is maintained on the City’s Wide Area Network (WAN). Staff have access to the system via workstations connected to the WAN or remote network applications. A telephone connection provides the auto-dialer for the WIN911 notification to phones or pagers. An Ethernet radio connected to the computer system at the M&O Building sends and receives radio signals to/from the Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) at the water facilities. PLCs at the facilities are also able to communicate directly with each other via radio signal. The City recently completed a SCADA Upgrade Project, completed in 2024, which updated the system platform to the most current version, modernizing the City’s SCADA system from its last major upgrade in 2015. Major components were also replaced throughout the system to provide more reliable communication. The new hardware, in conjunction with software upgrades, provides additional control of the city’s facilities. 6.2.1 Inspections, Preventive Maintenance, Repairs, and Replacement Systematic inspection of Water Utility facilities is conducted on a daily or weekly basis by Distribution Specialists under direction of the Water Operations Supervisor as summarized in Table 6-2. The inspection process serves the following purposes: ➢ System Confirmation - proper operation of automated control and monitoring equipment ➢ Sound Check - listen for unusual noises ➢ Well Levels - static and dynamic ➢ Equipment Check - pumps, motors, valves, chlorination, heaters, vents, generators, etc. ➢ Security Verification - intrusion, vents, hatches, locks, gates, graffiti, etc. A portion of the maintenance tasks handled by the Operations staff are associated with a Preventive Maintenance Program and some of those activities are arranged to coincide with the Facility Inspection Schedule shown in Table 6-2. The maintenance activities are based on equipment manufacturer recommendations and maintenance staff observations for infrastructure located within and outside the facility. Preventive maintenance tasks are essential for reliable operations and preservation of investment so adherence to the program is stressed. Additional maintenance activities handled by Water Operations staff include repairs, replacement, small improvement projects, and response to customer requests. The Distribution staff is involved in the same activities as Water Operations staff regarding inspection, preventive maintenance, repairs, replacement, and response to customer requests. Water Distribution staff activities are usually in response to damage or leaks involving mainlines, service laterals, meters, meter boxes, and hydrants. Other Distribution tasks include fire flow testing, system flushing, meter installation, and miscellaneous small improvement projects. Most customer requests are associated with water quality concerns and water pressure issues. Those requests are handled by the Distribution staff and/or Cross Connection Specialists, on a case-by-case basis. Page 223 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-8 Table 6-2 | Water Operations - Facility Inspection Schedule Type of Facility Facility Name Daily Inspection 5 Day Workweek Weekly Inspection Booster Pump Station Academy Pump Station 3 X Academy East Booster Pump Station X Green River Pump Station X Lea Hill Pump Station X Lea Hill Booster Pump Station X Lea Hill Intertie Booster Pump Station X Terrace View Booster Pump Station X Lakeland Hills Booster Pump Station X Game Farm Park Pump Station X Braunwood Booster Pump Station X Chlorination Facility Lea Hill Intertie Pump Station (Re-chlorination) X Terrace View Booster Pump Station (Re-chlorination) X Coal Creek Springs – Chlorine Gas X West Hill Springs - Chlorine Gas X Well 1 – Hypochlorite X Well 3A – Chlorine Gas (when well is in operation) Off-line Well 3B – Chlorine Gas (when well is in operation) Off-line Well 4 - Hypochlorite X Fulmer Field Corrosion Control Facility – Onsite Generated Hypochlorite (Treats Well 2, 6, and 7 sources) X Well 5A - Hypochlorite X Braunwood Well - Hypochlorite X Corrosion Control Facility Howard Road Corrosion Control Treatment Facility (Treats Coal Creek Springs source) X Fulmer Field Corrosion Control Treatment Facility (Treats Well 2, 6 and 7 sources) X Metals Removal Facility Well 5B (Treats iron and manganese) Off-line Reservoir Reservoir 1 – Valley Service Area X Reservoir 2 – Valley Service Area X Reservoir 4A – Lea Hill Service Area X Reservoir 4B – Lea Hill Service Area X Reservoir 5 – Lakeland Service Area X Reservoir 6 – Lakeland Service Area X Reservoir 8A - Academy Service Area X Reservoir 8B - Academy Service Area X Braunwood Reservoir X Spring Source Coal Creek Springs X West Hill Springs X Page 224 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-9 Type of Facility Facility Name Daily Inspection 5 Day Workweek Weekly Inspection Well Source Well 1 X Well 2 X Well 3A (Off-line) Off-line Well 3B (Off-line) Off-line Well 4 X Well 5 X Well 5A X Well 5B (Off-line) Off-line Well 6 X (when on) X (when off) Well 7 (Off-line) Off-line Braunwood Satellite Well X Intertie Supply Tacoma B Street Intertie X Tacoma 132nd Avenue Intertie X 6.2.2 Reservoir Maintenance Reservoirs are a fundamental part of the water distribution system. They act as storage and regulating devices for water flow and maintaining them in prime physical condition is an essential activity. The Water Utility began a rigorous reservoir maintenance program in 1997 and it has evolved into an annual routine function. Each year, two of the reservoirs have their interiors thoroughly inspected by a contractor experienced in reservoir maintenance. The annual inspection process is based on a rotational schedule to ensure inspection of each reservoir on a 5-year timetable. Since the reservoirs are usually filled with water, a diver must conduct the inspection. The diver is equipped with lights and an audio/video device to record the process. Issues of concern include corrosion, cracks, and condition of coating on the walls, valve, fasteners, etc. The diver is also equipped with a vacuum unit to remove sedimentation. The contractor also performs a visual inspection of the exterior of the reservoir for the same elements noted for the interior. The recording is reviewed by the c ontractor, a report is generated based on the interior and exterior inspection and a copy of the report and recording are given to the Water Manager and Water Utility Engineer for review. If the report and recording indicate that a reservoir needs major repair, relining, or repainting, another contractor is acquired for a recommended course of action. If interior work is required, the reservoir must be drained of water. In those situations, a carefully orchestrated timetable and shifting of water resources is necessary to balance maintenance with the needs of the City’s customers. 6.2.3 Pump Station Maintenance Pump Stations are inspected daily or weekly depending on the station by Water Operations staff. The inspection checklist includes confirming that proper operation of the automated controls and monitoring equipment align with the standard operating procedures for the equipment, sound checks for unusual noises, static and dynamic well level checks, equipment checks (pumps, motors, valves, chlorination, heaters, vents, generators, etc.), security checks through visual inspection of the facility grounds for intrusion, graffiti, or issues with vents, hatches, locks, gates, and anything else that may seem unusual or misaligned. Page 225 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-10 6.2.4 Treatment Facility Maintenance Treatment Facilities are inspected daily by Water Operations staff. The inspection checklist includes confirming that proper operation of the automated controls and monitoring equipment align with the standard operating procedures for the equipment, sound checks for unusual noises, equipment checks (pumps, motors, valves, chlorination, heaters, vents, generators, aeration towers, etc.), security checks through visual inspection of the facility grounds for intrusion, graffiti, or issues with vents, hatches, locks, gates, and anything else that may seem unusual or misaligned. 6.2.5 Pressure Reducing Valve Stations Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) Stations are inspected every month by Water Operations staff. The inspection checklist includes condition of the vault, valves, inlet pressure, outlet pressure, and pilot controls. Staff inspections are supplemented by a more thorough inspection and calibration process conducted annually by a contractor that specializes in PRVs. Repair or replacement maintenance, unless minor, is usually performed by the contractor. The City plans to implement an in-house repair maintenance program. Rebuilds of PRVs are typically done every three to five years based on the rebuild schedule. 6.2.6 Utility Locating Service Two Water Utility staff are designated as the Utility Locators for all City utilities and roadway infrastructure (Water, Storm Drainage, Sanitary Sewer, and Street lights and traffic signals) and additional staff may also be present to provide flagging when safety issues arise. The number of location requests varies daily but averages out to a full-time commitment. The Utility Locators report to the Water Operation Supervisor, but location requests may be made indirectly by the Water Distribution, Sanitary Sewer, or Storm Drainage Supervisors. 6.2.7 Fire Hydrant Inspection In 1999, a fire hydrant inspection goal was initiated. The intent was to inspect, repair, and test at least one third of the utility owned fire hydrants in the system each year. The importance of this program cannot be understated since fire hydrants are the first defense against loss of life or property due to fire. The inspections also improve water quality due to the stagnant water that is purged from the hydrant stubs. A water de-chlorination program, in response to Ecology guidelines, was initiated in 2001 to treat water purged from hydrant stubs. The Water Distribution Supervisor has made public hydrant inspection a year - round routine task of Water Utility operations. Secondary maintenance of public hydrants such as rust removal, painting, street reflector replacement, clearing obstructions, etc., is handled by seasonal part time staff when time permits. Property owners with private hydrants are solely responsible for obtaining annual, satisfactory inspections of their private hydrants from a qualified inspector. 6.2.8 Dead-end Flushing A key component of water quality control is dead-end line flushing. The City has approximately 548 dead- end mains throughout the distribution system. The water in dead-end mains tends to stagnate due to lack of turnover which can have an impact on water quality for customers in the immediate vicinity. Flushing dead-ends is the only effective way to purge the lines of stagnant water and associated particulate matter. In 2000, an engineering consulting firm was hired to assist the City with the development of a Dead-end Flushing Program. They examined the City’s distribution system via GIS data and supplemented the study Page 226 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-11 with field inspections. A comprehensive operating procedure detailing separate flushing instructions for each dead-end was developed and continues to be used today. Maintenance staff, under the direction of the Water Distribution Supervisor, follow the program instructions and record their activities. This program has been incorporated into the Unidirectional Flushing program, see Section 6.2.10. 6.2.9 Valve Exercising The AWWA technical manual M44 Distribution Valves: Selection, Installation, Field Testing, and Maintenance, suggests that valve exercising should be conducted each year and more frequently for valves 16 inches and larger. The Water Utility has a Valve Exercising Program, which is in concert with the Unidirectional and Dead-end Flushing programs. Historically, distribution valves have only been exercised on a limited and sporadic basis. Through the Valve Exercising Program, the City’s goal is to exercise 25 percent of the distribution valves each year. Hydrant foot valves are not included in the valve exercising program and instead, are exercised as part of the hydrant inspection process. Opening and closing valves by hand is a repetitive, ergonomically unsafe, and time-consuming task. The City has purchased a portable valve exercising machine and vacuum device to speed up removal of debris that collects in the bottom of valve boxes. Valves requiring repair or replacement are documented and corrected by City Staff or contractors. Additionally, Distribution staff work with GIS staff to correct inaccurate valve information in the City’s GIS data. 6.2.10 Unidirectional Flushing In 2013, the City implemented a comprehensive Unidirectional Flushing (UDF) program to flush its water system. The program’s goals include: ➢ Improving cleaning of accumulated deposits on pipes, ➢ Reducing water use, as compared with conventional flushing, and ➢ Reducing the impact on customers. The Water Distribution Supervisor is responsible for the UDF program to maintain Water Quality. The UDF process concentrates flow within a pipe by closing valves and using specific hydrants to isolate each pipeline and create flow in a single direction. The concentrated flows increase velocities within the pipe that results in scouring of accumulated deposits on pipes. UDF may remove sand, gravel, plastic, biofilms, and other accumulated materials that are not removed by conventional flushing. The cleaned mains may have improved water clarity or color, reduced turbidity, and improved chlorine residual. Flushing times of a half hour or less are typical, which can equate to substantial water savings. Therefore, UDF is a key component of the City’s Water Use Efficiency (WUE) program. The reduced flushing time also limits the impact on the Water Utility’s customers. As previously mentioned, the City has incorporated the valve exercising and dead-end flushing programs into the UDF program. Valves not used as part of a flushing sequence along each pipe length are exercised by distribution system staff to complete the Valve Exercising Program. While the UDF program flushes Page 227 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-12 dead-end mains, more frequent dead-end main flushing may be required for water quality reasons. The UDF program also provides static pressure measurements. The City’s goal is to conduct UDF of approximately 20 percent of the system each year. 6.2.11 System Loss Program The City has committed to an active System Loss Program to maintain water loss under 10 percent. The achievement is documented each year in the Distribution System Leakage Report. Elements of the Program include Leak Detection, Source Meter Calibration, Large Meter Testing, and Meter Replacement. Each of these is discussed in detail below. 6.2.11.1 Leak Detection The City is committed to a tight, non-leaking water distribution system. As of 2016, the city implemented an in-house Leak Detection program, with a goal to inspect 90 miles of water main every year. 6.2.11.2 Source Meters Source meters, also known as production meters, measure the amount of water emitted from the City’s springs and wells. They are calibrated by an outside contractor under the direction of the Water Operations Supervisor and if a meter cannot be calibrated properly, it is replaced with a new one. 6.2.11.3 Meter Replacement Program Between 2017 and 2018, the City replaced all service meters with an Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system, under the Water Meter and Billing System Improvements project. The system automatically receives meter reads via radio transmission and integrates the data into the City’s billing software. The benefits of an AMI system include increased accuracy and efficiency; early leak detection; high usage, zero usage, and backflow detection; and improved customer service. This has saved staff time associated with regular meter reading, missed or incorrect reads, final reads for customer account close-out, and confirmation of high reads for potential leaks. An optional interactive customer portal allows customers to view their monthly, daily, and hourly usage to see exactly when they are using water and how much. This allows customers to better understand their water usage, encourages conservation, and potentially saves them money. The AMI system is anticipated to have a 20-year life. That includes the system components and batteries in the radios. Meter replacement will be on a 20-year program to coincide with the AMI system. 6.2.11.4 Meter Services Water Distribution staff are responsible for all new service connections under three inches and contractors are usually secured for installation of sizes three inches and larger. Repairs, retrofits, or replacements of existing services are typically conducted by Water Distribution Staff unless unusual circumstances arise. Meter services consist of meters, meter vaults, meter boxes, service lines, valves, setters, and other associated equipment. The City uses master meters when beneficial to the City and its customers. Master meters are currently used at several mobile home parks, the Auburn Business Park, and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) commercial properties. Page 228 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-13 6.2.11.5 Large Meter Testing Large meters are devices that measure water consumed by customers with significant demand requirements. They are usually employed by the following customer classes: ➢ Commercial ➢ Farms or Parks – Irrigation ➢ Schools ➢ Multifamily Complexes ➢ Industrial / Manufacturing Businesses ➢ Wholesale Customers ➢ Municipal Buildings Large meters are defined as water meters three inches or larger. The system contains a total of 151 large meters, all of which are calibrated annually, as part of the City’s System Loss Program. Calibration of large meters is conducted by an outside contractor, but one maintenance staff member under the direction of the Water Distribution Supervisor assists in the process. If a meter cannot be calibrated, it is replaced with a new one. 6.2.12 Distribution System Corrosion Inspection One program that the Water Distribution Division would like to activate, if additional funds and labor resources are available, is a Distribution System Corrosion Inspection program. A significant percentage of the City’s piping system is constructed of metal which is subject to corrosive deterioration. Corrosion is an electrochemical reaction whereby metal is eroded and reduced. It is not possible to stop corrosion of metal pipe, but it can be substantially reduced if proper anti-corrosive measures are taken. The Distribution System Corrosion inspection will identify which pipes can benefit from corrosion resistance measures, resulting in a longer serviceable life. Popular measures taken to resist corrosion include coatings, poly-bagging, and anode packs, and they are described further below: ➢ Coatings are electrical insulator types of finishes applied to a surface and is the most common method of corrosion protection. Though coatings are common, they are subject to damage and decay. Damage from soil stress such as contraction and expansion can rip coatings from pipes. Pinholes in the insulation, also known as holidays, can allow seepage between the coating and pipe and accelerate corrosion. Penetration of the pipe occurs even more rapidly when pinholes are present than it would on a bare line. ➢ Anode packs are metal cylinders that are connected to a metal structure via electrically conductive wires and inserted into the ground adjacent to the structure. The ground is subject to stray electric currents and these currents are the electrical component of the electrochemical nature of corrosion. Anode packs become the sacrificial metal to corrode in lieu of the structure. This type of treatment, when initiated, provides benefits in two ways: 1) it could save substantial amounts of money by reducing unnecessary, early replacement of pipe and 2) it would reduce possible disruptive service to the City’s customers that could occur if pipe replacement were necessary. Though anodes packs are effective and economical, their current capacity is limited and they typically have a short lifespan. Page 229 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-14 ➢ Poly-bagging is the process of wrapping the exterior of buried water mains and appurtenances, typically under the influence of corrosive soils, with polyethylene, creating a protective layer around the mains and appurtenances. Poly-bagging is an effective method for corrosion protection of water mains and they are resistant to tearing or puncturing. Though economical, they are not as environmentally friendly and add another layer to maintenance activities. 6.3 Comprehensive Water Quality Monitoring The Water Operations staff maintains an active and ongoing program of water quality monitoring and reporting to ensure a safe, high quality water supply. Two staff members are responsible for water quality monitoring, sampling, control, and record keeping. The Water Operations staff also receives assistance from the Engineering Services - Water Quality Program Coordinator. A detailed description of the City’s water quality monitoring and results is presented in Appendix Q, which includes the following: ➢ Summary of the City’s water quality monitoring programs. ➢ Summary of recent water quality testing results. ➢ Summary of the Wholesale Interties Blending Evaluation. The City’s Water Quality Monitoring Program is detailed in a manual entitled “City of Auburn Public Water System Water Quality Monitoring Plan” provided in Appendix O. The document includes plans associated with coliform, lead and copper, disinfection by-products and treatment specific monitoring, and the Water Quality Monitoring Schedule. These plans comply with DOH regulations for Group A public water systems. All sampling is conducted in accordance with the annual Water Quality Monitoring Schedule received from DOH. The City samples for inorganic and physical parameters, synthetic and volatile organic compounds, asbestos, nitrate and nitrite, radionuclides, coliforms, residual chlorine, disinfection byproducts, lead and copper, fluoride, and per and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). A map of the sampling locations is included with the documents provided in Appendix O. Additional sampling also occurs based on special requests by DOH or by customers concerned about water quality issues involving unusual taste, odor, or color. The Water Manager maintains hard copies of the water quality analysis laboratory reports. These reports are kept at the M&O Building in files organized by years and analysis type. As specified by DOH regulations, chemical analysis reports are kept indefinitely, and bacteriological reports are maintained for a minimum of five years. The City will comply with the Follow-Up Action Requirements of WAC 246-290-320 whenever water quality results exceed a prescribed level. The Water Utility also complies with the requirements of WAC 246 -290 for public notification, as established by the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and DOH. Forms for “Water Boil Notification” and “Drinking Water Problem Corrected Notification” have been developed and are available for immediate distribution, if necessary. A list of the appropriate print, TV, and radio media to contact for public notice is included in the electronic Emergency Response Manual. An additional procedure described in the Emergency Response Manual to address water quality issues involves an “Action Plan for Water System Contamination Via Threat Warning.” Page 230 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-15 The City maintains equipment to perform some basic water quality monitoring functions. However, all testing required for water quality regulatory compliance is contracted to independent testing laboratories. The current primary laboratory used by the City is: Water Management Laboratory 1515 80th Street East Tacoma, Washington 98404 206-531-3121 If testing cannot be done on a timely basis, the City also uses the following laboratory: Analytical Resources, Inc. 4611 South 134th Place, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98168 206-695-6200 6.4 Emergency Preparedness and Response The City has prepared an electronic Public Works Emergency Response Manual (Manual) as a guide for management of emergency situations, with the objective of protecting life and property and restoration of essential services, such as providing clean water, as quickly as possible. The Manual is only one element of the City’s overall Emergency Response Plan, which serves as a guide and was first developed in 1999 in response to the potential impact of Y2K. The Emergency Response Plan is updated annually at the first of the year. It is not all-inclusive for every type of disaster that could occur but is a valuable tool for dealing with many of the emergency situations that most utilities could face. The Manual contains a detailed table of contents and is tabbed to allow quick access to information. Three copies of the Manual have been published. Copies are located at the M&O Building, in Engineering Services with the Public Works Director, and at the Valley Regional Fire Authority, Station 31. The Manual is also available in digital format on the City’s computer server. The master response program for the entire City is documented in the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP), which provides guidance to the Emergency Management Organization for mitigation, preparedness, responsibilities, recovery operations, training, and community education activities. The CEMP also describes the functions of local government and incorporation of essential non - governmental organizations into the Emergency Management Organization. Copies are in each City Department, the Public Works M&O Building, and the Valley Regional Fire Authority, Station 31. The CEMP is also available in digital format on the City’s Emergency Operation Center (EOC) computer server. An additional emergency response manual that is available for use is the Water Division Intertie Locations and Policy Manual. This manual contains contact names, addresses, and phone numbers for cities and water districts that have intertie connections with the City. Included are photos of the intertie vaults, valves, and meters, along with information for activating or deactivating an intertie. Three copies have been published and are located at the M&O Building, in Engineering Services with the Water Utility Engineer, and at the Valley Regional Fire Authority, Station 31. The City has been involved with several tabletop exercises to prepare for emergencies and they are an ongoing feature of the City’s Emergency Response Program. Staff, depending on their position, have also been trained for emergencies in accordance with the Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) Page 231 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-16 under the auspices of Homeland Security. The training program, known as the National Incident Management System (NIMS), offers educational classes tailored for the Incident Command System (ICS). The NIMS and ICS program is a solid blueprint for federal and local emergency command activities, but it does not provide the type of response details needed by PW maintenance staff and managers. Consequently, the PW Emergency Response Manual is the reference tool referred to on a more intimate scale. 6.4.1 Vulnerability Assessment The City’s Vulnerability Assessment (VA) was prepared in 2004 under the guidance of an engineering consultant firm and it was submitted to the USEPA on November 15, 2004. A Water System Security Improvement Plan (WSSIP) was also prepared in conjunction with the VA to prevent or significantly lessen the impact of intrusive activities. Recommendations noted in the WSSIP have been adequately addressed by completing the SCADA system upgrades and physical security project. As further upgrades are completed at City facilities, the recommendations noted in the WSSIP are considered, as well as other considerations as technology continues to advance. 6.4.2 Wellhead Protection Program The City’s wellhead protection program is key to managing potential sources of groundwater contamination prior to their entry into the drinking water system. The wellhead protection plan (WHP) was updated as part of the Plan and summarized in Chapter 5. Engineering Services staff are charged with implementation of the program. Staff track and follow up on construction projects, spills, and monitor possible contamination sources, as possible. 6.4.3 Water Shortage Contingency Plan In Auburn City Code (ACC) 13.14 the Mayor may order water use restrictions and conservation measures, when necessary, to protect public health, safety, and welfare during a water shortage or emergency caused by drought conditions, city water utility damage or destruction, or any other cause which threatens to disrupt or diminish the City’s water supply below its ability to meet normal demands. The City has also updated its Water Shortage Contingency Plan, attached as Appendix R, which establishes actions and procedures during impending or actual water shortages. These actions and activities maintain levels of service essential for public health and safety, minimize adverse impacts on economic activity, and protect customers’ lifestyles. The plan addresses both progressive situations, such as those that are weather-related, and more drastic and immediate situations such as facility emergencies (e.g., a pipeline break). Initial stages of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan may coincide with efforts in the WUE program; however, it is distinct as it is a response to a specific situation, and it may lead to mandatory restrictions and curtailment. 6.5 Safety Procedures The City has a comprehensive safety program that meets Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA) regulations. The safety policies and procedures for the water department are documented in 25 policies that are summarized in Table 6-3. The Page 232 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-17 policies cover the full range of hazards staff may experience while operating the water system. These include, but are not limited to, operation of motor vehicles and equipment, chemicals, confined spaces, falls, traffic, and fires. Each policy includes a purpose, organization affected, references, the policy, definitions, procedures to implement the policy, and responsibilities for the implementation. Responsibilities are assigned to individual role s, such as employee, supervisor, or safety manager. The policies and procedures clearly identify contact information of the applicable regulating agencies in case of a serious incident. All policies are available on the City’s intranet. Table 6-3 | Safety Policies and Procedures Number Policy Name Description 300-01 Workplace Health & Safety Document workplace health and safety policy 300-03 Hearing Conservation Implement program to protect employee hearing 300-04 Personal Protective Equipment Establish policy that requires employees to always use personal protective equipment when performing certain tasks or when in an unsafe environment 300-05 Flagger Certification Flagger certification requirements 300-06 First Aid Employee first aid training, first aid supplies and emergency stations 300-07 Hazard Reporting Procedure to report an obvious or potential safety or health hazard 300-08 Incident Reporting Procedures for reporting non-vehicular incidents 300-09 On The Job Injury Establish policy to monitor on-the-job injuries 300-10 Safety Inspection of City Owned Facilities Procedure for inspection of all City-owned and operated facilities 300-11 Central Safety Committee Establish function and structure of Central Safety Committee 300-13 Emergency Evacuations of City Buildings Procedure for evacuation of City buildings in the event of an emergency 300-14 Safety Restraints & Seat Belts Requires mandatory use of safety restraints/seat belts while driving or riding in the City vehicles 300-15 Excavation Trenching & Shoring Establish policy for shoring and sloping all excavations or trenches over four (4) feet in depth 300-16 Safety Line Procedure All Cranes, Backhoes, & Hoists Procedures for controlling moving loads being hoisted or swinging ground or truck using hoists, backhoes, cranes, or any mechanical device use in moving loads 300-17 Chemical Hazard Communication (Worker Right To Know) Establish chemical and global hazard communication program to assure the health and safety of City employees 300-18 Welding, Brazing, & Cutting Procedure for welding, cutting or brazing work or practices which may result in an injury or death 300-19 Lockout & Tagout Requirements for the lockout or tagout of energy isolating devices 300-20 Bloodborne Pathogens Procedure to prevent exposure to blood or other substances and materials that may carry bloodborne pathogens. Procedures for decontamination of equipment and evaluation and treatment of employees who experience exposure. 300-21 Reporting Vehicle Accidents Procedure for reporting vehicle accidents 300-22 Heat Related Illness Training for potential heat related illness Page 233 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-18 Number Policy Name Description 300-23 Confined Spaces Procedures for entering a confined space 300-24 Green Housekeeping Guidelines Procedures that sustain a "Green Cleaning" environment 300-25 Respiratory Protection Program Procedures that will prevent employees from inhaling hazardous airborne chemicals 300-26 Fall Protection & Rooftop Safety Procedures for rooftop safety and use of fall protection 300-27 Powered Industrial Trucks Training, operation, and safety of powered industrial vehicles In addition to the policies, all M&O staff receive safety training. The contents of the training are periodically reviewed and updated, if necessary, through departmental and city-wide safety committees. The Human Resources and Risk Management Department maintains information and schedules on safety training. The City maintains appropriate safety equipment and information. Each vehicle and facility have a fire extinguisher and first aid kit. All staff use personal protective equipment, such as hard hats, safety glasses, safety vests, etc., appropriate to the task. Climbing equipment and lockout/tagout equipment is available and stored at the M&O Building and the Well 7 storage facility. Additionally, each site with chemicals has a Safety Data Sheets (SDS) book that contains the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for all chemicals on site. A master sheet of all chemicals used by the Water Utility is maintained at the M&O Building. 6.6 Cross Connection Control Program The City’s Cross Connection Control Program (provided in Appendix Q) protects the public water system as defined by WAC 246.290.010, WAC 246.290.490, and Auburn City Code (ACC) 13.12 from contamination via cross connection hazards. It describes minimum operating policies, provides guidelines for installation, testing, and maintenance of approved backflow prevention assemblies, permitting process, inspection, and survey requirements for existing and new water service connections. The program is maintained by two Cross Connection Specialists under the direction of the Water Operations Supervisor. The specialists are responsible for identification and elimination of potential and actual cross connections and contamination hazards within the public water system. 6.7 Sanitary Survey Findings DOH completes periodic inspections of the City’s water facilities, their operations, and facility records to identify potential health risks to the public. The sanitary survey, conducted by DOH on August 22, 2022, identified significant deficiencies such as air gaps or backflow assemblies that must be added to the water supply lines at Wells 5 and 5A. Additionally, repair needs were identified for the reservoir overflow screens at Reservoirs 8A and 8B. DOH identified the need to terminate the pump to waste line at Well 5 above grade and either raise the casing at Well 5A or provide a sump pump or alarms to address potential water accumulation in the vault. Weekly vault inspections, especially after significant storms, were recommended until a permanent solution is implemented. The survey noted that the reservoir vents at Reservoirs 4A, 4B, and 8A should open downward to prevent debris entry. It also identified a need for evaluation of the overflow piping at Reservoirs 2, 4A, and 4B, to ensure compliance with regulations. The next DOH sanitary survey is scheduled for 2027. Page 234 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-19 The City has taken the following actions to address some of the deficiencies identified in the sanitary survey . ➢ A backflow assembly was installed at Well 5A. ➢ The reservoir overflow screen at Reservoirs 8A and 8B was repaired on September 13, 2022. ➢ The City implemented an inspection and maintenance program to conduct weekly inspections at Well 5A and immediately after a significant storm even. ➢ The direct connections of reservoir overflows (Reservoirs 4A and B to drains, sanitary sewer, and/or storm sewer) have been addressed. The following deficiencies identified in the sanitary survey will be addressed with ongoing or planned Capital Improvement Projects identified in Chapter 8 and are captured in Section 6.10.2 as recommended improvements: ➢ Reservoir vents will be retrofitted or replaced as part of the ongoing Reservoirs 4A, 4B, 8A , and 8B Seismic Valves Retrofit capital project. ➢ The request for the pump to waste line at Well 5 to terminate above grade will be addressed with a capital improvement project. ➢ The direct connections of reservoir overflows (Reservoirs 2) to drains, sanitary sewer, and/or storm sewer, will be addressed with a capital improvement project. 6.8 Customer Complaint Response Program One member of the Water Distribution staff is a Customer Service Representative. This individual is responsible for meter turn-on and turn-off, delinquency notices, meter rereads, new service reads, final service reads, leak adjustments, high consumption investigations, account documentation, and other duties, as assigned. The employee maintains a modified work schedule, which provides more flexibility in dealing with emergency service requests by customers. Beginning in 2006, the Water Utility, along with the rest of PW transitioned to an asset management software system called CarteGraph. Some of the benefits include: ➢ Ability to assign and track citizen complaints and requests ➢ Produce work orders ➢ Monitor work and maintenance projects ➢ Track costs for labor, equipment, and material ➢ Enhanced inventory control ➢ Integration with GIS ➢ Benchmark analysis ➢ Generate reports ➢ Track infrastructure conditions – GASB 34 The City has a customer service program accessible by the public and City staff via the City’s website. Customers fill out the online Citizen Report form and describe the services they are seeking. The submitted form downloads into the CarteGraph system for review and action by staff. In addition, customers can stay connected with the City on mobile devices with a SeeClickFix application. The SeeClickFix app allows customers to report graffiti, abandoned vehicles or potholes, water issues, etc. Page 235 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-20 6.8.1 Customer Request Response Program As described above, the CarteGraph system can assign and track customer requests (or complaints) and produce work orders. The City maintains a list of requests and identifies the work done to respond to any requests from the public. The City categorizes the citizen reported issues into the following five categories: ➢ Water Appearance: contains all requests related to the color of the water (brown, discoloration, cloudy, etc.) ➢ Odor: contains all requests related to water smell (chemical, sulfur, chlorine smell, etc.) ➢ Pressure: contains all requests related to change in water pressure (pressure drop, high water pressure, fluctuation in pressure, etc.) ➢ Taste: contains all requests related to water taste (poor, bitter, strong chlorine taste, etc.) ➢ Water Quality: contains all requests related to a combination of odor, taste, and discoloration issues. Customer requests are entered into the CarteGraph or SeeClickFix and a work order is generated. Typically, a Distribution staff member or team will investigate the issue and respond directly to the customer. A table summarizing the number and type of requests or complaints is provided in Chapter 3. 6.9 Recordkeeping and Reporting All recordkeeping and reporting practices follow DOH regulations as specified in WAC 246-290-480. The Water Manager maintains hard copies of the water quality analysis laboratory reports. These reports are kept at the M&O Building in files organized by year and analysis type. Analytical laboratories submit reports directly to DOH. As specified by the regulations, chemical analysis reports are kept indefinitely, and bacteriological reports are maintained for a minimum of five years. Additionally, Construction Completion Reports are submitted to DOH, as required. Construction Completion Reports for distribution main projects are maintained on file at the City and are available upon request by DOH, in accordance with WAC 246-290-125. Water production and purchase source meters are read daily (during the work week). Paper copies are scanned at the end of the month and digital copies in pdf format are maintained on the City computer server by month and year. Annual summary spreadsheets are also maintained on the computer server. This data is added to the monthly DOH reports. Records are maintained for a minimum of 10 years. Chlorine residual samples are collected in the distribution system and analyzed on a weekly basis. Summary spreadsheets are maintained on the City computer server by year. Records are maintained for a minimum of three years. Monthly reports containing water production and treatment data are submitted to DOH by the 10th day of the following month, using forms provided by DOH. Signed paper copies are scanned to produce a digital copy and are maintained on the City computer server, organized by year. Digital copies are maintained for a minimum of 10 years. Page 236 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-21 Most records that Water Utility collected in the past are based on hard copy paper forms. This includes forms that track maintenance and inspection records used for pumps, valves, meters, reservoirs, hydrants, operating equipment, etc. A portion of the integration process with CarteGraph involved the collection and collation of historical data into a form that can be downloaded into the software system. The City’s goal is a near-paperless documentation system that can be accessed by staff in the office, fie ld, or home on a 7- day, 24-hour basis. Existing electronic records include those described below. 6.9.1 Cross Connection Control Program Cross Connection Control records are managed with Tokay software and Laserfiche. Test reports conducted are stored in Laserfiche and are kept for 5 years. Tokay is used for creating reports, identifying and updating when tests are required, and general data entry and management of cross connection devices per parcel. 6.9.2 Water Meter Consumption Water meter consumption records are maintained by the Finance Department using the Springbrook Utility Billing System. These records include customer account data for classes of customers, billing, service, comments, and questions. The system also includes a tracking feature for water sold each month as well as annual total water sales. The tracking feature is useful because data on water consumption by customer type and season supports the City’s WUE Program, per Chapter 4. The Finance Department also provides staff with monthly financial reports regarding Water Utility operations. The City also uses AMI throughout the system as a tool for the WUE Program. Using AMI data, the City may be able to identify customer leaks and, as a result, provide cost savings in the Leak Detection, Repair, and Service Meter Replacements programs. Advanced metering also aids the City’s efforts to reduce non- payment of bills and water theft. 6.9.3 Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) The SCADA system monitors, records, and controls water system operations at various facilities. The electronic records are maintained by the IT Department and a back-up copy is made each evening to ensure that records are retrievable should hardware or software failure occur. Please note that the SCADA system is discussed more thoroughly in Section 6.2 of this chapter. 6.9.4 Water Meter Reading Effective January 1, 2019, the City transitioned to monthly consumption billing. The Utility Billing staff imports the water meter reads monthly into the City Utility Billing System. With the implementation of the AMI system, the City obtained a Cloud-Based Data Analytics Solution with meter data management capabilities called Sensus Analytics. Within Sensus Analytics, is a billing access application, which enables Utility Billing staff to generate and export a billing request file defined by a billing cycle and billing window. Subsequently, the file that contains meter numbers, account numbers, and current water meter reads are imported into the City Utility Billing System. The Utility Billing staff reviews abnormally high or low consumption levels compared to previous readings from the previous year, same period. Water service meters are read monthly to document customers’ water usage for billing purposes. The AMI system automatically stores and transmits the water use data for utility billing, without the need for personnel to collect the data on site. Page 237 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-22 6.10 Summary of O&M Deficiencies and Recommended Improvements 6.10.1 Water Facilities Evaluation Study The City completed an extensive Water Facilities Evaluation Study in 2014. The study conducted a physical inspection and evaluation of 40 out of the City’s 97 water supply facilities. Inspections included pump stations, treatment facilities, reservoirs, wells, transmission mains, and PRVs. Inspections considered general conditions, corrosion and rust, structural deficiencies, ability to meet current code, and operational constraints. In addition to the inspections, the remaining useful life of the facilitie s were developed in a desktop analysis for pump, motor, pipe, valve, general electrical equipment, and major electrical equipment. Where notable deficiencies were identified in the inspections or assets exceeded their usable life, improvements were recommended. Many of the recommended improvements have been completed or are currently scheduled to be completed and identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. Remaining improvements less than or equal to $10,000 are considered capital maintenance projects, which the City staff or a small works contractor will address as part of the normal M&O budget and are not identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. Based on the observed facilities, general maintenance improvements are recommended for each facility to create a schedule of improvements based on the facility’s remaining useful life. Regular facility inspections are also recommended, as summarized Table 6-4. Additionally, maintenance plans were developed for each inspected water system facility. These plans included the improvement type, estimated project cost, and frequency the improvement is required. Table 6-4 | Recommended Inspections Asset Type Recommended Inspection Frequency (years) Pump Perform pump test 5 Motor Check motor amp draw 5 Reservoir Inspect coating thickness 5 Reservoir Inspect reservoir interior 5 PRV Station Inspect for corrosion and signs of flooding 1 Structure Inspect for cracks in grout (where applicable) 1 Piping Inspect for general coating conditions 3 6.10.2 Recommended Improvements The City operates and maintains an efficient, environmentally sound, and safe water system. Recommended improvements include the outstanding projects identified from the 2014 Facility Evaluation Study, outstanding items to be corrected from the 2022 Sanitary Survey, and general continued repairs and maintenance activities that are conducted by M&O staff or contracted out. Table 6-5 provides a summary of the identified O&M projects and their costs. Page 238 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-23 Table 6-5 | O&M Improvement Projects O&M Deficiency Planned Year Notes The pump to waste line at Well 5 to terminate above grade will be addressed with a capital improvement project. (Identified in 2022 Sanitary Survey) 2026-2028 Included with the Well 5/Well 5A Upgrades Project Raising the casing at Well 5A to terminate above grade or the provision of a sump pump or alarms to activate when water accumulates in the vault. (Identified in 2022 Sanitary Survey) 2026-2028 Included with the Well 5/Well 5A Upgrades Project Reservoir vents will be retrofitted or replaced as part of the ongoing Reservoirs 4A, 4B, 8A, and 8B Seismic Valves Retrofit capital project. (Identified in 2022 Sanitary Survey) 2024-2025 Included in CP2219 – Reservoirs 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation The direct connections of reservoir overflows at Reservoirs 2 to drains, sanitary sewer, and/or storm sewer, will be addressed with a capital improvement project. (Identified in 2022 Sanitary Survey) 2024-2025 Included in Reservoir 2 Valves Project Conduct inspections of facilities at frequency recommended in the Facilities Evaluation Study. -- Refer to Table 6-4. To be completed via annual M&O operating budget. Continue distribution system corrosion inspection. TBD To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Develop a UDF Program for the Lakeland Service Areas. TBD To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Replace source water supply meters with flow transmitters for improved electronic data transmission and record keeping. TBD To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Continue PRV Vault Repairs 2024-2026 To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Continue Pump and Equipment Repairs and Maintenance 2024-2026 To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Continue Annual HVAC Maintenance and Repairs 2024-2026 To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Continue Fencing Repairs at Water Facilities 2024-2026 To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Continue Generator Maintenance and Repair 2024-2026 To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Continue Large Meter Repair and Testing 2024-2026 To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Continue Chlorine Feed and Analyzer Maintenance 2024-2026 To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Page 239 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Operations and Maintenance Program Page 6-24 O&M Deficiency Planned Year Notes Continue Vegetation Control and Maintenance at Water Facilities 2024-2026 To be completed via annual M&O operating budget as funds are available. Page 240 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards Page 7-1 CHAPTER 7 Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards This chapter outlines the Engineering Design and Construction Standards (EDCS) of the City of Auburn (City), concerning its water system. It encompasses policies and procedures governing project review and approval. To ensure the highest level of water system reliability, integration of the ED CS into the broader city infrastructure is essential. The City recognizes the interdependence of its water system with other municipal services. As such, there is an ongoing collaborative effort between the Water Division and other relevant City departments, such as Community Development and Finance, as well as non-City stakeholders, such as the Valley Regional Fire Authority (VRFA). The integration of the EDCS in this Water System Plan empowers the City to employ an alternative review process for distribution main projects, through the submittal exception process, which permits the City to approve project reports and construction documents without written approval from the Department of Health (DOH). This submittal exception is granted provided the conditions specified in WAC 246-290-125(2) are met. The submittal exception does not apply for source of supply, reservoir, pump station, and water treatment projects. For those projects, the City will seek approval from DOH through the submittal process outlined in WAC 246-290-110 and 246-290-120. The following topics are addressed in this chapter: 7.1 Project Review Procedures 7.2 Policies and Requirements for Outside Parties 7.3 Design and Construction Standards 7.4 Construction Certification 7.1 Project Review Procedures For all construction activities related to the City's water system, coordination must be done directly through the City’s Water Department. The City’s Water Department reviews plans, including calculations, reports, and AutoCAD files, to verify conformity with development requirements, City standards, City policies, as well as other federal, state, and local requirements. The plan sets are required to feature an overall utility plan illustrating public water facilities and private connections within the water service boundary, regardless of whether the project is inside or outside the City limits. City staff also review projects proposed by developers or other water purveyors to determine impacts to the City's water system facilities. Development review processes are detailed in the Engineering Design Standards (EDS), available on the City’s website. Compliance with Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) "Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction," and relevant City, State, and Federal regulations is also evaluated during the review process. Page 241 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards Page 7-2 All water-related improvements projects, whether for capital improvement or development, undergo a thorough review process by the Water Division, including evaluation by the VRFA and City’s Fire Authority for fire protection standards. Additionally, all plans involving main extensions, modifications, and fire service installations must be stamped by a Professional Engineer licensed in Washington State. 7.2 Policies and Requirements for Outside Parties The City manages the water utility in accordance with established water- system policies that govern various facets of utility operations. City policies are established by the City to provide a vision or mission of the water utility and to provide a framework for the design, operation, and ongoing wellbeing of the City’s water utility. Policies are developed specifically for the City’s multi-source municipal water system and seek to provide consistent treatment to all utility customers and to provide documentation to current water-system customers as well as those considering service from the City. What is included in these policies is limited to those things related to the water system and its design, maintenance, and operation. There are other policies and criteria that pertain to the water utility the City has in place regarding land use, development, and financial components that could still have an impact on the needs of the water system. These policies and criteria may include factors such as zoning regulations, building codes, infrastructure requirements, and financing options. These additional factors will be considered when planning for the water system, to meet the needs of the community in a sustainable and effective matter. Policies set forth for development are described in the Water System Policies provided as Appendix A of this Plan. 7.3 Design and Construction Standards Within the Retail Water Service Area (RWAS), the City has established specific standards governing the design and construction of water mains, detailed in the City's EDCS. The EDCS collectively contains the following: ➢ City of Auburn Engineering Design Standards (EDS). ➢ City of Auburn Engineering Construction Standards (ECS): o City of Auburn Engineering Construction Standards – Standard Details (STD DTL) o City of Auburn Engineering Construction Standards – General Special Provisions (GSP) o City of Auburn Engineering Construction Standards – Technical Special Provisions (TSP) These standards undergo periodic updates, with the most recent revision in 2024. The City's 2024 design standards and construction specifications related to the water system are outlined in Appendix P. Additionally, this plan incorporates relevant sections of the City's current construction standards, including materials, methods, and standard details applicable to the construction of water system appurtenances. For detailed information, the latest versions of the collective EDCS are accessible for view on the City's Public Works web page. Table 7-1 lists sections of the EDCS sections for the specifications, drawing standards , and special conditions of water main installations, extensions, and replacements. Standards for supply sources, reservoirs, pump stations, and water treatment facilities are not presented due to the complex nature of these facilities. For Page 242 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards Page 7-3 those projects, the City will seek approval from DOH through the submittal process outlined in WAC 246- 290-110 and 246-290-120. Table 7-1 | Water Main Design and Construction Standards Specifications for: Pipe material and pipe class. ANSI/NSF Standard 61 certified materials required for all pipes. EDS Section 7.01.02 Disinfection procedures (include de-chlorination or chlorinated water disposal specifications). TSP – 7.09.3(24) Pipe bedding and installed depth of bury. EDS Section 9.05 Bacteriological testing. TSP – 7.09.3(24)N Pressure and leakage testing. TSP – 7.09.3(23) Separation from sewer mains, non-potable conveyance systems, and other buried utilities. EDS Section 6.02 Valve spacing. EDS Section 7.03 Construction Drawings Standards Plan and profile views drawn to a particular scale EDS Sections 3.03, 3.04 & 3.04.07 Easement locations and dimensions EDS Sections 2.02, 3.04 & 3.04.07.B, 6.01, 7.01.04, 7.01.05, 7.02.01, 7.03 and STD DTL W-06.3, W-22.2, W-23.3, Appurtenant Design Standard Drawings Pipeline trench cross-section, including pipe bedding, backfill, compaction, and road restoration standard details STD DTL T-01 Hydrants (for fire, flushing) STD DTL W-07, W-08 Valves STD DTL W-17, W-18, W-19 Service Meters STD DTL W-15, W-16, W-16a Service lines and service connection to main STD DTL W-9, W-13, W-14 Air relief, vacuum relief, and combination air-vacuum relief valve and valve vault STD DTL W-02 Pressure reducing valve stations Submittal review (project specific) Thrust blocking STD DTL W-01 Backflow prevention assemblies STD DTL W-21, W-22, W-23, W-24, W-25 Blow-offs STD DTL W-03, W-04 Special Conditions Pipeline corrosion mitigation measures TSP 7.09.03(25) Potable/non-potable pipeline crossing construction details EDS Section 6.02 Stream-crossing construction details N/A Individual service booster pumps N/A Temporary water service (i.e., employed during water main replacement or emergency repair) N/A Page 243 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Distribution Facilities Design and Construction Standards Page 7-4 7.4 Construction Certification Construction work aimed at improving City roads and utilities, whether initiated by private developers or the City itself, must adhere to approved contract documents. City approval is mandatory for any modifications to approved plans before implementation, especially for work within the public right-of-way (ROW) or designated easements. Compliance with general WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications, approved plans, and the City's EDCS is strictly enforced. Prior to the start of construction, a pre-construction meeting must be held by the City and the developer, contractor, and/or designated representative. Pre-construction meetings establish the first touch point between the City and developer/contractor to discuss the schedule, certain unique aspects of the work, any special restrictions, and general coordination and communication protocols. Consistent presence of the approved set of plans with redline markups identified and requisite permits at the job site during construction is a shared responsibility of the City, the developer, and the construction contractor. The City exercises its authority to enforce standards through appointed project engineers, assistants, and inspectors, ensuring collective adherence to specified standards. Inspections, test measurements, and actions outlined in the City's Development Guidelines and Public Works Standards are pivotal. Post- construction, the submission of as-built drawings is mandated. Non-compliance with approved project documents can lead to stop-work orders and potential removal of completed elements, subject to penalties established by ordinance. The project's conclusive status is granted only when the City issues a formal letter of acceptance to the responsible party. Upon completion of construction activities related to the water system, including disinfection, flushing, and pressure testing for water mains, a construction completion report must be submitted. This document becomes part of the project records, and the release of water meters for any lot or building linked to a project is contingent upon final acceptance. Page 244 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-1 CHAPTER 8 Capital Improvements Program This chapter’s objective is to develop a cohesive Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the City of Auburn (City) by summarizing and prioritizing all capital projects identified in the previous chapters. The CIP provides a comprehensive accounting of capital projects needed to continue consistent, efficient water supply to the City’s Retail Water Service Area (RWSA) through the 20-year planning horizon. The recommended projects were developed in coordination with City staff. Projects identified as part of the City's asset management program that are anticipated to cost greater than $50,000 were included as capital projects. The capital projects discussed in Section 8.2 include water supply and storage improvements, improvements to the distribution system, and upgrades or replacement of aging facilities and distribution piping as discussed in Chapter 3. Projects were allocated to the 10-year (2025 to 2034) and 20-year (2035-2044) planning horizons. Planned projects coincide with the City’s current Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and have been placed into specific years for planned completion. These timeframes are intended to be a framework for future funding decisions that directs when future actions and decisions are intended to occur. However, these timeframes are estimates, and depending on factors involved in the processing of application s and project work, and availability of funding, the timing may change from the included timeframes. The framework does not represent actual commitments from the City, which may depend on funding and staffing resources available. 8.1 Prioritization 8.1.1 Project Identification Capital projects are organized into two categories to help provide a better understanding of the primary project driver as follows: ➢ Capacity Projects (CAP): These projects are needed to expand infrastructure capacity to meet increased demands associated with current deficiencies or projected growth. ➢ Non-Capacity (Non-CAP): These projects are needed to address aged and/or obsolete equipment to maintain and/or improve the reliability of the infrastructures system. These projects are needed to improve existing infrastructure for reasons other than capacity. The capital projects are also identified and grouped into categories based on the infrastructure they are focused on. Each project is assigned an identification number (Project ID) with the following ID prefixes: ➢ Supply (S): These projects are associated with the City’s water supply sources and treatment facilities. Page 245 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-2 ➢ Storage (R): These projects are associated with the City’s storage reservoirs or allow modifications in the system impacting reservoir storage transfer throughout the RWSA. ➢ Pump Stations (PS): These projects are associated with the City’s pump stations or booster pump stations (BPS). ➢ Distribution (D): These projects are associated with the City’s transmission and distribution piping systems. ➢ General Improvements (G): General improvement projects do not fit into the other categories and may be broader, impacting multiple components of the City’s water system. 8.1.2 Prioritization Factors The capital projects for the facilities improvements were prioritized based on system deficiencies, safety concerns, maintenance or capacity requirements, and regulatory requirements. The capital projects for the capacity driven distribution system improvements were prioritized based on the fire flow availability; projects resolving the largest deficits were prioritized higher, and as such are planned to be completed sooner than projects resolving smaller deficits. The capital projects for the condition driven distribution improvements were prioritized based on the existing pipe age, size, and material. More details are discussed in Chapter 3. The priority order of these improvements is reflected in the schedule of improvements, which is presented in Section 8.3 and Appendix W. 8.1.3 Estimated Costs “Active projects” are projects that are currently underway for completion. The project costs presented include total project costs for the current and future years and are presented in 2024 dollars. For projects already included in the City’s 2023 CFP, it was assumed that the project cost in 2024 dollars remains the same, unless the costs were identified as needing to be reassessed. For planned capital projects identified in the 2015 WSP that have not been completed and are not included in the City’s 2023 CFP, the project costs were escalated from 2014 dollars as presented in the 2015 WSP to 2024 dollars using the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI). For all other projects that were newly identified, modified, or reassessed, p lanning-level project cost estimates were developed for the improvements using average costs from RSMeans, HeavyBid Construction Cost Data, recent City of Auburn project bid tabs, City input, industry experience, and local contractor and supplier costs. These project costs are planning-level estimates and are categorized as Class 5 estimates, as defined by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE) International: Class 5 estimates are generally prepared based on very limited information, and subsequently have wide accuracy ranges. As such, some companies and organizations have elected to determine that due to the inherent inaccuracies, such estimates cannot be classified in a conventional and systemic manner. Class 5 estimates are prepared for any number of strategic business planning purposes, such as but not limited to market studies, assessment of initial viability, evaluation of alternate schemes, project Page 246 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-3 screening, project location studies, evaluation of resource needs and budgeting, long-range capital planning, etc. Typical accuracy ranges for Class 5 estimates are -50 % to -20% on the low side and +30% to +100% on the high side, depending on the construction complexity of the project, appropriate reference information and other risks (after inclusion of an appropriate contingency determination). Ranges could exceed those shown if there are unusual risks. All project descriptions and cost estimates in this WSP represent planning-level accuracy and opinions of costs (-50 percent to +100 percent). During the pre-design phase of each project, the project definition, scope, and specific information (e.g., pipe length and diameter, roadway restoration requirements, permitting requirements) should be verified. The final cost of individual projects will vary depending on actual labor and material costs, site conditions, market conditions, regulatory requirements, project schedule and other factors. Because of these factors, project feasibility and risks must be carefully reviewed prior to making specific financial decisions or establishing project budgets to support proper project evaluation and adequate funding. Total estimated project costs were developed through a progression of steps and multiple methodologies. The steps included development of component unit costs, construction costs and, finally, total project costs. The component unit cost includes the sum of materials, labor and equipment of a project’s basic features. The construction cost is the sum of component costs and construction markups, which includes a 30 percent allowance for contingency and 10.2 percent for sales tax. The total project costs presented is the sum of construction costs with the following additional allowances: ➢ 15 percent for City management, survey, legal, and project administration. ➢ 15 percent engineering design. ➢ 15 percent construction management and inspection. The following costs are not included, unless specifically noted: ➢ Land or right-of-way acquisition. ➢ Maintenance expenses. ➢ Operation expenses. All cost estimates were developed as total project costs in March 2024 dollars. In Table 8-10, costs have been inflated and escalated using an annual increase rate from 2024 dollars to their planned implementation year. For projects that will be designed or constructed in 2024, an annual increase of eight percent was used. For projects that will be designed or constructed after 2024, an annual increase of five percent was used. For future budgeting purposes, the latest engineering news record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) can be used to project current estimates to the year of implementation. The cost estimates for the Auburn area used the ENR CCI in Seattle of 15,477 (March 2024). 8.1.3.1 Pipeline Component Unit Costs The pipelines unit costs were developed using recent City construction bid tabs assuming the use of ductile iron pipe and a typical cover depth of four feet. The estimated unit cost is provided by pipe diameter per linear foot of pipe in Table 8-1, which includes the cost for the pipe, trench, roadway restoration, appurtenances, installation, and direct construction markups. As the diameter of pipe and the trench width increase, the costs also increase. Page 247 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-4 Table 8-1 | Water Pipeline Construction Costs per Linear Foot Pipe Diameter (inch) Unit Construction Cost ($/linear foot) 8 $490 10 $510 12 $520 14 $570 16 $630 18 $730 20 $780 24 $880 8.1.3.2 Reservoir Component Unit Costs Reservoir (storage tank) unit costs were determined based on the tank volume in gallons. Conceptual costs for tanks vary based on the material of storage: prestressed concrete and welded steel being the most common options. Unit costs for the different reservoir options are presented in Table 8-2 in terms of cost per gallon of storage. The unit costs do not include site piping, site improvements, land acquisition, repair, or recoating. Storage reservoir costs are sensitive to site-specific geotechnical and seismic considerations. A tank siting study is necessary whenever a new tank project is initiated to obtain the information required to inform the design. Table 8-2 | Reservoir Tank Construction Costs per Gallon Tank Material Unit Construction Cost ($/gallon) Prestressed Concrete $1.50 Welded Steel $1.25 8.2 Capital Improvement Program Summary and Schedule 8.2.1 Completed Projects The following projects have been completed since 2015 WSP was completed: ➢ S-01: Onsite Improvements Projects, completed in 2016. ➢ S-02: Emergency Power Improvements Project, completed in 2016. ➢ S-17: West Hill Springs Flow Control Improvements, completed in 2017. ➢ S-19: Fulmer Field Improvements Project, completed in 2018. ➢ R-01: Lakeland Hills Reservoir 5 Improvements, completed in 2016. ➢ D-03: SCADA Upgrades, completed in 2015. ➢ D-10: Pipeline Asset Management Study, completed in 2020. ➢ D-13: Lea Hill PRV Station Improvements, completed in 2018. ➢ D-14: Valley AC Main Replacement, completed in 2015. ➢ PS-03: Green River Pump Station Emergency Power, completed in 2020. ➢ PS-07: Academy Pump Station No.1 Improvements, completed in 2023. ➢ G-06: Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) Casino Master Meters, completed in 2016. ➢ G-09: Water Meter & Billing System Improvements, completed in 2018 Page 248 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-5 The following projects have been eliminated since 2015 WSP was prepared: ➢ G-05 - Utilities Field Operations Center: This project was replaced with a more comprehensive upgrade to the City’s Operations and Maintenance Facilities as reported in the 2021 Limited Comprehensive Plan Update. ➢ D-12 - Academy Transmission Replacement: This project was eliminated, after further investigation found no issues with the existing pipeline. ➢ D-15: Braunwood Transmission: This project was split from Reservoir Seismic Rehabilitation (R-06) identified in the 2015 WSP. This project was originally planned to incorporate the Braunwood Satellite System, however after further evaluation, there is not a business case to support this project. Instead, it is replaced in this WSP with a mechanical upgrades project for the Braunwood Pump Station to maintain operation. The potential for incorporation of the Braunwood Satellite System may be more viable in the future pending potential development in the southern portion of the City’s RWSA. ➢ D-16 - Game Farm Park Transmission: This project was originally planned to allow for the decommissioning and removal of the Game Farm Park Pump Station, however after further evaluation, there is not a business case to support this project. Instead, it is replaced in this WSP with a mechanical upgrades project to maintain operation of the Game Farm Park Pump Station. Elimination of the Game Farm Park Pump Station may be more viable in the future pending potential development in the southern portion of the City’s RWSA. ➢ S-12 - West Hill Springs Water Quality Improvements: The City had planned to replace the aging West Hill Springs chlorination building and equipment with a new liquid chlorination system. However, since this project is not required to meet regulatory requirements and after further review of the City’s Financial Program, this project was eliminated to prioritize projects required to resolve deficiencies. This project will be completed later, likely beyond the planning horizon for this WSP. ➢ S-14 - Algona Well 1 Redevelopment: This project was eliminated until the Algona Well 1 Study is completed. A new capital project may be developed in the 10 to 20-year planning horizon pending the outcome of the study. 8.2.2 Active Projects The following projects are currently underway for completion by the City and are referred to as “Active Projects” that have remaining costs to be spent in the near term: ➢ CP2021 - Well 4 Facility Improvements: This project was split from the Well 4 Pump Improvements project (S-22) identified in the 2015 WSP. This project includes upgrades to much of the mechanical systems at the facility. ➢ CP2043 - Well 4 Electrical Improvements: This project was split from the Well 4 Pump Improvements project (S-22) identified in the 2015 WSP to accommodate beneficial electrical improvements outside the original scope of the project. The well facility is over 40 years old and much of the electrical equipment is original. Upgrades to the electrical system will improve the overall efficiency of the facility. Page 249 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-6 ➢ CP2219 - Reservoir 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation: This project was split from Reservoir Seismic Rehabilitation (R-06) identified in the 2015 WSP. The City plans to install seismic control valves on outlet piping of the Lea Hill Reservoirs (4A & 4B) and Academy Reservoirs (8A & 8B). A seismic control valve isolates the reservoir to prevent catastrophic flows from the reservoir during a seismic pipe failure. This project will also address outstanding deficiencies identified in the 2022 Sanitary Survey, including vent modifications, overflow connection modifications and overflow screen repairs. ➢ CP2134 - Comprehensive Water System Plan Update: This project was split from identified in the 2015 WSP (G-08), which originally included updates for both 2024 and 2034. This project will be carried forward in the CIP with further WSP updates being required in 2034 and 2044. ➢ CP1603 - Coal Creek Springs Transmission Main Replacement: This project was identified in the 2015 WSP as project (D-11) will be completed in 2024. The project will replace the existing 24-inch diameter steel transmission main crossing the White River with a new transmission main suspended from a utility and pedestrian bridge to cross the White River. ➢ CP2204 - Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation (Phase 1): The Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation project aims to investigate the cause of low yield and identify potential upgrades to improve water production. The updates will be completed in Phase 2 of the project. ➢ CP2413 - Reservoir 2 Valves: This project was split from Reservoir Seismic Rehabilitation (R-06) identified in the 2015 WSP. This project will replace the existing 20-inch supply valve with a seismic control valve and replace the 12-inch drain valve at Reservoir 2. Both valves will be installed in a vault. This project was identified as a maintenance issue due to limited access to the valves. The addition of a seismic control valve will improve the resiliency of the distribution system. This project will address the outstanding deficiency identified in the 2022 Sanitary Survey by modifying the overflow connection. ➢ CP1914 - Cascade Water Alliance Water Purchase: This project was identified in the 2015 WSP as project (S-04) and finances System Development Charges for the right to purchase water from Tacoma Public Utilities (TPU) through the Second Supply Pipeline to meet future projected demand, based on agreements with Cascade Water Alliance. Council approved the agreements for permanent and reserve wholesale supply in September 2013, and a new agreement was executed in 2014. Budget reflects purchase of permanent supply; payments will continue through 2029. ➢ S-08 - Water Resources Protection Program (Wellhead Protection): This program provides annual funding for implementing strategies identified in the Wellhead Protection Plan. Although some tasks will be performed as part of the water operations budget, other tasks will require consultants with expertise in review and investigation of contaminant sites and other environmental databases, development of spill response plans, and leaking underground storage tanks. This program will continue through the 20-year planning horizon. ➢ R-03 - Reservoir Repair and Replacements: This is an annual program that provides budget for general reservoir maintenance and minor repairs. This program will continue through the 20-year planning horizon. ➢ R-05 - Reservoir Painting: This is a program that operates on a 10-year cycle to complete reservoir coatings. This program will continue through the 20-year planning horizon with the next anticipated painting project planned in 2025. Page 250 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-7 The following projects include distribution improvements identified in the 2015 WSP to be completed as part of either the Annual Distribution System Improvements Program (D-02), Water Repair and Replacement Program (D-09) or are in partnership with other City utilities and are funded by budget available in the Street Utility Improvements annual program (D-06). All three programs have been updated and will continue through the 20-year planning horizon. In total the following active projects will replace approximately 9,000 linear feet of water main in the City’s system. The locations of all active distribution system improvement projects are identified in Figure 3-12 in Chapter 3. ➢ CP1619 - 104th Park Development (104th to 102nd Water Main Loop) ➢ CP2301 - 104th Avenue SE PRV Replacement ➢ CP2123 - C St SW Preservation ➢ CP2125 - D St SE and 23rd Street SE Storm Improvements ➢ CP2410 - 112th Pl SE Water Main Replacement ➢ CP1622 - Auburn Way South - Hemlock St SE to Poplar St SE ➢ CP2022 - Garden Avenue Realignment ➢ CP2210 - M Street NE Widening ➢ CP2116 - R Street SE Widening ➢ CP2308 - R St SE and 21st St SE Roundabout ➢ CP2315 - R St SE Preservation - 33rd St SE to 37th St SE ➢ CP2319 - Lea Hill Road/104th Ave SE Roundabout ➢ CP2404 - 12th St SE and Auburn Way South Water R&R ➢ CP2412 - 2025 Local Street Preservation ➢ 2026 Local Street Preservation The following active projects were not identified in the 2015 WSP: ➢ CP2405 - Fulmer Treatment Facility VFD Replacements: The variable frequency drive (VFD) for pumps 1 and 2 at Fulmer Corrosion Control Treatment Facility (CCTF) were installed in 2002. They are at the end of their useful life and require replacement as repair parts are no longer available. ➢ CP2329 - Coal Creek Springs Flowmeter Replacement: The project will replace existing source meters on the Coal Creek Springs collectors to improve the accuracy and frequency of production readings. ➢ Algona Well 1 Study – Phase 1: The project will conduct a preliminary assessment of options to utilize the existing water right. ➢ Valley Service Area Reservoir No. 3 Siting Analysis: The project will conduct a siting analysis to identify and evaluate possible locations for the new reservoir. ➢ Braunwood Pump Station Assessment: The project will identify process mechanical upgrades necessary to continued operation. The project will also evaluate roofing replacement material options and costs. ➢ Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation – Phase 1: The project will investigate the cause of reduced production from Coal Creek Springs and recommend improvements to increase production capacity. Page 251 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-8 8.2.3 Capital Improvement Projects The following projects identified in the 2015 WSP have not been completed since the WSP was prepared, but have been revisited and are discussed in detail in the following sections for completion during this planning period. The timing of most projects has been adjusted based on the City’s financial analysis and project prioritization updates. ➢ S-03 - Well 7 Back-Up Power: Delayed to 2032 since Well 7 has been offline due to high levels of Manganese. The timing of this project will be aligned with the completion of the Well 7 Treatment Phase 1 project (S-15) that will allow the Well to resume operation. ➢ S-06 - Well 5/5A Upgrades: Delayed from 2022 to 2026. ➢ S-07 - Well Inspection and Redevelopment Program: Delayed from 2015-2033 to 2026. ➢ S-09 - Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation: Delayed from 2018 to 2027 based on awaiting results of ongoing investigations to identify the cause and possible solutions to improve production from Coal Creek Springs. The timing of this project may be adjusted pending results of the on-going investigation. ➢ S-11 - Wells 3A/3B Treatment: Delayed from 2035 to 2036. ➢ S-13 - Algona Well 1 Study: Delayed from 2015 to 2039. ➢ S-15 - Well 7 Treatment Phase 1: Delayed from 2022 to 2030 based on City financial analysis and updated project prioritization. ➢ S-16 - Well 7 Treatment Phase 2: Moved forward from 2035 to 2033. ➢ S-18 - Howard Road CCTF Expansion: Delayed from 2025 to 2032. The timing of this project must be aligned with the completion of the Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation project, as its purpose is to provide increased treatment capacity to accommodate increased flows from Coal Creek Springs. ➢ S-20 - Well 2 Replacement: Moved forward from 2035 to 2030. ➢ S-21 - Coal Creek Springs Chlorination Building Replacement: Moved forward from 2035 to 2030. ➢ R-04 - Valley Service Area Reservoir No. 3: Delayed from 2025 to 2041. ➢ R-07 - Reservoir Capital Improvements: Delayed from 2025 to 2027 to avoid timing conflicts with other current projects at Reservoirs 4A, 4B, and 8A. ➢ R-07 - Braunwood Reservoir Improvements: Separated from “Reservoir Capital Improvements” project and delayed from 2025 to 2039. ➢ PS-04 - Intertie Booster Pump Station Improvements: Delayed from 2021 to 2024. ➢ PS-09 - Game Farm Park Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades: Replaces original project ‘Game Farm Park Pump Station/Distribution System Improvements. Delayed from 2025 to 2034. ➢ PS-10 - Lea Hill Pump Station Replacement: Delayed from 2025 to 2027 to avoid conflicts with concurrent work in area being completed as part of a separate project. Page 252 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-9 ➢ G-08 - Comprehensive Water System Plan Update: This project was split into two separate completion years for future updates (2034 and 2044). Based on the information provided by the City, information included in the 2023 CFP, asset management program input, and results of the system capacity analysis provided in Chapter 3, the following new projects were identified that are included in the CIP and are discussed in further detail below: ➢ Rehabilitate & Clean Wells 2 and 6 (3-year Cycle). ➢ On-Site Chlorine Generation Systems (OSEC) at Wells 1 and 4. ➢ Academy PRV Project. ➢ Braunwood Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades. ➢ Water Trench Patches Program. ➢ West Hill Springs Transmission Main Replacement. ➢ Lea Hill 648 Zoning Adjustment. 8.2.3.1 Water Supply The City’s water supply strategy details both project sizing and timing. A summary of the 0 to 10-year and 10 to 20-year capital projects recommended for securing adequate supply to meet the system’s future demands are presented in Table 8-3. Project IDs have been revised to reflect the updated prioritization and planned timing of projects presented in this WSP. Previous project IDs from the 2015 WSP as presented above will be discontinued for clarity purposes. Active projects identified above are not discussed in detail as they are already well defined and in progress. 8.2.3.1.1 Cascade Water Alliance Water Purchase (S-01) Financing to purchase water from Tacoma Public Utilities (Tacoma) to meet water demands is based on an agreement with Cascade Water Alliance (Cascade), which had purchased water supply from Tacoma. The Council approved the agreement for permanent wholesale supply in September 2013. The agreement provides an additional 3.32 mgd of supply during the peak day and 1.5 mgd of average day supply. The City’s permanent and reserve agreement requires System Development Charges (SDC) payments of $21,073,743 between 2017 and 2029. A total of $934,810 of payments will continue from 2023 through 2029. The SDC costs will decrease if less than the full reserve amount is purchased. The project ID was previously S-04 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.2 Water Resources Protection Program (Wellhead Protection) (S-02) Annual funding for implementing strategies identified in the Wellhead Protection Plan. Although some tasks will be performed as part of the water operations budget, other tasks will require consultants with expertise in review and investigation of contaminant sites and other environmental databases, development of spill response plans, and leaking underground storage tanks. The project ID was previously S-08 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.3 Rehabilitate & Clean Wells 2 and 6 (3-year Cycle) (S-3) Rehabilitation work completed in 2013-2014 indicated it would be beneficial to clean and rehabilitate both wells on a regular basis to improve production capacity and pumping efficiencies. Cleaning was completed in 2020 and again in late 2023/early 2024. This program was originally established as a 5-year cycle, however based on more recent evidence, more frequent cleaning is required. Cleaning and rehabilitation for Wells 2 and 6 will be performed over a 3-year cycle. This program was not identified in the 2015 WSP. Page 253 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-10 8.2.3.1.4 Well Inspection and Redevelopment Program (S-04) The City allocates annual funding for investigations and redevelopment of supply wells and springs necessary to support production at maximum capacity for efficient utilization. This program is to be used for production wells and spring collectors, and is not intended to finance the replacement of pumps, motors, buildings, etc. The project ID was previously S-07 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.5 On-Site Chlorine Generation Systems (OSEC) at Wells 1 and 4 (S-05) The existing liquid chlorine (sodium hypochlorite) used at Wells 1 and 4 degrades during low winter demand periods when the volume used is much lower and product turnover is decreased. This results in more chemical consumption to achieve the same chlorine dose which is not cost effective. The hypochlorite systems will be replaced with on-site chlorine generation systems sized to meet peak summer demands while providing flexibility during winter months. This project was not identified in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.6 Fulmer CCTF Replace On-Site Chlorine Generation System (OSEC) (S-06) The existing on-site chlorine generating equipment was installed in 2002. The generation cell was replaced in 2012. Sourcing parts for equipment repairs has become increasingly difficult due to the equipment age. An analysis performed in 2018 comparing chlorine alternatives indicated that on-site generation has the lowest overall cost. This project will replace the entire generation system. The chlorination system will be sized to accommodate future production from Well 7. 8.2.3.1.7 Well 5/5A Upgrades (S-07) Well 5 needs significant improvements including a new building, a backup generator, chlorination, and a hydrologic investigation to evaluate observed decreased production. Due to the small size of the existing site, the acquisition of an adjacent parcel may be required. Additionally, the project will ad dress the recommended Capital Improvements identified in the 2014 Facility Evaluation Study (CIP Project G -01), including a new pump at Well 5 and new pump and motor at Well 5A. Additional upgrades may be identified in the hydrologic investigation; therefore, the cost of this CIP item should be revisited upon completion of the study. This project will also include improvements to address outstanding deficiencies identified in the 2022 Sanitary Survey, including modifications to the pump waste line for Well 5 and addressing water accumulation in the vault at Well 5A. The project ID was previously S-06 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.8 Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation – Phase 2 (S-08) Complete rehabilitation of the Coal Creek Springs collectors to improve production capacity resulting in greater utilization of the water right. Improvements are to be defined by the outcomes of the 2023/2024 hydrogeologic study currently being completed as Phase 1 (S-04). Additional upgrades may be identified in the hydrologic investigation; therefore, the cost of this CIP item should be revisited upon completion of the study. 8.2.3.1.9 Coal Creek Springs Chlorination Building Replacement (S-09) Coal Creek Springs chlorination building was identified as requiring replacement in the 2013 Facility Evaluation Study. Additionally, the project will upgrade the source treatment from chlorine gas to a liquid sodium hypochlorite disinfection system. Sizing of the new equipment will be dependent upon capacity improvements completed as part of the Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation Project. A new building will be constructed to house the equipment. The project ID was previously S-21 in the 2015 WSP. Page 254 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-11 8.2.3.1.10 Well 7 Treatment Phase 1 (S-10) Well 7 is not operational due to high manganese levels. Manganese treatment is required to allow operation of this facility to be restored and to utilize the full water right for this well. Due to space limitations at the Well 7 site, the treatment facilities will be added at the Fulmer Field CCT Facility. The treatment facility will be installed in two phases. The first phase will provide 2.5 mgd of capacity. Additionally, phase 1 of the project will address the recommended improvements to the Fulmer Field CCT Facility identified in the 2013 Facility Evaluation Study, including a new pump and motor. The project ID was previously S-15 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.11 Well 2 Replacement (S-11) The Fulmer Well Field Improvement project found that Well 2 can continue to serve the City but would need to be replaced to resolve ongoing operational challenges. This project includes installation of a new large diameter well. It is assumed that the well will remain on its existing site, or other City-owned property. The project ID was previously S-20 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.12 Howard Road CCTF Expansion (S-12) The inflow to the Howard Road CCTF will increase with the completion of the Well 1 Improvements project in 2016 and planning production improvements for Coal Creek Springs Collector Improvements. The existing facility will be expanded to its full capacity to provide additional treatment capacity and redundant pump capacity to match increased flows. Additionally, the project will address the recommended improvements to Howard Road CCTF identified in the 2013 Facility Evaluation Study, including a new pump and motor. The expansion will include an additional aeration tower and a pump to match existing. The project ID was previously S-18 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.13 Well 7 Back-up Power (S-13) Well 7 is currently out of service, but the City has plans to bring the facility back online once manganese treatment is provided as part of the Well 7 Treatment Phase 1 Project. Without back-up power to its pumps, Well 7 is not considered a reliable source of supply for the Valley Service Area. The City has limited land available at the Well 7 site, therefore, backup power will be installed at the Fulmer Field CCT Facility. The project also includes installing underground electrical transmission capability between Well 7 and the Fulmer Field CCT Facility. The project ID was previously S-03 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.14 Well 7 Treatment Phase 2 (S-14) Well 7 Treatment Phase 2 will complete the manganese treatment facilities at the Fulmer Field CCT Facility to allow year-round use of Well 7. Phase 2 will add 2.5 mgd of treatment for a total capacity of 5.0 mgd. The project ID was previously S-16 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.1.15 Wells 3A/3B Treatment (S-15) Wells 3A and 3B are not operated due to high manganese levels. Manganese treatment is required to allow these wells to be used, which would add 4.03 mgd of instantaneous flow capacity to the City’s supply capabilities. The project includes manganese treatment, a new well and treatment building, well pumps, and onsite backup-power. Additionally, a new sodium hypochlorite system for chlorination will be installed. The project ID was previously S-11 in the 2015 WSP. Page 255 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-12 Table 8-3 | Prioritized Water Supply Improvement Projects Project Name Project ID Project Timing Added Qi Capacity (mgd) Estimated Cost 2024 USD Brief Project Description 0 to 10-Year Planning Horizon Cascade Water Alliance Water Purchase S-01 2024-2029 3.32 $5,608,860 The agreement provides an additional 3.32 mgd of supply during the peak day and 1.5 mgd of average day supply. Water Resources Protection Program (Wellhead Protection) S-02 2024-2044 (Annual) $1,287,700 Annual funding for Wellhead Protection activities. Rehabilitate & Clean Wells 2 and 6 (3-year Cycle) S-03 2025-2044 $1,750,000 3-year cycle program to clean and rehab Wells 2 and 6. Well Inspection and Redevelopment Program S-04 2026-2027 $420,000 Annual funding allocation for investigations and redevelopment of wells and springs to maximize production capacity. On-Site Chlorine Generation Systems (OSEC) at Wells 1 and 4 S-05 2026-2027 $275,000 Replace liquid hypochlorite systems with on-site generation systems. Fulmer CCTF Replace On-Site Chlorine Generation System (OSEC) S-06 2026-2027 $500,000 Replace aged on-site chlorine generation equipment. Well 5/5A Upgrades S-07 2026-2028 $2,715,000 New building, back-up generator, chlorination, and a hydrologic investigation to evaluate the reasons for decreased production. Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation – Phase 2 S-08 2027-2030 4.32 $5,337,000 Rehabilitation of the Coal Creek Springs collectors to improve production. Coal Creek Springs Chlorination Building Replacement S-09 2030-2031 $2,081,000 Replace chlorination system and building at Coal Creek Springs Facility with hypochlorite disinfection system. Well 7 Treatment Phase 1 S-10 2030-2032 2.5 $10,097,000 Requires manganese treatment facilities Well 2 Replacement S-11 2030-2031 3.46 $1,960,000 Replace Well 2 to resolve ongoing operational challenges. Howard Road CCTF Expansion S-12 2032-2033 $1,450,000 Expand the facility to its full capacity (including an additional aeration tower and pumps). Well 7 Back-Up Power S-13 2032-2033 $2,075,000 Provide back-up power for this source. Well 7 Treatment Phase 2 S-14 2033-2035 2.5 $8,054,000 Requires completion of manganese treatment facilities. 10 to 20-Year Planning Horizon Wells 3A/3B Treatment S-15 2036-2038 4.03 $13,945,000 Provide manganese treatment for well operation Algona Well 1 Study – Phase 2 S-16 2039 $250,000 Evaluate possible uses of water right. Subtotal $57,805,560 Page 256 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-13 8.2.3.1.16 Algona Well 1 Study – Phase 2 (S-16) Algona Well 1 has been abandoned and all related facilities removed. This project will study possible options to utilize the existing water right. One option may be to redevelop the well on-site at its previous location. Another alternative may be to pursue an alternative well location or how to use the water right at another existing facility. The project does not include the development of design, permitting or construction of well infrastructure. The project ID was previously S-13 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.2 Storage Table 8-4 provides a summary of the planned reservoir projects. Project IDs have been revised to reflect the updated prioritization and planned timing of projects presented in this WSP. Previous project IDs from the 2015 WSP as presented above will be discontinued for clarity purposes. Active projects identified above are not discussed in detail as they are already well defined and in progress. 8.2.3.2.1 Reservoir Repair & Replacements (R-01) The City has allocated an annual capital expenditure for general reservoir maintenance and minor improvements. Projects are identified by the City on an as-needed basis. The project ID was previously R- 03 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.2.2 Reservoir Painting (10-year Cycle) (R-02) The City plans to paint the welded steel reservoirs to extend their useful life. This program finances the painting of two reservoirs every 10 years. The project ID was previously R-05 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.2.3 Academy PRV Project (R-03) A new PRV facility will be located to rezone a portion of the Valley 242 pressure zone to the Academy 350 pressure zone to resolve fire flow deficiencies in the area. This PRV facility will also allow storage transfer from the Academy Service Area where this is surplus storage to the Valle y Service Area to resolve 2034 storage deficit projections, allowing for more system flexibility. The PRV facility location is assumed to be in a cul-de-sac where U St SE meets 28th St SE but will be confirmed during design. The PRV vault is assumed to house a 2-inch PRV for low flows (normal operation) and a 6-inch PRV for fire flows. This project was not identified in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.2.4 Reservoir Capital Improvements (R-04) The 2013 Facility Evaluation Study identified improvements to reservoir facilities based on the condition and remaining useful life of the assets within the facilities. Improvements were identified at Reservoir 1, Reservoir 4A & 4B, and Reservoir 8A & 8B. The project ID was previously R-07 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.2.5 Braunwood Reservoir Improvements (R-05) The 2013 Facility Evaluation Study identified improvements to reservoir facilities based on the condition and remaining useful life of the assets within the facilities. Improvements were identified at the Braunwood Reservoir and were previously included in Reservoir Capital Improvements project (R-07) in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.2.6 Valley Service Area Reservoir No. 3 (R-06) To meet future storage requirements in the Valley Service Area, it is recommended that a new, 2-MG storage reservoir. A siting study should be conducted to identify the preferred reservoir location and other details; it is assumed that the reservoir will be in the northeast portion of the Valley 242 pressure zone . Page 257 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-14 Property acquisition is expected to be required and an allowance of $1M is included in the project budget. The project ID was previously R-04 in the 2015 WSP. It was assumed that the new reservoir will be a prestressed concrete tank, however this should be confirmed during the siting study. Table 8-4 | Storage Improvements Projects Project Name Project ID Project Timing Added Storage (MG) Estimated Cost 2024 USD Brief Project Description 0 to 10-Year Planning Horizon Reservoir Repair & Replacements R-01 2024-2044 (Annual) $1,392,000 Annual program for reservoir maintenance and minor improvements. Reservoir Painting (10-year Cycle) R-02 2025-2044 $3,500,000 Required for maintenance and reservoir longevity in both Academy and Lea Hill service areas. Academy PRV Project R-03 2027 $470,000 PRV for storage transfer and rezoning to meet fire flow demands. Reservoir Capital Improvements R-04 2027 $470,000 Improvements to Reservoir 1, Reservoir 4A&4B, Reservoir 8A&8B based on the condition and remaining useful life. 10 to 20-Year Planning Horizon Braunwood Reservoir Improvements R-05 2039-2040 $250,000 Improvements based on condition and remaining useful life. Valley Service Area Reservoir No. 3 R-06 2041-2044 2.0 $11,745,000 Required to meet future storage requirements in the Valley service area. Subtotal $17,827,000 8.2.3.3 Pump Stations Table 8-5 provides a summary of the planned pump station projects. Project IDs have been revised to reflect the updated prioritization and planned timing of projects presented in this WSP. Previous project IDs from the 2015 WSP as presented above will be discontinued for clarity purposes. Active projects identified above are not discussed in detail as they are already well defined and in progress. 8.2.3.3.1 Intertie Pump Station/Lea Hill BPS Improvements (PS-01) The Lea Hill BPS serves the closed 648 Pressure Zone and does not have sufficient capacity to meet fire flow requirements under current or future demand projections. To meet fire flow requirements, an additional 2,500 gpm of firm capacity is required. The Lea Hill BPS and that Intertie Pump Station share a building. To increase capacity of the Lea Hill PS, the project will provide additional piping and modify the existing Intertie Pump Station/Lea Hill BPS building to utilize the existing Intertie Pump Station pumps to serve the Lea Hill 648 pressure zone. The project will also add pressure reducing valves and control valves at Lea Hill reservoirs, and system valves to provide efficient operation of the 132nd Ave Tacoma Intertie. On-site back- up power improvements for the Lea Hill BPS are also included to improve facility reliability. In the 2015 WSP, this project also included distribution system improvements to rezone a portion of the Lea Hill Service Area; this work has been shifted to a separate project titled the Lea Hill 648 Zoning Adjustment project. This project ID was previously PS-04 in the 2015 WSP. Page 258 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-15 8.2.3.3.2 Lea Hill Pump Station Replacement (PS-02) The Lea Hill Pump Station will be reconstructed to provide redundant pumped supply to the Lea Hill area. If the Green River Pump Station is out of service for maintenance, a redundant pump station would avoid the need to purchase more expensive regional surface water through the 132nd Intertie. The pump station needs to be relocated from its current location on the shoulder of Lea Hill Road at the base of a steep hill for safety and reliability considerations. Two separate active projects (Garden Avenue Realignment and Lea Hill Roundabout) will construct approximately 900 feet and 835 feet of 12-inch diameter transmission main respectively, that is required for the future pump station. The project ID was previously PS-10 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.3.3 Braunwood Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades (PS-03) The Braunwood Pump Station is an aging facility that serves the Braunwood Satellite System. The project will include minor mechanical or electrical improvements to rehabilitate the facility for continued use. This project ID was previously PS-09 in the 2015 WSP. This project was not identified in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.3.4 Game Farm Park Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades Project (PS-04) The Game Farm Wilderness Park Pump Station is an aging facility that serves the Game Farm Wilderness and recreational area. The 2013 Facility Evaluation Study identified improvements to allow continued use of the station including pump replacement and building repairs. Additional minor mechanical or electrical improvements may be warranted to rehabilitate the facility for continued use. This project ID was previously PS-09 in the 2015 WSP. Table 8-5 | Pump Station Improvement Projects Project Name Project ID Project Timing Added Firm/Reliable Capacity (gpm) Estimated Cost 2024 USD Brief Project Description 0 to 10-Year Planning Horizon Intertie Pump Station/Lea Hill BPS Improvements PS-01 2024-2026 2,500 gpm $2,325,000 Expand the fire flow capacity of the Lea Hill BPS by connecting to the Intertie PS pumps. Lea Hill Pump Station Replacement PS-02 2027-2029 $6,365,000 Decommission and replace the pump station at the end of its usable life. 10 to 20-Year Planning Horizon Braunwood Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades PS-03 2034-2035 $250,000 Rehabilitate Pump Station to allow continued use. Game Farm Park Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades PS-04 2034-2035 $250,000 Rehabilitate Pump Station to allow continued use. Subtotal $9,190,000 8.2.3.4 Distribution System The City’s water distribution system will require many improvements to address fire flow deficiencies identified by the system analysis presented in Chapter 3. Additionally, the City has undersized, and aging piping within the water system that needs to be replaced to reduce the risk of breaks and leaks . The identified distribution system improvements programs are described below and summarized in Table 8-7. Page 259 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-16 Project IDs have been revised to reflect the updated prioritization and planned timing of projects presented in this WSP. Previous project IDs from the 2015 WSP as presented above will be discontinued for clarity purposes. Active projects identified above are not discussed in detail as they are already well defined and in progress. 8.2.3.4.1 Annual Distribution System Improvements Program (D-01) The Annual Distribution System Improvements Program is focused on capacity related improvements to the City’s water distribution system as identified in Figure 3-12 and Table 3-33 of Chapter 3. These improvements address deficiencies during fire flow demand scenarios. A comprehensive list of the projects and their individual estimated costs are provided in Appendix W. The total of all project costs is distributed across the 20-year planning horizon and will be prioritized to address the areas with the greatest deficiency first. This project ID was previously D-02 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.4.2 Street Utility Improvements (D-02) The City Street Utility program provides an annual budget to perform water main improvements in coordination with the Street Preservation programs and general arterial street improvements. By replacing water infrastructure concurrent with other utility or street improvement projects, the City can reduce overall project costs. Identified projects are anticipated to occur annually throughout the planning period. This project ID was previously D-06 in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.4.3 Water Repair & Replacements (D-03) Previous WSPs identified pipelines for the City’s Water Repair & Replacement program focus on replacement of old cast iron pipes, pipes under 6-inches that serve fire hydrants, dead-end mains in non- residential areas, and decommissioned duplicate pipes. The budget for this project has been re-evaluated and is revised to focus on the replacement of undersized cast iron pipe. The budget was developed focusing specifically on 4-inch diameter cast iron pipe, however the City may also allocate this budget to replace other undersized cast iron pipe within the system. Table 8-6 summarizes the basis of the program budget using the same unit cost assumptions and allowances established in Section 8.1.3. The City’s pipeline water repair and replacement program will be accomplished through the combination of the Street Utility Improvements (D-02) and this program. Ideally, Water Repair and Replacement and Street Utility projects will be constructed on alternating years to maintain consistent levels of capital expenditures. This project ID was previously D-09 in the 2015 WSP. Table 8-6 | Water Repair & Replacements Cost Estimate Length (LF) Existing Size (inch) New Size (inch) Unit Cost Component Cost Construction Cost Project Cost 11,740 4 8 $490/LF $5,752,500 $8,241,000 $11,950,000 8.2.3.4.4 Water Trench Patches Program (D-04) This program provides annual funding for roadway restoration of trench patches from water main leak repairs and water service installation that are beyond the scope of work done by City maintenance staff. This project was not identified in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.4.5 West Hill Springs Transmission Main Replacement (D-05) The 2020 pipeline assessment indicated the existing cast iron transmission main is in poor condition. The main has experienced two breaks in the past. The project will replace approximately 1,250 LF of 10 -inch Page 260 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-17 diameter cast iron pipe with 12-inch diameter ductile iron pipe. The project includes preliminary geotechnical investigations prior to design and construction. This project was not identified in the 2015 WSP. 8.2.3.4.6 Lea Hill 648 Zoning Adjustment (D-06) The system capacity analysis identified deficiencies in the upper portion of the Lea Hill 563 pressure zone where the highest service elevations of the zone are located. This project includes system piping and valving modifications to rezone a portion of the Lea Hill 563 pressure zone to the Lea Hill 648 pressure zone. GIS and site verification, as well as minimal system modeling are required to verify necessary modifications. Table 8-7 | Distribution System Improvements Projects Project Name Project ID Project Timing Estimated Cost 2024 USD Brief Project Description 0 to 20-Year Planning Horizon Annual Distribution System Improvements Program D-01 2025-2044 (Annual) $59,699,000 Pipe improvement projects required to address system capacity deficits. Street Utility Improvements D-02 2025-2044 (Annual) $24,618,000 Water main improvements concurrent with street improvements. Water Repair & Replacements D-03 2025-2044 (Annual) $11,950,000 Pipe improvements to replace aging and undersized pipes. Water Trench Patches Program D-04 2024-2044 (Annual) $3,360,000 Annual program for restoration following water and service leaks. West Hill Springs Transmission Main Replacement D-05 2024, 2026-2027 $1,401,000 Transmission piping replacement. Lea Hill 648 Zoning Adjustment D-06 2027 $104,000 Pressure zone modifications to address fire flow capacity deficit. Subtotal $101,132,000 8.2.3.5 General Utility Projects The general water system projects and their estimated costs are provided in Page 261 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-18 Table 8-8. Project IDs have been revised to reflect the updated prioritization and planned timing of projects presented in this WSP. Previous project IDs from the 2015 WSP as presented above will be discontinued for clarity purposes. 8.2.3.5.1 Water System Plan Updates (G-01, G-02) DOH requires Water System Plans to be updated every ten years. The City has allocated budget to complete Water System Plan Updates in 2034 and 2044. The project ID for both updates was previously G-08 in the 2015 WSP. Page 262 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-19 Table 8-8 | General Water System Projects Project Name Project ID Project Timing Estimated Cost 2024 USD Brief Project Description 0 to 10-Year Planning Horizon Water System Plan Update - 2034 G-01 2033-2034 $750,000 Mandated by Washington Department of Health. 10 to 20-Year Planning Horizon Water System Plan Update - 2044 G-02 2043-2044 $750,000 Mandated by Washington Department of Health. Subtotal $1,500,000 8.3 CIP Summary and Schedule Table 8-9 summarizes the total CIP cost by project categories for the 20-year planning horizon. All costs shown are in 2024 dollars. Distribution system improvements comprise more than 50 percent of the allocated costs for the CIP. Table 8-9 | Total CIP Cost by Project Category from 2024 through 2044 Category Total CIP Cost Summary 2024 – 2044 (2024 USD) Supply $60,416,013 Storage $21,579,621 Pump Stations $9,230,000 Distribution $121,858,681 General $1,750,000 TOTAL $214,834,315 The results of prioritizing the improvements were used to establish an implementation schedule that can be used by the City for preparing its 20-year CIP and 6-year CFP. The implementation schedule for the active projects and planned CIP projects is summarized in Table 8-10. More details are included in Appendix W. The City uses this information to develop rates and SDC charges. The City will schedule the water main projects in the Annual Distribution Improvements Program and Water Repair and Replacements during the annual budget process. This provides the City with the flexibility to coordinate these projects with roadway or other projects within the same area. Page 263 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-20 Table 8-10 | Capital Improvements Program Costs and Phasing CIP ID Name CAP/ Non- CAP Total Estimated Cost 2024 USD 2024 10-Year 20-Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035-38 2039-42 2043-44 Active Projects CP1619 104th Park Development (104th to 102nd Water Main Loop) Non-CAP $350,000 $350,000 CP2301 104th Avenue SE PRV Replacement Non-CAP $390,475 $390,475 CP2123 C St SW Preservation Non-CAP $1,802,075 $901,038 $901,038 CP1603 Coal Creek Springs Transmission Main Replacement Non-CAP $4,450,422 $4,450,422 CP2125 D St SE and 23rd Street SE Storm Improvements Non-CAP $2,285,677 $2,285,677 CP2021 Well 4 Facility Improvements Non-CAP $884,822 $884,822 CP2403 Well 4 Electrical Improvements Non-CAP $1,050,000 $200,000 $850,000 CP2410 112th Pl SE Water Main Replacement Non-CAP $2,100,000 $255,000 $1,845,000 CP1622 Auburn Way South - Hemlock St SE to Poplar St SE Non-CAP $2,398,000 $2,398,000 CP2022 Garden Avenue Realignment Non-CAP $699,797 $699,797 CP2210 M Street NE Widening Non-CAP $357,000 $37,000 $320,000 CP2116 R Street SE Widening Non-CAP $1,762,488 $100,000 $1,662,488 CP2308 R St SE and 21st St SE Roundabout Non-CAP $544,897 $61,897 $483,000 CP2315 R St SE Preservation - 33rd St SE to 37th St SE Non-CAP $301,850 $301,850 CP2319 Lea Hill Road/104th Ave SE Roundabout Non-CAP $850,000 $100,000 $150,000 $600,000 CP2405 Fulmer Treatment Facility VFD Replacements Non-CAP $175,000 $175,000 CP2219 Reservoirs 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation Non-CAP $1,433,871 $1,433,871 CP2404 12th St SE and Auburn Way South Water R&R Non-CAP $636,000 $318,000 $318,000 CP2412 2025 Local Street Preservation Non-CAP $725,000 $65,000 $660,000 2026 Local Street Preservation Non-CAP $1,073,000 $50,000 $150,000 $873,000 CP2329 Coal Creek Springs Flowmeter Replacement Non-CAP $375,017 $375,017 CP2134 Comprehensive Water System Plan Update - 2024 Non-CAP $250,000 $250,000 CP2209 Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation - Phase 1 Non-CAP $75,614 $75,614 CP2413 Reservoir 2 Valves Non-CAP $2,268,750 $68,750 $2,200,000 Algona Well 1 Study – Phase 1 Non-CAP $50,000 $50,000 Valley Service Area Reservoir No. 3 Siting Analysis Non-CAP $50,000 $50,000 Braunwood Pump Station Assessment Non-CAP $40,000 $40,000 Supply S-01 Cascade Water Alliance Water Purchase CAP $5,608,860 $934,810 $934,810 $934,810 $934,810 $934,810 $934,810 S-02 Water Resources Protection Program (Wellhead Protection) Non-CAP $1,287,700 $87,700 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $240,000 $240,000 $120,000 S-03 Rehabilitate & Clean Wells 2 and 6 (3-year Cycle) Non-CAP $1,750,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 S-04 Well Inspection and Redevelopment Program Non-CAP $420,000 $210,000 $210,000 S-05 On-Site Chlorine Generation Systems (OSEC) at Wells 1 and 4 Non-CAP $275,000 $100,000 $175,000 Page 264 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Program Page 8-21 CIP ID Name CAP/ Non- CAP Total Estimated Cost 2024 USD 2024 10-Year 20-Year 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035-38 2039-42 2043-44 S-06 Fulmer CCTF Replace On-Site Chlorine Generation System (OSEC) Non-CAP $500,000 $150,000 $350,000 S-07 Well 5/5A Upgrades CAP $2,715,000 $950,000 $265,000 $1,500,000 S-08 Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation – Phase 2 CAP $5,337,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,837,000 S-09 Coal Creek Springs Chlorination Building Replacement Non-CAP $2,081,000 $520,250 $1,560,750 S-10 Well 7 Treatment Phase 1 CAP $10,097,000 $1,500,000 $2,597,000 $6,000,000 S-11 Well 2 Replacement CAP $1,960,000 $400,000 $1,560,000 S-12 Howard Road CCTF Expansion CAP $1,450,000 $450,000 $1,000,000 S-13 Well 7 Back-Up Power Non-CAP $2,075,000 $414,961 $1,660,039 S-14 Well 7 Treatment Phase 2 CAP $8,054,000 $1,654,000 $3,800,000 $2,600,000 S-15 Wells 3A/3B Treatment CAP $13,945,000 $13,945,000 S-16 Algona Well 1 Study – Phase 2 Non-CAP $250,000 $250,000 Storage R-01 Reservoir Repair & Replacements Non-CAP $1,392,000 $192,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $240,000 $240,000 $120,000 R-02 Reservoir Painting (10-year Cycle) Non-CAP $3,500,000 $250,000 $1,500,000 $1,750,000 R-03 Academy PRV Project CAP $470,000 $470,000 R-04 Reservoir Capital Improvements Non-CAP $470,000 $470,000 R-05 Braunwood Reservoir Improvements Non-CAP $250,000 $250,000 R-06 Valley Service Area Reservoir No. 3 CAP $11,745,000 $1,500,000 $10,245,00 0 Pump Station PS-01 Intertie Pump Station/Lea Hill BPS Improvements Non-CAP $2,325,000 $75,000 $250,000 $2,000,000 PS-02 Lea Hill Pump Station Replacement Non-CAP $6,365,000 $765,000 $3,000,000 $2,600,000 PS-03 Braunwood Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades Non-CAP $250,000 $70,000 $180,000 PS-04 Game Farm Park Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades Non-CAP $250,000 $70,000 $180,000 Distribution D-01 Annual Distribution System Improvements Program CAP $59,699,000 $400,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $3,572,636 $14,290,546 $14,290,546 $7,145,273 D-02 Street Utility Improvements Non-CAP $24,618,000 $601,000 $617,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $5,200,000 $5,200,000 $2,600,000 D-03 Water Repair & Replacements Non-CAP $11,950,000 $150,000 $450,000 $600,000 $600,000 $600,000 $600,000 $600,000 $600,000 $600,000 $650,000 $2,600,000 $2,600,000 $1,300,000 D-04 Water Trench Patches Program Non-CAP $3,360,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $160,000 $640,000 $640,000 $320,000 D-05 West Hill Springs Transmission Main Replacement Non-CAP $1,401,000 $50,000 $200,000 $1,151,000 D-06 Lea Hill 648 Zoning Adjustment CAP $104,000 $104,000 General G-01 Comprehensive Water System Plan Update - 2034 Non-CAP $750,000 $375,000 $375,000 G-01 Comprehensive Water System Plan Update - 2044 Non-CAP $750,000 $750,000 Total Project Cost (March 2024 USD) $214,834,315 $15,368,740 $13,020,848 $12,897,298 $10,674,810 $11,364,810 $10,214,810 $8,937,250 $10,647,750 $11,544,961 $9,369,039 $10,367,636 $42,115,546 $25,460,546 $22,850,273 Cost in Future USD with Inflation/Escalation $15,505,949 $13,438,366 $15,356,813 $13,346,021 $14,919,117 $14,079,931 $12,934,911 $16,181,050 $18,421,739 $15,697,211 $18,238,810 $84,303,230 $61,753,697 $64,192,441 Page 265 of 374 22-3425 •May 2025 2024 Water System Plan Update • City of Auburn Capital Improvements Plan Page 8-22 Page 266 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-1 CHAPTER 9 Financial Program 9.1 Introduction This chapter was prepared by FCS GROUP to provide a financial program that allows the City of Auburn (City) water utility to remain financially viable during the planning period. This financial viability analysis considers the historical financial condition, current and identified future financial and policy obligations, operation and maintenance (O&M) needs, and the financial impacts of the capital projects identified in this Water System Plan (WSP). Furthermore, this chapter provides a review of the water utility’s current rate structure with respect to rate adequacy and customer affordability. 9.2 Past Financial Performance This section includes a historical summary of financial performance as reported by the City, including fund resources and uses arising from cash transactions. 9.2.1 Comparative Financial Statements The City legally owns and operates a water utility. Table 9-1 shows a summary of water fund resources and uses arising from cash transactions for the previous 6 years (2017 through 2022). 2023 financial statements were not available at the time the chapter was developed. Table 9-2 shows a summary of assets and liabilities, with the difference between the two reported as “net position .” Increases and decreases in net position are useful indicators of the financial position of the City’s utility. Noteworthy findings and trends for the historical performance and condition of the City’s water utility are then discussed. 9.2.1.1 Findings and Trends ➢ The City’s water charges for services increased from $14.8M in 2017 to $16.5M in 2022. The average annual increase was approximately 2.2 percent per year, with a total increase of 11.4 percent from 2017 to 2022. Charges for services increase each year, except for 2019 and 2020 where revenues fell by 1.5 percent and 1.4 percent respectively. Operating Expenditures increased by $1.7M across the six years with an average annual increase of 2.8 percent. Similar to observations made in revenues, expenditures dropped in 2020 but to a greater extent, decreasing by 2.0 percent. Despite total operating expenses slightly outpacing growth in operating revenues, operating income has been positive in all years observed. 2019 and 2020 had slightly less operating income than other years, observed at $2.7M, with the remainder of the years averaging $3.1M. ➢ The O&M coverage ratio (total operating revenues divided by total operating expenses) was 126.3 percent in 2017. With expenses slightly outpacing revenues this metric decreased and ended 2022 at 122.8 percent. A ratio of 100.0 percent or greater shows that operating revenue will successfully cover operating expenses, and the utility has remained above this ratio for all years observed. Page 267 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-2 Table 9-1 | Summary of Historical Fund Resources and Uses Arising From Cash Transactions 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 OPERATING REVENUES Charges for Service 14,781,310$ 15,293,485$ 15,057,517$ 14,846,679$ 15,879,799$ 16,459,868$ Other Operating Revenue - 600 835 835 - - Total Operating Revenues 14,781,310$ 15,294,085$ 15,058,352$ 14,847,514$ 15,879,799$ 16,459,868$ OPERATING EXPENSES Operations and Maintenance 3,753,573$ 3,692,419$ 3,789,093$ 3,727,553$ 3,912,937$ 3,840,391$ Administration 4,672,569 4,702,259 4,727,971 4,615,503 5,221,782 6,028,393 Depreciation and Amortization 3,269,581 3,407,933 3,848,016 3,774,956 3,826,387 3,533,926 Other Operating Expenses 8,964 - - - - - Total Operating Expenses 11,704,687$ 11,802,611$ 12,365,080$ 12,118,012$ 12,961,106$ 13,402,710$ Operating Income (Loss)3,076,623$ 3,491,474$ 2,693,272$ 2,729,502$ 2,918,693$ 3,057,158$ NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES) Interest Revenue 104,564$ 178,271$ 261,654$ 49,808$ 22,790$ 278,430$ Other Non-Operating Revenue 269,264 324,228 589,809 148,433 26,542 86,333 Gain (Loss) on Sale of Capital Assets - - - - - - Interest Expense (703,321) (697,363) (658,808) (910,452) (663,857) (601,400) Other Non-Operating Expense - - - (225,230) - (90,443) Total Non-Operating Revenues (Expenses)(329,493)$ (194,864)$ 192,655$ (937,441)$ (614,525)$ (327,080)$ Income (Loss) Before Contributions and Transfers 2,747,130$ 3,296,610$ 2,885,927$ 1,792,061$ 2,304,168$ 2,730,078$ Capital Contributions 1,176,756$ 1,271,234$ 3,246,853$ 2,170,407$ 5,382,110$ 1,772,439$ Transfers In 2,500,000 2,686,332 39,258 6,536,029 - - Transfers Out (2,693,946) (2,800,400) (147,002) (6,643,340) (119,472) (96,339) Change in Net Position 3,729,940$ 4,453,776$ 6,025,036$ 3,855,157$ 7,566,806$ 4,406,178$ Net Position, January 1 75,751,705 79,481,645 83,935,421 89,960,457 93,815,614 101,382,420 Net Position, December 31 79,481,645$ 83,935,421$ 89,960,457$ 93,815,614$ 101,382,420$ 105,788,598$ O&M Coverage Ratio 126.3%129.6%121.8%122.5%122.5%122.8% Net Operating Income as a % of Operating Revenue 20.8%22.8%17.9%18.4%18.4%18.6% Debt Service Coverage Ratio 3.83 4.16 3.93 3.63 3.17 2.85 Page 268 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-3 Table 9-2 | Summary of Historical Comparative Statements of Net Position 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 CURRENT ASSETS Cash and Cash Equivalents 5,765,412$ 7,294,288$ 9,568,609$ 11,417,193$ 14,719,905$ 13,826,776$ Investments - - - - - - Restricted Cash: Bond Payments 1,690,316 1,687,994 1,672,123 2,334,270 2,246,000 2,183,144 Customer Deposits 43,892 31,541 40,062 64,792 91,672 104,070 Other (Reserve for Bonds and Rate Stabilization)1,630,313 1,630,314 1,627,520 11,586,722 5,987,879 2,448,053 Customer Accounts 1,363,945 1,837,533 1,912,797 2,090,429 2,007,050 2,203,858 Other Receivables - - - - - - Due From Other Governmental Units 17,968 14,338 - - 10,000 - Inventories 135,450 183,252 189,071 233,015 242,192 313,273 Total Current Assets 10,647,296$ 12,679,260$ 15,010,182$ 27,726,421$ 25,304,698$ 21,079,174$ NONCURRENT ASSETS Net Pension Asset -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,266,854$ 920,143$ Capital Assets Not Being Depreciated: Land 897,971 897,971 897,971 1,283,524 1,283,524 1,283,524 Intangible - Water Rights 5,449,186 5,701,772 5,954,358 6,889,163 7,823,968 8,758,773 Construction In Progress 8,374,328 620,533 3,488,784 4,443,772 6,918,228 6,283,865 Capital Assets: Buildings and Equipment 2,509,599 2,509,599 2,509,599 2,509,599 2,509,599 2,509,599 Improvements Other Than Buildings 131,463,582 142,480,531 145,175,810 151,038,789 159,207,726 167,888,532 Less Accumulated Depreciation (54,538,817) (57,946,751) (61,794,767) (65,569,723) (69,396,109) (72,930,035) Total Noncurrent Assets Net of Accumulated Depreciation 94,155,849$ 94,263,655$ 96,231,755$ 100,595,124$ 110,613,790$ 114,714,401$ TOTAL ASSETS 104,803,145$ 106,942,915$ 111,241,937$ 128,321,545$ 135,918,488$ 135,793,575$ DEFFERED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Deferred Outflow from Bond Refunding -$ -$ -$ 78,146$ 78,146$ 78,146$ Deferred Outflow related to Pensions 312,206 274,590 296,941 334,033 309,166 866,866 Total Deferred Outflows of Resources 312,206 274,590 296,941 412,179 387,312 945,012$ CURRENT LIABILITIES Current Payables 1,354,856$ 831,153$ 971,724$ 1,015,566$ 1,627,369$ 700,718$ Claims Payable - - - - - - Loans Payable - Current 634,328 652,107 467,646 478,000 250,914 224,800 Employee Leave Benefits - Current 125,285 122,115 128,188 122,116 172,872 172,114 Leases Payable - Current - - - - - - Revenue Bonds Payable - Current 871,737 902,092 935,347 1,215,345 1,268,753 1,327,964 Payable From Restricted Assets: Accrued Interest 828,486 794,779 754,158 1,126,592 1,065,376 998,923 Deposits 43,892 31,541 40,062 64,792 91,672 104,070 Other Liabilities Payable 600 - - - - - Total Current Liabilities 3,859,184$ 3,333,787$ 3,297,125$ 4,022,411$ 4,476,956$ 3,528,589$ NONCURRENT LIABILITIES Employee Leave Benefits 37,836$ 44,177$ 34,069$ 44,176$ 74,823$ 66,026$ Loans Payable 3,689,390 3,123,514 2,697,219 2,359,332 2,108,418 1,883,620 Leases Payable - - - - - - Revenue Bonds Payable 14,899,559 13,952,693 12,972,571 26,189,156 24,596,375 22,944,382 Net Pension Liability 2,775,633 2,245,967 1,937,559 1,917,936 1,216,710 1,478,887 Total Non Current Liabilities 21,402,418$ 19,366,351$ 17,641,418$ 30,510,600$ 27,996,326$ 26,372,915$ TOTAL LIABILITIES 25,261,602$ 22,700,138$ 20,938,543$ 34,533,011$ 32,473,282$ 29,901,504$ DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Deferred Inflow Related to Leases -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Deferred Inflow Related to Pensions 372,104 581,946 639,878 385,099 2,450,098 1,048,485 Total Deferred Inflows of Resources 372,104$ 581,946$ 639,878$ 385,099$ 2,450,098$ 1,048,485$ NET POSITION Net Investment in Capital Assets 75,751,151$ 77,321,243$ 80,831,095$ 72,687,561$ 86,632,404$ 87,779,897$ Restricted For: Debt Service 801,827 835,535 873,362 10,460,130 658,575 3,265,869 Rate Stabilization - - - - - - Pension Asset - - - - - 920,143 Unrestricted 2,928,667 5,778,643 8,256,000 10,667,923 14,091,441 13,822,689 TOTAL NET POSITION 79,481,645$ 83,935,421$ 89,960,457$ 93,815,614$ 101,382,420$ 105,788,598$ Current Ratio 2.8 3.8 4.6 6.9 5.7 6.0 Debt to Net Position Ratio 0.26 0.23 0.20 0.33 0.29 0.26 Debt to Noncurrent Capital Assets Ratio 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.31 0.26 0.24 Page 269 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-4 ➢ Net operating income as a percentage of operating revenue was 20.8 percent in 2017, decreasing to a low of 17.9 percent in 2019, before ending 2022 at 18.6 percent. Similar to the O&M coverage ratio, these trends show how successfully operating revenue actually covered operating expenses, with higher positive numbers being the best and negative numbers showing a need for improvement. In addition, these trends demonstrate the ability of the utility to invest in capital, whether through direct cash transfers or the issuance and servicing of debt. ➢ The debt service coverage ratio measures the amount of cash flow available to meet principal and interest payments. Typically, revenue bond debt service coverage requires a minimum factor of 1.25 during the life of the loans. This ratio is calculated by di viding cash or net operating income (operating revenues less operating expenses) by annual revenue bond debt service. The debt service coverage ratio for all outstanding revenue bond debt ended 2017 at 3.83, decreasing to 2.85 by 2022, as the City took on more debt liabilities. The fact that this ratio has sustained levels higher than the minimum target of 1.25 indicates a stable capacity for new debt and will likely result in favorable terms when entering the bond market. 9.2.1.2 Findings and Trends ➢ The current ratio is calculated by dividing unrestricted current assets by current liabilities and measures an entity’s ability to pay short-term obligations. This ratio ranges from a low of 2.8 in 2017 to a high of 6.9 in 2020, ending at 6.0 in 2022. Anything above 2.0 for this liquidity ratio is good. ➢ The Debt to Net Position Ratio compares total debt to total net position, which is the difference between total assets and liabilities. This ratio ranged from a high of 0.33 or 33 percent in 2020 to a low of 0.20 or 20 percent in 2019. For utilities, a ratio of 40 to 60 percent helps to moderate rate impacts by spreading costs over a longer period of time. Based on these results, the City may consider utilizing debt service for future capital investments, especially if it benefits syste m expansion. ➢ The Debt to Noncurrent Capital Asset Ratio compares total debt to noncurrent capital assets, which are also known as property, plant and equipment. This ratio begins at 0.22 or 22 percent debt to 78 percent noncurrent assets in 2017. Noncurrent capital assets increase by $20.6 million throughout the six-year history while debt increased by $6.2 million, and the ratio increases to 24 percent by 2022. Similar to the debt to net position ratio, these results indicate the utility has ample borrowing capacity and may consider utilizing debt service for future capital investments, especially if it benefits system expansion. A ratio of 40 percent debt to 60 percent eq uity or below is a general industry target. 9.3 Financial Plan The water utility is responsible for generating sufficient revenue to meet all of its costs. The primary source of funding is derived from ongoing monthly service charges, with additional revenue coming from late penalties and interest earnings. The City controls the level of user charges and, with City Council approval, can adjust user charges as needed to meet financial objectives. Page 270 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-5 The financial plan can only confirm financial feasibility if it considers the total system costs of providing water services, both operating and capital. To meet these objectives, the following elements have been completed. 1. Capital Funding Plan. Identifies the total capital improvement plan (CIP) obligations of the planning period. The plan defines a strategy for funding the CIP, including an analysis of available resources from rate revenues, existing reserves, connection charge revenues, debt financing, and any special resources that may be readily available (e.g., grants, developer contributions, etc.). The capital funding plan impacts the financial plan through the use of debt financing (resulting in annual debt service) and the assumed rate revenue made available for capital funding. 2. Financial Forecast. Identifies future annual non-capital costs associated with the operation, maintenance, and administration of the water system. Included in the financial plan is a reserve analysis that forecasts cash flow and fund balance activity, along with testing for satisfaction of actual or recommended minimum fund balance policies. The financial plan ultimately evaluates the sufficiency of utility revenues in meeting all obligations, including cash uses such as operating expenses, debt service, capital outlays, and reserve contributions, as well as any coverage requirements associated with long-term debt. The plan also identifies the future adjustments required to fully fund all utility obligations in the planning period. 9.3.1 Capital Funding Plan To properly evaluate future capital funding needs, capital costs were escalated by 3.00 percent annually to the year of planned spending. The CIP developed for this WSP identifies $143.3M in escalated project costs over the 11-year planning horizon from 2024-2034. The 20-year period, through 2043, includes $262.6M in total escalated project costs. A summary of the 11-year and 20-year CIPs are shown in Table 9-3. As shown, each year has varied capital cost obligations depending on construction schedules and infrastructure planning needs. Table 9-3 | 11-Year and 20-Year CIPs 2024 15,368,740$ 15,368,740$ 2025 13,020,848 13,411,473 2026 12,897,298 13,682,743 2027 10,674,810 11,664,653 2028 11,364,810 12,791,194 2029 10,214,810 11,841,764 2030 8,937,250 10,671,544 2031 10,647,750 13,095,389 2032 11,544,961 14,624,811 2033 9,369,039 12,224,471 2034 10,367,636 13,933,236 11-Year Total 124,407,951$ 143,310,019$ 2035 - 2043 77,003,728 119,267,070 20-Year Total 201,411,679$ 262,577,089$ Year Unescalated $Escalated $ Page 271 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-6 Table 9-4 provides more detail for the 11-year CIP. Table 9-4 | 11-Year CIP (Escalated $) 9.4 Available Funding Assistance and Financing Resources 9.4.1 City Resources Resources appropriate for funding capital needs include accumulated cash in the capital fund, rate revenues designated for capital spending purposes, developer contributions, and capital-related charges such as system development charges. The first two resources will be discussed in the Fiscal Policies section of the Financial Forecast. Capital-related charges are discussed below. Project 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Active Projects (In Design or Construction) 104th Park Development (104th to 102nd Water Main Loop)350,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 104th Avenue SE PRV Replacement 390,475 C St SW Preservation 901,038 928,069 Coal Creek Springs Transmission Main Replacement 4,450,422 D St SE and 23rd Street SE Storm Improvements 2,285,677 Well 4 Facility Improvements 884,822 Well 4 Electrical Improvements 200,000 875,500 112th Pl SE Water Main Replacement 255,000 1,900,350 Auburn Way South - Hemlock St SE to Poplar St SE 2,469,940 Garden Avenue Realignment 699,797 M Street NE Widening 37,000 339,488 R Street SE Widening 103,000 1,763,734 R St SE and 21st St SE Roundabout 61,897 497,490 R St SE Preservation - 33rd St SE to 37th St SE 301,850 Lea Hill Road/104th Ave SE Roundabout 100,000 159,135 655,636 Fulmer Treatment Facility VFD Replacements 175,000 Reservoirs 4 and 8 Seismic Rehabilitation 1,433,871 12th St SE and Auburn Way South Water R&R 318,000 327,540 2025 Local Street Preservation 65,000 679,800 2026 Local Street Preservation 50,000 154,500 926,166 Coal Creek Springs Flowmeter Replacement 375,017 Comprehensive Water System Plan Update - 2024 250,000 Reservoir 2 Valves 68,750 2,266,000 Supply Cascade Water Alliance Water Purchase 934,810 962,854 991,740 1,021,492 1,052,137 1,083,701 Water Resources Protection Program 87,700 61,800 63,654 65,564 67,531 69,556 71,643 73,792 76,006 78,286 80,635 Rehabilitate & Clean Wells 2 and 6 (3-year Cycle)257,500 281,377 307,468 335,979 Well Inspection and Redevelopment Program 222,789 229,473 Coal Creek Springs Rehabilitation 75,614 546,364 1,125,509 2,318,548 2,193,474 Coal Creek Springs Chlorination Building Replacement 621,206 1,919,526 Howard Road CCTF Expansion 570,047 1,304,773 On-Site Chlorine Generation Systems (OSEC) at Wells 1 and 4 106,090 191,227 Fulmer CCTF Replace On-Site Chlorine Generation System (OSEC)159,135 382,454 Well 5/5A Upgrades 1,007,855 289,573 1,688,263 Well 7 Treatment Phase 1 1,791,078 3,193,982 7,600,620 Well 7 Back-Up Power 525,660 2,165,974 Well 7 Treatment Phase 2 2,158,095 5,106,882 Well 2 Replacement 477,621 1,918,603 Algona Well 1 Study 50,000 Storage Reservoir Repair and Replacements 192,000 61,800 63,654 65,564 67,531 69,556 71,643 73,792 76,006 78,286 80,635 Reservoir Painting (10-year Cycle)257,500 1,591,350 Academy PRV Project 513,582 Reservoir Capital Improvements 513,582 Valley Service Area Reservoir No. 3 50,000 Pump Stations Intertie Booster Pump Station Improvements 75,000 257,500 2,121,800 Lea Hill Pump Station Replacement 835,936 3,376,526 3,014,112 Braunwood Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades 40,000 94,074 Game Farm Park Pump Station Mechanical Upgrades 94,074 Distribution System Annual Distribution System Improvements Program 412,000 2,652,250 2,731,818 2,813,772 2,898,185 2,985,131 3,074,685 3,166,925 3,261,933 4,801,325 Street Utility Improvements 619,030 654,575 1,420,545 1,463,161 1,507,056 1,552,268 1,598,836 1,646,801 1,696,205 1,747,091 Water Repair & Replacements 154,500 477,405 655,636 675,305 695,564 716,431 737,924 760,062 782,864 873,546 Water Trench Patches Program 160,000 164,800 169,744 174,836 180,081 185,484 191,048 196,780 202,683 208,764 215,027 West Hill Springs Transmission Main Replacement 50,000 212,180 1,257,729 Lea Hill 648 Zoning Adjustment 113,644 General Comprehensive Water System Plan Update - 2034 489,290 503,969 $15,368,740 $13,411,473 $13,682,743 $11,664,653 $12,791,194 $11,841,764 $10,671,544 $13,095,389 $14,624,811 $12,224,471 $13,933,236 Page 272 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-7 9.4.1.1 System Development Charges A connection charge such as the City’s system development charge (SDC) refers to a one-time charge imposed on new customers as a condition of connecting to the water system. The purpose of the SDC is two-fold: 1) to promote equity between new and existing customers; and 2) to provide a source of revenue to fund capital projects necessary for meeting growth. This revenue can only be used to fund utility capital projects or to pay debt service incurred to finance those projects. In the absence of a connection charge, growth-related capital costs would be borne in large part by existing customers. In 2024, the City charged all new customers an SDC of $9,553 per meter capacity equivalent (MCE). MCEs are defined by the American Water Works Association and represent the maximum safe operating flow capacity in gallons per minute, relative to the base meter size. 9.4.1.2 Local Facilities Charges While a connection charge is the manner in which new customers pay their share of system investment costs, local facilities charge funding is used to pay the costs of local facilities that connect each property to the system’s infrastructure. Local facilities funding is often overlooked in rate forecasting because it is funded upfront by either connecting customers and developers, or through an assessment to properties, but never from rates. A number of mechanisms can be considered toward funding local facilities. One of the following scenarios typically occurs: (a) the utility charges a connection fee based on the cost of the local facilities (under the same authority as the facilities assessment fee); (b) a developer funds an extension of the system to its development and turns those facilities over to the utility (contributed capital); or (c) a local assessment is set up called a Utility Local Improvement District (ULID/LID) or a Local Utili ty District (LUD), which collects tax revenue from benefited properties. A local facilities charge (LFC) is a variation of the connection charge. It is a city-imposed charge to recover the cost related to service extension to local properties. Often called a front-footage charge and imposed on the basis of footage of the main “fronting” a particular property, it is usually implemented as a reimbursement mechanism to a city for the cost of a local facility that directly serves a property. It is a form of a connection charge and thus can accumulate up to 10 years of interest. It typically applies in instances when no developer-installed facilities are needed through developer extension due to the prior existence of available mains already serving the developing property. The developer extension is a requirement that a developer install on -site and sometimes off-site improvements as a condition of extending service. These are in addition to the connection charge required and must be built to City standards. Part of the agreement between the City and the developer planning to extend service might include a latecomer agreement (also called payback agreements), resulting in a latecomer charge to new connections for the developer extension. Latecomer charges are a variation of developer extensions, whereby new customers connecting to a developer-installed improvement make a payment to the City based on their share of the developer’s cost. The City passes this charge on to the developer who in stalled the facilities. As part of the developer extension process, this defines the allocation of costs and records latecomer obligations on the title of affected properties. No interest is allowed, and the reimbursement agreement cannot exceed 20 years in duration. ULID/LID is another mechanism for funding infrastructure that assesses benefited properties based on the special benefit received by the construction of specific facilities. Most often used for local facilities, some Page 273 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-8 ULIDs also recover related general facilities costs. Substantial legal and procedural requirements can make this a relatively expensive process, and there are mechanisms by which a ULID can be rejected. 9.4.2 Outside Resources This section outlines various grant, loan, and bond opportunities available to the City through federal and state agencies to fund the CIP identified in the WSP. 9.4.2.1 Grants and Low-Cost Loans Historically, federal and state grant programs were available to local utilities for capital funding assistance. However, these assistance programs have been mostly eliminated, substantially reduced in scope and amount, or replaced by loan programs. Remaining grant programs are generally lightly funded and heavily subscribed. Nonetheless, the benefit of low-interest loans makes the effort of applying worthwhile. The State of Washington’s Department of Commerce maintains a document currently entitled “Funding Programs for Drinking Water and Wastewater Projects; Updated 3 -5-2024”, which contains details on government programs, eligibility requirements, and contact information, should the City wish to inquire about program offerings and eligibility requirements. 9.4.2.2 Bond Financing General Obligation Bonds – General obligation (G.O.) bonds are bonds secured by the full faith and credit of the issuing agency, committing all available tax and revenue resources to debt repayment. With this high level of commitment, G.O. bonds have relatively low interest rates and few financial restrictions. However, the authority to issue G.O. bonds is restricted in terms of the amount and use of the funds, as defined by the Washington constitution and statute. Specifically, the amount of debt that can be issued is linked to assessed valuation. Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 39.36.020 states: (2)(a)(ii) Counties, cities, and towns are limited to an indebtedness amount not exceeding one and one half percent of the value of the taxable property in such counties, cities, or towns without the assent of three-fifths of the voters therein voting at an election held for that purpose. (b) In cases requiring such assent counties, cities, towns, and public hospital districts are limited to a total indebtedness of two and one-half percent of the value of the taxable property therein. While bonding capacity can limit the availability of G.O. bonds for utility purposes, these can sometimes play a valuable role in project financing. A utility rate savings may be realized through two avenues: the lower interest rate and related bond costs, and the extension of repayment obligation to all tax-paying properties (not just developed properties) through the authorization of an ad valorem property tax levy. Revenue Bonds – Revenue bonds are commonly used to fund utility capital improvements. The debt is secured by the revenues of the issuing utility. With this limited commitment, revenue bonds typically bear higher interest rates than G.O. bonds and require security conditions related to the maintenance of dedicated reserves (a bond reserve) and financial performance (added bond debt service coverage). The City agrees to satisfy these requirements by resolution as a condition of bond sale. Page 274 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-9 Revenue bonds can be issued in Washington without a public vote. There is no bonding limit, except perhaps the practical limit of the utility’s ability to generate sufficient revenue to repay the debt and provide coverage. In some cases, poor credit might make issuing revenue bonds problematic. 9.4.3 Capital Financing Strategy An ideal capital financing strategy would include the use of grants and low-cost loans when debt issuance is required. However, these resources are very limited and competitive in nature and do not provide a reliable source of funding for planning purposes. It is recommended that the City pursue these funding avenues but assume revenue bond financing to meet the needs which can’t be met by available cash resources. The capital financing strategy developed to fund the CIP identified in this WSP assumes the following funding resources: ➢ Accumulated cash reserves, ➢ Transfers of excess cash (over minimum balance targets) from the Operating Fund, ➢ System development charge revenue, ➢ Interest earned on Capital Fund balances, ➢ Grant proceeds, and ➢ Revenue bond financing. The cash resources described above are anticipated to fund 58.1 percent of the 11-year CIP and 56.4 percent of the 20-year CIP. The remaining funding is assumed to be from new debt obligations of $69.1M in the next 11-year planning period and an additional $45.3M between 2034-2043. Table 9-5 presents the 11-year and 20-year capital financing strategy. Table 9-5 | 11-Year and 20-Year Capital Financing Strategy 9.5 Financial Forecast The financial forecast, or revenue requirement analysis, forecasts the amount of annual revenue that needs to be generated by user rates. The analysis incorporates operating revenues, O&M expenses, debt service payments, rate-funded capital needs, and any other identified revenues or expenses related to operations. The objective of the financial forecast is to evaluate the sufficiency of the current level of rates. In addition 2024 15,368,740$ 325,000$ 2,717,531$ 12,326,209$ 15,368,740$ 2025 13,411,473 452,813 12,958,660 - 13,411,473 2026 13,682,743 468,497 3,541,340 9,672,907 13,682,743 2027 11,664,653 484,723 11,179,930 - 11,664,653 2028 12,791,194 501,511 6,320,070 5,969,613 12,791,194 2029 11,841,764 518,881 10,400,000 922,883 11,841,764 2030 10,671,544 536,853 - 10,134,691 10,671,544 2031 13,095,389 555,446 12,539,943 - 13,095,389 2032 14,624,811 574,684 2,260,057 11,790,070 14,624,811 2033 12,224,471 594,589 9,900,000 1,729,882 12,224,471 2034 13,933,236 615,182 13,318,054 13,933,236 Subtotal 143,310,019$ 5,628,179$ 2,717,531$ 69,100,000$ 65,864,309$ 143,310,019$ 2035 - 2043 119,267,070 6,589,599 45,300,000 67,377,472 119,267,070 Total 262,577,089$ 12,217,778$ 2,717,531$ 114,400,000$ 133,241,780$ 262,577,089$ Year Capital Expenditures Escalated System Development Charge Revenue Cash / Reserve Funding Total Financial ResourcesGrant Funding Revenue Bond Proceeds Page 275 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-10 to annual operating costs, the revenue needs also include debt covenant requirements and specific fiscal policies and financial goals of the City. For this analysis, two revenue sufficiency tests have been developed to reflect the financial goals and constraints of the City: cash needs must be met; and debt coverage requirements must be realized. In order to operate successfully with respect to these goals, both tests of revenue sufficiency must be met. Cash Test – The cash flow test identifies all known cash requirements for the City in each year of the planning period. Typically, these include O&M expenses, debt service payments, rate -funded system reinvestment funding or directly funded capital outlays, and any additions to specified reserve balances. The total annual cash needs of the City are then compared to projected cash revenues using the current rate structure. Any projected revenue shortfalls are identified, and the rate increases necessary to m ake up the shortfalls are established. Coverage Test – The coverage test is based on a commitment made by the City when issuing revenue bonds and some other forms of long-term debt. For the purposes of this analysis, revenue bond debt is assumed for any needed debt issuance. As a security condition of issuance, the City would be required per covenant to agree that the revenue bond debt would have a higher priority for payment (a senior lien) compared to most other expenditures; the only outlays with a higher lien are O&M expenses. Debt service coverage is expressed as a multiplier of the annual revenue bond debt service payment. For example, a 1.00 coverage factor would imply that no additional cushion is required. A 1.25 coverage factor means revenue must be sufficient to pay O&M expenses, annual revenue bond debt service payments, and an additional 25.0 percent of annual revenue bond debt service payments. The excess cash flow derived from the added coverage, if any, can be used for any purpose, including funding capital projects. Targeting a hi gher coverage factor can help the City achieve a better credit rating and provide lower interest rates for future debt issues. 9.5.1 Current Financial Structure The City maintains a fund structure and implements financial policies that target management of a financially viable and fiscally responsible water system. 9.5.1.1 Fiscal Policies A summary of the key financial policies employed by the City, as well as those recommended and incorporated in the financial program, are discussed below. Operating Reserve – Operating reserves are designed to provide a liquidity cushion to ensure that adequate cash working capital will be maintained to deal with significant cash balance fluctuations, such as seasonal fluctuations in billings and receipts, unanticipated cash expenses, or lower than expected revenue collections. Like other types of reserves, operating reserves also serve another purpose: they help smooth rate increases over time. Target funding levels for an operating reserve are generally expressed as a certain number of days of O&M expenses, with the minimum requirement varying with the expected revenue volatility. Industry practice for utility operating reserves ranges from 30 days (8.0 percent) to 120 days (33.0 percent) of O&M expenses, with the lower end more appropriate for utilities with stable revenue streams and the higher end more appropriate for utilities with significant seasonal or consumption-based fluctuations. The City’s current goal is to maintain a minimum balance in the Operating Fund equal to 90 days of O&M expenses for working capital. Page 276 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-11 Capital Reserve – A capital contingency reserve is an amount of cash set aside in case of an emergency should a piece of equipment or a portion of the utility’s infrastructure fail unexpectedly. The reserve also could be used for other unanticipated capital needs, including capital project cost overruns. Industry practices range from maintaining a balance equal to 1.0 to 2.0 percent of fixed assets, an amount equal to a 5-year rolling average of CIP costs, or an amount determined sufficient to fund equipment failure (other than catastrophic failure). The final target level should balance industry practices with the risk level of the City. This financial plan targets a minimum balance in the water utility capital fund equal to 1.0 percent of fixed assets. System Reinvestment – System reinvestment funding promotes system integrity through ongoing repair and replacement of system infrastructure. Ideally, a detailed asset management plan would guide the level of rate funded system reinvestment, however, in absence of this level of effort, annual depreciation expense is commonly used as a measure of the decline in asset value associated with routine use of the system. Particularly for utilities that do not already have an explicit system reinvestment policy in p lace, implementing a funding level based on full depreciation expense could significantly impact rates. An alternative benchmark is annual depreciation expense net of debt principal payments on outstanding debt. This approach recognizes that customers are still paying for certain assets through the debt component of their rate and intends to avoid simultaneously charging customers for an asset and its future replacement. The specific benchmark used to set system reinvestment funding targets is a matter of p olicy that must balance various objectives, including managing rate impacts, keeping long-term costs down, and promoting “generational equity” (i.e., not excessively burdening current customers with paying for facilities that will serve a larger group of customers in the future). The City is currently phasing in system reinvestment funding, aiming to reach 100 percent of annual depreciation levels by 2030. With this phase-in strategy in place, the City is forecast to fund an average of $4.1 million in capital costs annually through dedicated rate revenues within the 11-year forecast period. Debt Management – It is prudent to consider policies related to debt management as part of a broader utility financial policy structure. Debt management policies should be evaluated and formalized, including the level of acceptable outstanding debt, debt repayment, bond coverage, and total debt coverage targets. The City has three outstanding water revenue bonds, a Public Works Trust fund loan, and two other low interest loans. This forecast meets or exceeds the required revenue bond debt service coverage of 1.25. 9.5.1.2 Financial Forecast The financial forecast is primarily based upon the City’s budget through 2024 and takes into consideration other key factors and assumptions needed to develop a complete portrait of the City’s annual water utility financial obligations. The following is a list of the key revenue and expense factors and assumptions used to develop the financial forecast. ➢ Growth – Rate revenue is escalated utilizing a 0.45 percent growth rate developed based on actual historical trends at the City. ➢ Revenue – The City has two general revenue sources: 1) water service charges (rate revenue); and 2) miscellaneous (non-rate) revenue. In the event of a forecasted annual shortfall, rate revenue can be increased to meet the annual revenue requirement. For the purpose of this financial forecast, rate revenues are forecasted to increase with customer growth. Non-rate revenues are Page 277 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-12 held constant throughout the forecast period, with the exception of interest earnings which are calculated based on projected balances and assumed investment rates. ➢ System Development Charge Revenue – the existing system development charges are applied to the projected new connections to forecast revenue. Connection charges are forecast to generate an average of $512,000 annually from 2024-2034. This equates to an average of 46 new MCEs per year. Connection charge revenue is directed towards annual capital needs. ➢ Expenses – O&M expense projections are based on the City’s budget through 2024 with general cost inflation increases of 3.0 percent, labor cost inflation of 5.0 percent for 2025 and 2026, decreasing to 3.0 percent thereafter and benefit cost inflation increases of 12 .50 percent for 2025 and 2026, decreasing to 5.5 percent per year thereafter. Budget figures were used for taxes in 2024. Future taxes are calculated based on forecasted revenues and prevailing tax rates. o Facilities GO Bond - In order to construct a new facility for Maintenance and Operations for the City, the water utility will fund part of a General Obligation Bond totaling approximately $39.1 million. Beginning in 2025, the water utility’s proportionate share of the bond is forecasted at $333,000 annually for the remainder of the twenty-year forecast. ➢ Existing Debt – The water utility has six (6) outstanding debt issues: three (3) revenue bonds, one (1) Public Works Trust Fund (PWTF) loan and two (2) Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) loans. Total annual existing debt service obligations begin 2024 at $2.7 million, decreasing to $1.1 million by 2034 as four (4) of the six (6) loans are fully repaid. ➢ Future Debt – The capital financial strategy developed for this WSP forecasts the need for $69.1M in new debt proceeds in five (5) separate instances throughout the eleven-year forecast. The analysis performed assumes all new debt is through revenue bond financing. Annual new debt service obligations are forecasted to begin in 2025 at $1.5 million increasing to $6.1 million by 2034. ➢ Transfers to Capital - Operating fund balance above the minimum requirement is assumed to be available to fund capital projects and projected to be transferred to the Capital Fund each year, if needed. In total, the utility is forecast to fund $17.9 million in capital projects from excess operating fund cash within the 11-year forecast period. Although the financial plan is completed through 2043, the rate strategy focuses on the shorter-term planning period of 2024 through 2034. It is recommended that the City revisit the proposed rates every 3 to 4 years to ensure that the rate projections developed remain adequate. Any significant changes should be incorporated into the financial plan and future rates should be adjusted as needed. Table 9-6, following, summarizes the annual revenue requirements based on the forecast of revenues, expenditures, fund balances, and fiscal policies. Page 278 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-13 Table 9-6 | 11-Year Financial Forecast The financial forecast indicates that at existing rate levels the utility will be come deficient in 2025 as growth in expenses outpaces growth in revenues and the utility takes on additional debt obligations to fund capital infrastructure investment. The City has adopted a 7.50 percent increase for 2025, to resolve the remaining projected deficiency, rates will need to increase by 9.50 percent annually from 2026 through 2030, before decreasing to 3.00 percent annually through 2034. Revenue Requirement 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Revenues Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates 18,398,987$ 18,480,409$ 18,562,210$ 18,644,392$ 18,726,956$ 18,809,906$ 18,893,241$ 18,976,964$ 19,061,078$ 19,145,583$ 19,230,482$ Non-Rate Revenues 711,618 995,023 921,087 742,167 760,542 763,594 775,863 779,012 795,263 798,519 810,558 Total Revenues 19,110,605$ 19,475,432$ 19,483,297$ 19,386,559$ 19,487,499$ 19,573,500$ 19,669,104$ 19,755,976$ 19,856,341$ 19,944,102$ 20,041,040$ Expenses Cash Operating Expenses 14,490,240$ 15,195,624$ 15,775,495$ 16,147,464$ 16,560,290$ 16,986,418$ 17,429,740$ 17,888,499$ 18,366,342$ 18,860,547$ 19,374,767$ Existing Debt Service 2,674,248 2,671,361 2,665,106 2,615,447 2,611,734 2,601,528 2,598,336 1,759,410 1,759,292 1,090,490 1,089,760 New Debt Service - 1,455,336 1,455,336 2,998,874 2,998,874 3,916,177 3,916,177 5,221,569 5,221,569 6,094,771 6,094,771 Rate Funded System Reinvestment 1,738,857 1,037,921 2,016,114 1,877,607 3,393,539 4,213,598 5,626,454 5,888,362 6,180,858 6,425,348 6,704,012 Total Expenses 18,903,345$ 20,360,242$ 21,912,050$ 23,639,392$ 25,564,438$ 27,717,721$ 29,570,707$ 30,757,840$ 31,528,062$ 32,471,155$ 33,263,310$ Total Surplus (Deficiency)207,259$ (884,810)$ (2,428,754)$ (4,252,833)$ (6,076,939)$ (8,144,221)$ (9,901,603)$ (11,001,863)$ (11,671,720)$ (12,527,053)$ (13,222,271)$ Annual Rate Adjustment 0.00%7.50%9.50%9.50%9.50%9.50%9.50%3.00%3.00%3.00%3.00% Cumulative Annual Rate Adjustment 0.00%7.50%17.71%28.90%41.14%54.55%69.23%74.31%79.54%84.92%90.47% Rate Revenues After Rate Increase 18,398,987$ 19,866,440$ 21,850,041$ 24,031,724$ 26,431,269$ 29,070,437$ 31,973,157$ 33,078,288$ 34,221,651$ 35,404,570$ 36,628,414$ Additional Taxes from Rate Increase - 229,097 543,446 890,472 1,273,446 1,695,963 2,161,979 2,330,808 2,505,891 2,687,448 2,875,704 Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase 207,259$ 272,124$ 315,632$ 244,027$ 353,928$ 420,347$ 1,016,334$ 768,653$ 982,962$ 1,044,486$ 1,299,958$ Coverage After Rate Increases 3.00 2.10 2.40 1.91 2.24 2.19 2.52 2.41 2.50 2.43 2.51 Page 279 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-14 9.5.1.3 City Funds and Reserves Table 9-7 shows a summary of the projected Operating Fund and Capital Fund ending balances through 2034 based on the rate forecasts presented above. The Operating Fund is maintained above 90 days of O&M expenses. The Capital Fund balance meets or exceeds the minimum target of 1 percent of fixed assets in most years of the study timeframe with the exception of 2026, 2028 and 2030 where balances fall below target. Fund balances are rebuilt and meet or exceed target balances by the end of the eleven-year timeframe. Table 9-7 | Ending Cash Balance Summary 9.6 Current and Projected Rates 9.6.1 Current Rates The existing water rates are composed of a fixed monthly charge that varies by meter size and a variable consumption charge per hundred cubic feet (CCF) for all water usage. While fixed charges are consistent across customer classes for all meter sizes except one inch, usage charges are different for each customer class. Consumption for the single family class is divided into three escalating pricing tiers that are applied year-round. This type of inclining tier structure is designed to discourage discretionary usage of water and encourage conservation. All other customers are charged a uniform rate for all consumption used. Table 9-8 shows the existing City of Auburn water system rate schedule. Table 9-8 | Existing Schedule of Rates Ending Fund Balances 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Operating Fund 8,988,743$ 9,260,867$ 3,943,874$ 4,036,866$ 4,140,073$ 4,246,604$ 4,357,435$ 4,472,125$ 4,591,586$ 4,715,137$ 4,843,692$ Capital Fund 2,019,201 6,659,039 1,226,711 9,587,690 1,038,144 4,653,056 1,096,853 9,910,203 3,003,538 8,649,973 3,293,834 Total 11,007,944$ 15,919,905$ 5,170,585$ 13,624,556$ 5,178,217$ 8,899,660$ 5,454,288$ 14,382,328$ 7,595,123$ 13,365,110$ 8,137,526$ 3/4”21.08$ 1” - Single Family 21.08 1” - All Other Classes 23.66 1 1/2” 25.76 2” 29.69 3”57.11 4”71.66 6”91.57 8”118.30 10”167.97 Single Family 0-7 CCF 4.18$ 7-15 CCF 5.11 Greater Than 15 CCF 5.81 Multi-Family 5.00$ Commercial 5.27 Manufacturing / Industrial 5.15 Schools 5.61 Municipal 5.19 Irrigation 6.94 Description 2024 Existing Monthly Fixed Charges (All Classes) Volume Charges per CCF Page 280 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-15 9.6.2 Projected Rates The financial forecast discussed above indicates the need for annual rate adjustments to satisfy all forecasted financial obligations. The City has adopted a 7.50 percent increase for 2025, with annual 9.50 percent increases forecasted from 2026 through 2030, and 3.00 percent increases from 2031 to 2034. Table 9-9 shows the projected rates with increases applied uniformly to the water fixed and volume components for all classes. A more detailed rate study that will analyze the projected increases beyond the current adopted rates will be conducted in 2025. Table 9-9 | Proposed Schedule of Rates 9.6.3 Conservation Based Rates In 2003 the Washington State Legislature passed the Municipal Water Supply Efficiency Requirements Act. The Water Use Efficiency rules went into effect on January 22, 2007 and typically apply to Water System Plans that each jurisdiction is required to develop every six to ten years. The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) outlines the rules of this act, under RCW 70.119.180. In section 4(B), the RCW states that jurisdictions must perform an “evaluation of the feasibility of adopting and implementing water de livery rate structures that encourage water conservation.” The City of Auburn currently charges their single family residential customers based on an inclining block rate structure to incentivize water use conservation, therefore no additional evaluation was performed. 9.7 Affordability The Washington State Department of Health and the Department of Commerce Public Works Board use an affordability index to prioritize low-cost loan awards depending on whether rates exceed 2.5 percent of the median household income for the service area. The average median household income for the City was $87,406 between 2018 and 2022, expressed in 2022 dollars, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The 2022 value is escalated based on the actual rate of inflation in 2023 of 4.31 percent and the 3.00 percent inflation rate used in the financial forecast to project the median household income in future years. Table 9-10 Existing 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 3/4”21.08$ 22.66$ 24.81$ 27.17$ 29.75$ 32.58$ 35.68$ 36.75$ 37.85$ 38.99$ 40.16$ 1” - Single Family 21.08 22.66 24.81 27.17 29.75 32.58 35.68 36.75 37.85 38.99 40.16 1” - All Other Classes 23.66 25.43 27.85 30.50 33.40 36.57 40.04 41.24 42.48 43.75 45.06 1 1/2” 25.76 27.69 30.32 33.20 36.35 39.80 43.58 44.89 46.24 47.63 49.06 2” 29.69 31.92 34.95 38.27 41.91 45.89 50.25 51.76 53.31 54.91 56.56 3”57.11 61.39 67.22 73.61 80.60 88.26 96.64 99.54 102.53 105.61 108.78 4”71.66 77.03 84.35 92.36 101.13 110.74 121.26 124.90 128.65 132.51 136.49 6”91.57 98.44 107.79 118.03 129.24 141.52 154.96 159.61 164.40 169.33 174.41 8”118.30 127.17 139.25 152.48 166.97 182.83 200.20 206.21 212.40 218.77 225.33 10”167.97 180.57 197.72 216.50 237.07 259.59 284.25 292.78 301.56 310.61 319.93 Single Family 0-7 CCF 4.18$ 4.49$ 4.92$ 5.39$ 5.90$ 6.46$ 7.07$ 7.28$ 7.50$ 7.73$ 7.96$ 7-15 CCF 5.11 5.49 6.01 6.58 7.21 7.89 8.64 8.90 9.17 9.45 9.73 Greater Than 15 CCF 5.81 6.25 6.84 7.49 8.20 8.98 9.83 10.12 10.42 10.73 11.05 Multi-Family 5.00$ 5.38$ 5.89$ 6.45$ 7.06$ 7.73$ 8.46$ 8.71$ 8.97$ 9.24$ 9.52$ Commercial 5.27 5.67 6.21 6.80 7.45 8.16 8.94 9.21 9.49 9.77 10.06 Manufacturing / Industrial 5.15 5.54 6.07 6.65 7.28 7.97 8.73 8.99 9.26 9.54 9.83 Schools 5.61 6.03 6.60 7.23 7.92 8.67 9.49 9.77 10.06 10.36 10.67 Municipal 5.19 5.58 6.11 6.69 7.33 8.03 8.79 9.05 9.32 9.60 9.89 Irrigation 6.94 7.46 8.17 8.95 9.80 10.73 11.75 12.10 12.46 12.83 13.21 Proposed Monthly Fixed Charges (All Classes) Volume Charges per CCF Description Page 281 of 374 22-3425 • May 2025 2024 Water System Plan • City of Auburn Financial Program Page 9-16 presents the City’s monthly water bill, projected to 2034 and tested against the 2.5 precent monthly affordability threshold. Table 9-10 | Community Affordability Test Applying the 2.5 percent monthly affordability test, the City’s rates are forecasted to remain within the indicated affordability range through 2034. 9.8 Conclusion The results of this analysis indicate that at existing rate levels the utility will be deficient beginning in 202 5. To keep pace with expenses and prepare for new debt obligations needed to fund system infrastructure needs, the City has adopted a 7.50 percent rate increase in 2025. Forecasting into the future a 9.5 percent annual rate increase will be required from 2026 through 2030, followed by 3.00 percent increases through 2034. It is recommended that the City regularly review and update the key underlying assumptions that compose the multi-year financial plan to ensure that adequate revenues are collected to meet the City’s total financial obligations. Year Inflation Median HH Income 2.5% Monthly Threshold Projected Monthly Bill % of Median HH Income 2022 87,406$ 2023 4.31%91,173 2024 3.00%93,908 195.64$ 50.34$ 0.64% 2025 3.00%96,726 201.51 54.09 0.67% 2026 3.00%99,627 207.56 59.25 0.71% 2027 3.00%102,616 213.78 64.90 0.76% 2028 3.00%105,695 220.20 71.05 0.81% 2029 3.00%108,866 226.80 77.80 0.86% 2030 3.00%112,132 233.61 85.17 0.91% 2031 3.00%115,495 240.62 87.71 0.91% 2032 3.00%118,960 247.83 90.35 0.91% 2033 3.00%122,529 255.27 93.10 0.91% 2034 3.00%126,205 262.93 95.88 0.91% Page 282 of 374 Please click the below link to view the Amended 2024 Comprehensive Water Plan Appendices (A-W) Appendices (A-W) Page 283 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Ordinance No. 6983 (Gaub) An Ordinance amending Sections within Chapter 10.42 of the Auburn City Code related to the use of automated traffic safety cameras to detect traffic violations (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Ordinance No. 6983.) July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Public Works Ordinance 6983 - Photo Enforcement, Ordinance 6983 - Exhibit A - Chapter 10.42 ACC Administrative Recommendation: City Council to approve Ordinance No. 6983. Background for Motion: This Ordinance updates Auburn City Code Chapter 10.34 to align with recently updated state law and provides for automated traffic safety cameras to enforce speed limits outside school zones at locations meeting State requirements. Background Summary: Ordinance No. 6983 proposes amendments to Auburn City Code Chapter 10.34. The amendments are needed to align City Code with recently adopted legislation regarding automated traffic safety cameras including providing for automated traffic safety cameras to enforce speed limits outside school speed zones and to set the violation fine. Locations for general speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras are subject to State requirements which include a requirement that City Council approves the locations. The locations proposed for general speed enforcement are addressed with a Resolution that is separate from this Ordinance. The Ordinance was presented and discussed at the June 23, 2025 Study Session. Councilmember: Tracy Taylor Staff: Ingrid Gaub Page 284 of 374 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6983 June 10, 2025 Page 1 of 3 Rev. 04/24 ORDINANCE NO. 6983 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTIONS WITHIN CHAPTER 10.42 OF THE AUBURN CITY CODE RELATED TO THE USE OF AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS TO DETECT TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS WHEREAS, the City utilizes automated traffic safety cameras for the detection of traffic violations in accordance with Auburn City Code (ACC) Chapter 10.42; WHEREAS, ACC 10.42 currently authorizes the City to enforce stoplight violations, railroad crossing violations, and school speed zone violations; WHEREAS, since the City’s last revision of ACC 10.42, the State has revised RCW sections referenced in ACC 10.42 and expanded the ability for agencies to use automated traffic safety cameras for additional purposes; WHEREAS, since 2023, the City has operated 12 cameras installed in 8 different school zones which have reduced vehicle speeds in these zones in support of the City’s transportation safety goals; WHERAS, with the adoption of the City’s 2025/2026 Biennial Budget, the City Council approved a program improvement to expand automated traffic safety camera enforcement of speeding violations to locations outside school zones; WHEREAS, the City is conducting an analysis in accordance with the new legislative requirements to identify and evaluate additional locations where speed enforcement using automated traffic safety cameras would further support the City’s transportation safety goals; Page 285 of 374 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6983 June 10, 2025 Page 2 of 3 Rev. 04/24 WHEREAS, ACC 10.42 requires revision to align with the recently updated RCW and to allow for speed enforcement using automated traffic safety cameras at locations outside school zones; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as follows: Section 1. Amendments to City Code. Auburn City Code Chapter 10.42 is amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A to this Ordinance. Section 2. Implementation. The Mayor is authorized to implement those administrative procedures necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation. Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application of it to any person or circumstance, will not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Page 286 of 374 -------------------------------- Ordinance No. 6983 June 10, 2025 Page 3 of 3 Rev. 04/24 Section 4. Effective date. This Ordinance will take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law. INTRODUCED: _______________ PASSED: ____________________ APPROVED: _________________ ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Published: _____________________________________________________________ Page 287 of 374 Chapter 10.42 AUTOMATED TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENTSAFETY CAMERAS Sections: 10.42.010 Authorized use of automated traffic safety cameras – Restrictions. 10.42.020 Notice of infraction for automated traffic safety camera violations. 10.42.030 Response to infraction notice – Request for hearing. 10.42.040 Presumption of committed infraction – Overcoming presumption. 10.42.050 Infractions not part of driving record, processed as parking infractions. 10.42.060 Fines – Payment. 10.42.070 Nonexclusive enforcement. 10.42.080 Authorization of electronic signatures. 10.42.010 Authorized use of automated traffic safety cameras – Restrictions. A. Law enforcement officers of the city of Auburn and persons or entities authorized by the city are authorized to use automated traffic safety cameras and related automated systems, consistent with the provisions of state law, set forth in RCW 46.63.210 - .260, to detect one or more of the following: (1) stoplight violations; (2) railroad crossing violations; and (3) school speed zone violations.enforce traffic ordinances. B. The city’s use of automated traffic safety cameras is subject to the following restrictions: 1. Use of automated traffic safety cameras is restricted to intersections of two or more arterials with traffic control signals that have yellow change interval durations in accordance with RCW 47.36.022, railroad crossings, and school speed zones. 21. Automated traffic safety cameras may only take pictures of the vehicle and vehicle license plate and only while an infraction is occurring. Pictures taken by automated traffic safety cameras may not reveal the face of the driver or of the passengers in the vehicle. Ordinance 6983 Exhibit A Page 288 of 374 32. Unless otherwise provided by law, all photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images, or any other personally identifying data prepared under this section, are for the exclusive use of law enforcement in the discharge of duties under this section. C. At least 30 days prior to the activation of any automated traffic safety cameras, the city shall clearly mark all locations where automated traffic safety cameras are in use by placing signs in locations that clearly indicate to a driver that they are entering a zone where traffic laws are enforced by an automated traffic safety camera. The signs must be readily visible to a driver approaching an automated traffic safety camera. Signs must follow the specifications and guidelines under the manual of uniform traffic control devices for streets and highways as adopted by the State department of transportation under Chapter 47.36 RCW. D. For the purposes of this chapter, “automated traffic safety camera” means a device that uses a vehicle sensor installed to workshall be as defined in conjunction with an intersection traffic control system, a railroad grade crossing control system, or a speed measuring device, and a camera synchronized to automatically record one or more sequenced photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images of the rear of a motor vehicle at the time the vehicle fails to stop when facing a steady red traffic control signal or an activated railroad grade crossing control signal, or exceeds a speed limit to a school speed zone as detected by a speed measuring device.RCW 46.63.210. (Ord. 6868 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 5957 § 1, 2005.) E. The city shall prepare and post an annual report on the city’s website in accordance with RCW 46.63.220. 10.42.020 Notice of infraction for automated traffic safety camera violations. A. When an automatic traffic safety camera detects a violation under this section, a notice of infraction may be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within 14 days of the violation, or to the renter of a vehicle within 14 days of establishing the renter’s name and address under this section. B. If the registered owner of the vehicle is a rental car business, the law enforcement agency shall, before issuing a notice of infraction, provide a written notice to the rental car business that a notice of infraction may be issued to the rental car business if the rental car business Ordinance 6983 Exhibit A Page 289 of 374 does not, within 18 days of receiving the written notice, provide to the issuing agency by return mail: 1. A statement under oath stating the name and known mailing address of the individual driving or renting the vehicle when the infraction occurred; or 2. A statement under oath that the business is unable to determine who was driving or renting the vehicle at the time the infraction occurred. A rental car business’s timely mailing of this statement to the issuing law enforcement agency relieves the business of any liability for the notice of infraction under this chapter. In lieu of identifying the vehicle operator, the rental car business may pay the applicable penalty. C. The law enforcement officer issuing the notice of infraction shall include with it a certificate or facsimile thereof, based upon inspection of photographs, microphotos, or electronic images produced by an automated traffic safety camera, stating the facts supporting the notice of infraction. This certificate or facsimile is prima facie evidence of the facts contained in it and is admissible in a proceeding charging a violation under this chapter. (Ord. 6868 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 5957 § 1, 2005.) 10.42.030 Response to infraction notice – Request for hearing. A notice of infraction based on evidence detected by an automated traffic safety camera shall direct the violator to respond to the notice as required by law. The response may be by mail. (Ord. 6868 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 5957 § 1, 2005.) 10.42.040 Presumption of committed infraction – Overcoming presumption. A. In a traffic infraction case involving a violation detected through the use of an automated traffic safety camera under this chapter, proof that the particular vehicle described in the notice of infraction was in violation of any provision of RCW 46.63.170,this chapter, together with proof that the person named in the notice of traffic infraction was at the time of the violation the registered owner of the vehicle, constitutes in evidence a prima facie presumption that the Ordinance 6983 Exhibit A Page 290 of 374 registered owner of the vehicle was the person in control of the vehicle at the point where, and for the time during which, the violation occurred. B. This presumption may be overcome only if the registered owner states, under oath, in a written statement to the court or in testimony before the court that the vehicle involved was, at the time of the violation, stolen or in the care, custody, or control of some person other than the registered owner. (Ord. 6868 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 5957 § 1, 2005.) 10.42.050 Infractions not part of driving record, processed as parking infractions. Infractions detected through the use of automated traffic safety cameras are not part of the registered owner’s driving record under RCW 46.52.101 and 46.52.120. Additionally, infractions generated by the use of automated traffic safety cameras under this chapter shall be processed in the same manner as parking infractions prosecuted under the Auburn City Code, including for the purposes of RCW 3.50.100, 3.62.040, 46.16A.120, and 46.20.270, and any other applicable statutes. (Ord. 6868 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 5957 § 1, 2005.) 10.42.060 Fines – Payment. A. Stoplight Violations. The fine for stoplighta violation infractionsinfraction under this chapter shall be $139$145.00, including all applicable statutory assessments.except the fine for a school speed zone infraction which shall be $200.00. B. Railroad Crossing and School Speed Zone Violations. The fine for railroad crossing and school speed zone violation infractions under this chapter shall be $200.00. CB. Failure to Respond to Infraction Notice. Violators failing to respond to a notice of infraction as required by law shall be assessed a $10.00 penalty. DC. Payment of Fines. Fines shall be paid directly to the court as directed on the notice of infraction. If the fines are not paid before they are sent to collections, collection costs may be Ordinance 6983 Exhibit A Page 291 of 374 added to the amounts due and owing. (Ord. 6868 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 6109 § 1, 2007; Ord. 6059 § 1, 2006; Ord. 6016 § 1, 2006; Ord. 5957 § 1, 2005.) 10.42.070 Nonexclusive enforcement. Nothing in this chapter prohibits a law enforcement officer from issuing a notice of traffic infraction to a person in control of a vehicle at the time a violation occurs under RCW 46.63.030(1)(a), (b), or (c). (Ord. 6868 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 5957 § 1, 2005.) 10.42.080 Authorization of electronic signatures. In connection with the use of automated traffic safety cameras under this chapter, the city council of the city of Auburn authorizes the use of electronic signatures in accordance with Chapter 1.80 RCW and other applicable law. (Ord. 6868 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022; Ord. 5958 § 1, 2005.) Ordinance 6983 Exhibit A Page 292 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Resolution No. 5840 (Gaub) A Resolution setting a Public Hearing to consider the vacation of City right- of-way located within a portion of the northwest corner of 1st Street NW and B Street NW within the City of Auburn, Washington (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5840.) July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Public Works RES 5840, Exhibit A & B, Staff Report, Vicinity Map Administrative Recommendation: City Council to adopt Resolution No. 5840. Background for Motion: This Resolution will set August 18, 2025, as the date for the Public Hearing to consider the vacation of right-of-way located within a portion of the northwest corner of 1st Street NW and B Street NW. Background Summary: Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) has applied to the City for vacation of right-of-way located within a portion of the northwest corner of 1st Street NW and B Street NW. The applicant owns the adjacent Parcel No. 049200-0460 to the north and would utilize the proposed vacation area to locate improvements associated with their project outside of the parking garage building they are constructing on Parcel No. 049200-0460. The application has been reviewed by City staff and utility purveyors who have an interest in the right- of-way. Through this review City staff have determined the right-of-way is not necessary to meet the needs of the City and could be vacated with conditions. Resolution No. 5840, if adopted by City Council, sets the date of the Public Hearing for ROW Vacation No. VAC25-0002 for August 18, 2025. Councilmember: Tracy Taylor Staff: Ingrid Gaub Page 293 of 374 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5840 Vacation No. VAC25-0002 July 9, 2025 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 5840 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY LOCATED WITHIN A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 1ST STREET NW AND B STREET NW WITHIN THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON WHEREAS, the City received a petition signed by the owners of at least two-thirds (2/3) of the property abutting City right-of-way located within a portion of the northwest corner of 1st Street NW and B Street NW. The petition requests that the City vacate its interest in this right-of-way; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ACC 12.48.070 require the City to set a public hearing to consider the proposed vacation by Resolution, with the date of the hearing being not more than sixty (60) days nor less than twenty (20) days after the date of passage of such Resolution; and WHEREAS, consistent with these authorities, this Resolution sets a timely public hearing to consider the proposed vacation. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RESOLVES as follows: Section 1.A public hearing to consider the petition for vacation of City right-of- way located within a portion of the northwest corner of 1st Street NW and B Street NW (legally described in attached Exhibit “A”, and shown on the survey depiction in attached Exhibit “B”) is set for 7:00 p.m. on the 18th day of August, 2025 at the City Council Chambers at 25 West Main Street, Auburn, Washington 98001. All persons wishing to speak to this proposed vacation at the public hearing are invited to attend. Page 294 of 374 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5840 Vacation No. VAC25-0002 July 9, 2025 Page 2 of 2 Section 2.The Mayor is authorized to implement those administrative procedures necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation, including posting notice of such public hearing as required by State law and City Ordinance. Section 3.This Resolution will take effect and be in full force on passage and signatures. Dated and Signed this 21st day of July, 2025. CITY OF AUBURN ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Page 295 of 374 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION (AST 119) ALL THAT PORTION OF THE RIGHTS OF WAY OF 1ST STREET NORTHWEST (PINE STREET) AND “B” STREET NORTHWEST (RAILROAD STREET), AS DEDICATED BY THE FIRST ADDITION TO THE TOWN OF SLAUGHTER, VOLUME 2 OF PLATS, PAGE 84, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, LYING WITHIN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT PORTION OF LAND DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF AUBURN BY RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20091118001497, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DEDICATION AND NORTH RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN OF SAID 1ST STREET NORTHWEST, SOUTH 89°19’42” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 52.00 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID NORTH LINE AND SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN, SOUTH 53°06’11” WEST, A DISTANCE OF 65.60 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN OF SAID “B” STREET NORTHWEST; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY MARGIN, NORTH 00°40’18” EAST, A DISTANCE OF 40.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF AUBURN, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. CONTAINING 1,040 SQUARE FEET, OR 0.02 ACRES MORE OR LESS. 04/04/2025 Page 296 of 374 52.00'30.00'S89° 19' 42"E NORTH R/W MARGIN BLOCK 2 FIRST ADD. TO TOWN OF SLAUGHTER VOL. 2, P. 84 57.00' 3 2 BLOCK 7 L.W.BALLARD'S PARK ADDITION TO SLAUGHTER VOL. 3, P. 91 1ST ST NW (PINE ST) (NON-RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR)B ST NW (RAILROAD ST)(NON-RESIDENTIALCOLLECTOR)S53° 0 6' 1 1 " W 65.60'40.00'WEST R/W MARGINN00° 40' 18"ENORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY℄ POB 27.50'7.50' DEDICATED PERDEED REC. NO.20091118001497N 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300, Tacoma, WA 98403 253.383.2422 TEL 253.383.2572 FAX EXHIBIT "B" 04/04/2025 Page 297 of 374 1 of 3 June 13, 2025 VAC25-0002 Staff Report RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION STAFF REPORT Right-of-Way (ROW) Vacation Number VAC25-0002 Applicant: Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) Property Location: Right-of-Way located at a portion of the northwest corner of 1st Street NW and B Street NW. Description of right-of-way: This right(s)-of-way (ROW) proposed for vacation consists of a portion of northwest corner of 1st Street NW and B Street NW. The area proposed for vacation is bound by Parcel No. 049200-0460 on the north side and Parcel No. 132104-9022 on the west side. The area to the southeast is the existing roadway of 1st Street NW and B Street NW. The total proposed ROW vacation area is approximately 1,040 square feet (0.02 acres). The proposed vacation area of a portion of the northwest corner of 1st Street NW and B Street NW became ROW when the south 32.5 feet of the proposed vacation area was dedicated as ROW by the plat of 1st Addition to Town of Slaughter on November 21, 1887, recorded in Vol. 2 of Plats at Page 84 Records of King County, WA by L.W. and Mary Ballard. The north 7.5 feet of the proposed vacation area was dedicated as ROW with previous development of Parcel No. 049200-0460 to the north through Right of Way Dedication Deed under King County Recording No. 20091118001497, dated November 18, 2009. See Exhibit “A” for legal description and Exhibit “B” for survey depiction. Proposal: Sound Transit is developing the adjacent parcel to the north of the proposed vacation area and would utilize the vacated area to locate improvements associated with their project outside of the parking garage building they are constructing on Parcel No. 049200-0460. Applicable Policies & Regulations: • RCW’s applicable to this situation - meets requirements of Chapter 35.79 RCW. • MUTCD standards - not affected by this proposal. Page 298 of 374 2 of 3 July 9, 2025 VAC25-0002 Staff Report • City Code or Ordinances - meets requirements of Chapter 12.48 ACC. • Comprehensive Plan Policy - not affected. • City Zoning Code - not affected. Public Benefit: • The ROW vacation supports development and construction of the second Sound Transit Parking Garage in Auburn which will help facilitate commute trip reduction by addressing commuter parking needs. • The ROW vacation decreases the street maintenance obligation of the City. Discussion: The vacation proposal was circulated to adjacent property owners, franchised utilities, and City staff, including City Utility Divisions for review and comment. 1. BNSF Railroad – BNSF supports the vacation as an adjacent property owner and has signed the ROW Vacation Petition. 2. Puget Sound Energy, Inc (PSE) – Comments from PSE were received and PSE does have existing electrical facilities consisting of a pole, underground lines and handholes for which they request an easement be reserved. PSE does not have any gas facilities in the proposed vacation area. 3. Comcast – Comments from Comcast were received and Comcast has no facilities in the location of the vacation and does not require an easement. 4. Lumen – Comments from Lumen were received. They have no facilities in the right-of-way for which they require an easement and have no objections to the vacation. 5. Astound Broadband – Comments from Astound were received and Astound has no facilities in the location of the vacation and does not require an easement. 6. Fatbeam LLC – Comments from Fatbeam were received and they do not have fiber in this location and do not require an easement. 7. Engineering – Engineering has no objections to the proposed vacation. 8. Transportation – Transportation supports the requested vacation. 9. Traffic Operations – There is no transportation fiber in the area. 10. Planning – Planning has no comments. 11. Water – Water has no comments. 12. Sewer – Sewer has no comments. 13. Storm – Storm has no comments. 14. VRFA – VRFA has no comments. 15. Solid Waste – Solid Waste has no comments. 16. Police – The proposed vacation does not appear to impact police operations. 17. Streets –Streets has no comments. 18. Construction – Construction has no comments. Page 299 of 374 3 of 3 July 9, 2025 VAC25-0002 Staff Report 19. Innovation and Technology – Innovation and Technology has no comments on the proposed vacation. Assessed Value: ACC 12.48.045 states: “The city council may require as a condition of the ordinance that the city be compensated for the vacated right-of-way in an amount which does not exceed one-half the value of the right-of-way so vacated, except in the event the subject property or portions thereof were acquired at public expense or have been part of a dedicated public right-of-way for 25 years or more, compensation may be required in an amount equal to the full value of the right-of-way being vacated. The city engineer shall estimate the value of the right-of-way to be vacated based on the assessed values of comparable properties in the vicinity. If the value of the right -of-way is determined by the city engineer to be greater than $2,000 the applicant will be required to provide the city with an appraisal by an MAI appraiser approved by the city engineer, at the expense of the applicant. The city reserves the right to have a second appraisal performed at the city’s expense.” RCW 35.79.030 states the vacation “shall not become effective until the owners of property abutting upon the street or alley, or part thereof so vacated, shall compensate such city or town in an amount which does not exceed one -half the appraised value of the area so vacated. If the street or alley has been part of a dedicated public right-of- way for twenty-five years or more, or if the subject property or portions thereof were acquired at public expense, the city or town may require the owners of the prope rty abutting the street or alley to compensate the city or town in an amount that does not exceed the full appraised value of the area vacated.” An appraisal by an MAI appraiser of the subject right-of-way was required to be submitted by the applicant. The appraisal was reviewed and found to be acceptable. The appraisal values the right-of-way using an “Across the Fence” appraisal methodology which values the subject right-of-way at $86,000. The south 32.5 feet of right-of-way has been right-of-way for more than 25 years and was provided through dedication of the plat of 1st Addition to Town of Slaughter in 1887. The north 7.5 feet of right-of-way was provided through Right of Way Dedication Deed to the City in 2009. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the right-of-way vacation be granted subject to the following conditions: 1. An Easement shall be reserved for Puget Sound Energy, Inc. electric facilities. 2. Staff recommend that compensations for the value of the right -of-way not be required as the right-of-way was acquired through dedication of a plat or Right of Way Dedication Deed at no cost to the City. Page 300 of 374 VAC25-0002 - 1st Street NW and B Street NW - Vicinity Map Printed On: 6/13/2025 Map created by City of Auburn eGIS Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy. 1:11280100200 ft WGS84 Web Mercator (Auxiliary Sphere) 1st Street NW (Pine St) 1st Street NW B Street NW ( Railroad St)City of Auburn City HallBNSFCentral Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) W Main Street W Main StreetC Street NWN Division StreetN Division StreetProposed Vacation Area is approximate. See Legal Description and Survey Depiction for more information.A Street NWA Street NWW Main Street Page 301 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Resolution No. 5844 (Gaub) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to enter into an Agreement with KGCAL Sumner Meadows LLC Related to the Previous Boundary Adjustment with the City of Sumner (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5844.) July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Public Works RES 5844 Easement Release - COA and KGCAL, Resolution 5844 Exhibit A - Agreement Administrative Recommendation: City Council to adopt Resolution No. 5844. Background for Motion: This Resolution will allow the completion of improvements to an existing driveway to Auburn’s property located in the City of Sumner. This will provide adequate access to the sand/salt facilities used to maintain Lake Tapps Parkway during inclement weather events and meet the terms of the previously approved boundary revision between the Cities of Sumner and Auburn agreed to in Resolution 5371. Background Summary: Resolution No. 5844 authorizes the Mayor to enter into an agreement with KGCAL Sumner Meadows LLC (KGCAL) which is the Developer completing improvements at the former Sumner Golf Course property along Lake Tapps Parkway/Stewart Road. Under Resolution No. 5371, Sumner and Auburn agreed to a boundary adjustment between the Cities to place the access point for the new development within the City of Sumner. As part of that agreement, there was an access easement to be provided on the development's property to facilitate access to Auburn’s sand/salt facilities to maintain Lake Tapps Parkway. This easement was granted to Auburn as part of the property sale process between Sumner and KGCAL. Following the completion of the boundary adjustment between the Cities, it was determined that improvements to an existing driveway access would provide Auburn with a more appropriate location for the sand/salt storage facility within Auburn’s existing property, removing the need to build the facility within the City of Sumner. KGCAL has agreed to complete the improvements in exchange for a release of the easement encumbering their property. The improvements are required to be completed by September 15, 2025. Councilmember: Tracy Taylor Staff: Ingrid Gaub Page 302 of 374 Page 303 of 374 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5844 June 16, 2025 Page 1 of 2 Rev. 04/24 RESOLUTION NO. 5844 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH KGCAL SUMNER MEADOWS LLC RELATED TO THE PREVIOUS BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT WITH THE CITY OF SUMNER WHEREAS, KGCAL is building an industrial project (“Project”) in the City of Sumner. To ensure that the entrance to the Project was located within Sumner, Auburn and Sumner agreed to relocate the boundary between the cities to the north at the Project location through Resolution 5371, WHEREAS, as a result of the line change, the driveway used by Auburn staff to access a sand/salt bin for inclement weather operations was proposed to be on KGCAL property in the City of Sumner, WHEREAS, to address this, KGCAL granted an easement to Auburn recorded under #202406210396 (“Easement”). Auburn and KGCAL have now agreed that KGCAL will make access improvements that will allow Auburn to access its sand/salt bins from a public right of way without the easement. Once the improvements are completed to Auburn’s reasonable satisfaction, Auburn will release the Easement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RESOLVES as follows: Section 1.The Mayor is authorized to enter into an agreement with KGCAL Sumner Meadows LLC in substantial conformity with the agreement attached as Exhibit A. Section 2.The Mayor is authorized to implement those administrative procedures necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation. Page 304 of 374 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5844 June 16, 2025 Page 2 of 2 Rev. 04/24 Section 3.This Resolution will take effect and be in full force on passage and signatures. Dated and Signed this 21st day of July, 2025. CITY OF AUBURN ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Page 305 of 374 Resolution 5844, Exhibit A 1 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between KGCAL Sumner Meadows LLC (“KGCAL”) and the City of Auburn, a Washington Municipal Corporation, located and doing business at 25 West Main Street, Auburn, Washington 98001 ("Auburn"). WHEREAS, KGCAL is building an industrial project (“Project”) in the City of Sumner. To ensure that the entrance to the Project was located within Sumner, Auburn and Sumner agreed to relocate the boundary between the cities to the north at the Project location through Resolution 5371; and WHEREAS, as a result of the line change, the driveway used by Auburn staff to access a sand/salt bin for inclement weather operations was proposed to be on KGCAL property in the City of Sumner; and WHEREAS, to address this, KGCAL granted an easement to Auburn recorded under # 202406210396(“Easement”). Auburn and KGCAL have now agreed that KGCAL will make access improvements that will allow Auburn to access its sand/salt bins from a public right of way without the easement. Once the improvements are completed to Auburn’s reasonable satisfaction, Auburn will release the Easement. NOW, THEREFORE, Auburn and KGCAL hereby agree as follows: 1) KGCAL will make the improvements described on the plans attached as Exhibit A (the “Work”) by September 15, 2025. 2) Upon completion of the Work, to the reasonable satisfaction of Auburn, Auburn will release the Easement. THE CITY OF AUBURN KGCAL ____________________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR Page 306 of 374 Resolution 5844, Exhibit A 2 ATTEST: SHAWN CAMPBELL AUBURN CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: JASON WHALEN AUBURN CITY ATTORNEY Page 307 of 374 Resolution 5844, Exhibit A 3 EXHIBIT A Page 308 of 374 Resolution 5844, Exhibit A 4 Page 309 of 374 Resolution 5844, Exhibit A 5 Page 310 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Resolution No. 5846 (Hay) A Resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the King County Regional Interlocal Agreement enabling the City to receive its share of the opioid settlement funds (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5846.) July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Human Services RES 5846, 2025.06 Amended ILA with King Co Administrative Recommendation: City Council to adopt Resolution No. 5846. Background for Motion: This Resolution will amend section 6F to allow the Opioid Abatement Council (OAC) Administrator to retain any overages in payments of administrative funds and apply those funds to future OAC administrative expenses, thus avoiding a shortage of administrative funds in the future, and also sets provisions for future amendments of the agreement. Background Summary: Currently, the parties in the ILA are contributing 10% of their allocation of opioid settlement funds to cover OAC administrative costs. While the OAC originally anticipated being able to credit back unused portions of the parties’ contributions on a yearly basis, the disbursements of opioid settlement funds are not being spread evenly over the settlement period. Unexpectedly, there were large disbursements in 2023 and 2024. As a result, the parties’ contributions to OAC administrative costs in the earlier years will exceed annual costs and, in the later years, will be less than needed to cover annual OAC administrative costs. With current planned staffing levels necessary to administer OAC through 2039, if the OAC were to annually credit back the unused contributions, the OAC Administrator would incur funding deficits starting in 2028, and significant deficits by 2033. To address this situation, the OAC is proposing to carry the parties’ excess contributions from the early years into the later years to cover the OAC administrative costs over the entire settlement period (through 2039). Instead of crediting cities with unspent funds yearly, the OAC Administrator would hold back credits to cover the deficits as needed, potentially until the end of the settlement period. The OAC Administrator would provide an administrative budget forecast update yearly at the annual open OAC meeting. At the end of the settlement period, the OAC Administrator will credit back all unspent contributions. Holding back the current year’s credits and amortizing fees moving forward will reduce the deficit and likely allow for a total of approximately $1 million to be returned to Parties at the Page 311 of 374 end of the settlement period (2039). Without amortization of balloon payments, the OAC Administrator may be unable to facilitate the OAC. Councilmember: Yolanda Trout-Manuel Staff: Kent Hay Page 312 of 374 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5846 July 16, 2025 Page 1 of 2 Rev. 2024 RESOLUTION NO. 5846 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE KING COUNTY REGIONAL INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ENABLING THE CITY TO RECEIVE ITS SHARE OF THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUNDS WHEREAS, by Resolution 5722, the Auburn City Council authorized the Mayor to execute the King County Regional Interlocal Agreement, enabling the City of Auburn to receive its share of the opioid settlement funds (the “King County Regional Agreement”); and WHEREAS, by Resolutions 5708, and 5682, the Auburn City Council accepted a share of the funds awarded to Washington through the opioid distributor and manufacturer settlements; and WHEREAS, the King County Regional Agreement provided for the creation of the King County Regional Opioid Abatement Council (“OAC”) with those duties and functions as set forth in that certain One Washington Memorandum of Understanding (the “MOU”) attached to the King County Regional Agreement; and WHEREAS, the King County Regional Agreement provides for the payment and financing of certain OAC Administrative Costs by each party to the Agreement, including the City of Auburn; and WHEREAS, the parties to the King County Regional Agreement seek to modify the terms of the Agreement to better facilitate the use and accounting of member agency contributions to OAC Administrative Costs by the OAC Administrator; and Page 313 of 374 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5846 July 16, 2025 Page 2 of 2 Rev. 2024 WHEREAS, the City desires to continue participation in the King County Regional Agreement and, as a member of the OAC, agrees to address the need for flexibility with annual funding of the OAC Administrative Costs to support ongoing opioid treatment and prevention. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RESOLVES as follows: Section 1.The Mayor is authorized to sign Amendment Number 1 of the King County Regional Agreement, attached as Exhibit A, which revises provisions in Sections 6 and 9 of the King County Regional Agreement. Section 2.The Mayor is authorized to implement those administrative procedures necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation. Section 3.This Resolution will take effect and be in full force on passage and signatures. Dated and Signed this 21st day of July, 2025. CITY OF AUBURN ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ______________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Page 314 of 374 King County Regional Agreement Page 1 For Opioid Abatement Council Amendment Number 1 KING COUNTY REGIONAL AGREEMENT OPIOID ABATEMENT COUNCIL This regional agreement for an opioid abatement council is entered into among King County and the cities of Auburn, Bellevue, Bothell, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Enumclaw, Federal Way, Issaquah, Kenmore, Kent, Kirkland, Lake Forest Park, Maple Valley, Mercer Island, Newcastle, Redmond, Renton, Sammamish, SeaTac, Seattle, Shoreline, Snoqualmie, Tukwila and Woodinville, each a "Party" and jointly "Parties' SECTION 1. RECITALS WHEREAS, the State of Washington and other local governments have engaged in litigation with entities who manufacture, distribute, and dispense prescription opioids; and WHEREAS, the opioid litigation has resulted in various settlements and/or judgments with direct money payments to be made to the state and its eligible political subdivisions; and WHEREAS, the One Washington Memorandum of Understanding Between Washington Municipalities ("the MOU"), attached hereto with Exhibits A, B, and C, and incorporated by reference, which has been previously approved and executed by the Parties, requires the formation of an opioid abatement council; and WHEREAS, the undersigned Parties do hereby adopt and implement this Agreement for the creation of the King County Regional Opioid Abatement Council ("OAC"), to be bound by the terms of this Agreement, the MOU and exhibits thereto, the settlement agreement provisions, and any applicable state statute(s). NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by the Parties: SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS 1."Approved Purposes" refers to the strategies specified and set forth in Exhibit A to the MOU. 2."OAC Administrator” shall mean King County, the Party who shall perform the duties assigned to the OAC Administrator in Section 4.C. 3."Opioid Funds" shall mean monetary amounts obtained through a settlement, judgment or any other manner from the Opioid Litigation. 4."Opioid Litigation" shall mean the litigation between state and/or local jurisdictions and Johnson & Johnson, and distributors AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson; and the national opioid settlement agreements involving Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Allergan, Walgreens, Walmart, and CVS. 5."National Settlement Agreement(s)" or "Settlement(s)" means the national opioid settlement agreements involving Johnson & Johnson, and distributors AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson; and the national opioid settlement agreements involving Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Allergan, Walgreens, Walmart, and CVS. Page 315 of 374 King County Regional Agreement Page 2 For Opioid Abatement Council Amendment Number 1 SECTION 3. PARTICIPATING ENTITIES The Parties to this Agreement are the political subdivisions in King County entitled to direct payment of Opioid Funds pursuant to the National Settlement Agreements derived from the Opioid Litigation. SECTION 4. CREATION OF THE KING COUNTY REGIONAL OAC Consistent with the MOU Exhibits A, B and C, the Parties create and establish the OAC to perform the duties and functions set forth in the MOU and herein. A.OAC Members 1.Membership - Representation on the OAC shall be roughly proportional to Opioid Fund distribution with a total of four party representatives: two from King County, one from the City of Seattle, and one chosen by the Sound Cities Association (SCA). All persons who serve on the OAC must have prior work or educational experience pertaining to one or more of the Approved Purposes. 2.Chair-As the OAC Administrator, one of the King County representatives to the OAC shall be the chairperson to preside at and lead all meetings of the OAC and to act as the representative of the OAC in any matters contemplated by the MOU. The chairperson is entitled to vote on all OAC business and at King County's discretion, the role of the chairperson may alternate between the two King County OAC representatives. 3.OAC Vacancies - In the event the OAC has a vacancy, the Party or Parties whose representative vacated the position shall select a new member for the OAC. 4.Alternates- Parties may designate alternate representatives to serve on the OAC in the absence of the Party or Parties' primary representative. Alternates must meet the same work/educational experience requirements as primary representatives. B.Duties of the OAC 1.Oversight -As provided in this Agreement, the OAC shall monitor distribution, expenditure, re-allocation, and dispute resolution related to the Parties' allocations of Opioid Funds for Approved Purposes within the King County Region. 2.Data Requirements - The OAC shall determine what data and in what form and under what timelines the Parties must provide to the OAC Administrator regarding the Parties' Opioid Fund allocation expenditures. 3.Reports - The OAC shall annually review reports prepared by the OAC Administrator of the Parties' Opioid Funds allocation expenditures for compliance with the Approved Purposes and the terms of the MOU and any Settlement. 4.Re-Allocation of Opioid Funds - If the OAC is notified that a Party will forego some or all of its allocation of Opioid Funds, the OAC shall: (i)Request and then approve or deny proposals from other Parties and/or community groups for use of the allocation within the King County Region; and (ii)Direct the trustee responsible for releasing Opioid Funds to distribute the allocation to the Party(ies) and/or community group(s) whose proposals were approved by the OAC. 5.Reporting - The OAC shall report and make publicly available all decisions on Opioid Fund allocation and re-allocation applications, proposals, distributions, and expenditures by the OAC and the Parties. 6.Dashboard - The OAC shall develop and maintain a centralized public dashboard or other repository for the publication of expenditure data from the OAC and the Parties that receive Opioid Funds. The dashboard or repository shall be updated at least annually. Page 316 of 374 King County Regional Agreement Page 3 For Opioid Abatement Council Amendment Number 1 7.Outcome Data - If necessary, the OAC shall require and collect additional outcome- related data from the Parties to evaluate the use of the Opioid Funds. The OAC shall work with the Parties to determine the type of outcome data to be collected. 8.Complaints - The OAC shall establish a process for hearing complaints and resolving disputes by Parties regarding the alleged failure of the OAC or a Party to (1) use Opioid Funds for Approved Purposes or (2) comply with reporting requirements. 9.Noncompliance - If the OAC finds that a Party's expenditure of its allocation of Opioid Funds did not comply with the Approved Purposes of the MOU, or that the Party otherwise misused its allocation of Opioid Funds, the OAC may take remedial action against the alleged offending Party. Such remedial action is left to the discretion of the OAC and may include notifying the Settlement Fund Administrator of the noncompliant expenditure(s) and requesting suspension of direct payments to the offending Party and re-allocation by the OAC consistent with Section B.4. C.Duties of the OAC Administrator 1.Receipt of Expenditure Reports - The OAC Administrator shall receive and maintain the expenditure reports provided by the Parties pursuant to Section D.8 and shall provide them to the members of the OAC for the annual review required under Section B.3. 2.Re-Allocation -The OAC Administrator shall be responsible for requesting proposals, notifying the Settlement trustee as required, and maintaining records of distribution decisions for Opioid Funds subject to re-allocation under Section B.4. 3.Reporting - (i)The OAC Administrator shall fulfill the OAC's responsibilities for collecting data, preparing reports, and making information publicly available, including through the development, maintenance, and annual updating of a centralized public dashboard or other repository. (ii)The OAC Administrator shall set deadlines for the Parties to submit data to the OAC and the OAC shall not be responsible for any deficiencies in data or reports due to the failure of a Party to meet those deadlines or the reporting requirements under Section D. (iii)Nothing in this Section C shall relieve a Party of its responsibilities to maintain, report, and produce data or records as required by Section D, the MOU, and/or any Settlement Agreement. 4.Outcome Data - If the OAC determines that outcome-related data will be collected, the OAC Administrator will receive such data from the Parties and prepare any related reports as directed by the OAC. 5.Records Retention - The OAC Administrator shall maintain OAC records for no less than five (5) years and shall make such records available for review by other Parties or the public. Records requested by the public shall be produced in accordance with the Washington Public Records Act, chapter 42.56 RCW. Nothing in this section supplants any Party's obligations to retain and produce its own records as provided in this Agreement. Page 317 of 374 King County Regional Agreement Page 4 For Opioid Abatement Council Amendment Number 1 6.Accounting of Administrative Expenses The OAC Administrator shall prepare the annual accounting of OAC administrative expenses. D.Duties of the Parties 1.Notice of OAC Representative - Parties shall notify the OAC Administrator of its OAC representative and alternate, if any, and shall timely fill vacancies. 2.Use and Distribution of Opioid Funds - Parties shall maintain full discretion over the use and distribution of their allocation of Opioid Funds, provided the Opioid Funds are used solely for Approved Purposes. 3.Notice to Forego Allocation - If a Party chooses to forego its allocation of Opioid Funds, it will notify the OAC so the funds can be re -allocated as provided in Section B.4. A Party's notice that it will forgo its allocation of Opioid Funds shall apply to all future allocations unless the Party notifies the OAC otherwise. A Party is excused from the reporting requirements set forth in this Agreement for any allocation of Opioid Funds it foregoes. 4.Allocation Amount - If a Party disputes the amount it receives from its allocation of Opioid Funds, the Party shall resolve the dispute with the Settlement Fund Administrator. However, the Party shall alert the OAC within sixty (60) days of discovering the information underlying the dispute. Failure to alert the OAC within this timeframe shall not constitute a waiver of the Party's right to seek recoupment of any deficiency in its allocation. 5.Collaboration - Parties may agree and elect to share, pool, or collaborate with their respective allocation of Opioid Funds as long as such sharing, pooling, or collaboration is used for Approved Purposes and complies with the MOU and the Settlements. 6.Proposal Methodology - Parties shall develop and implement a methodology for obtaining, receiving, and reviewing proposals for use of their allocation of Opioid Funds. 7.Community -Based Input- Parties shall ensure an opportunity for community -based input on priorities for Opioid Fund allocation strategies. 8.Reporting - Parties shall report to the OAC Administrator on all expenditures of Opioid Fund allocations. The specific data to be provided shall be determined by the OAC. 9.OAC Administrative Payment -As further described in Section 6, beginning in 2023 each Party shall contribute 10% of its annual Opioid Funds allocation to pay for OAC Administrative Costs. 10.Party's Administrative Costs -After the 10% OAC Administrative Costs contribution, the administrative costs for a Party to administer its allocation of Opioid Funds shall not exceed 10% of the remaining allocation or actual costs, whichever is less. 11.Records Retention - Parties shall maintain all records related to the receipt and expenditure of Opioid Funds for no less than five (5) years and shall make such records available for review by other Parties, the OAC, or the public. Records requested by the public shall be produced in accordance with the Washington Public Records Act, chapter 42.56 RCW. Records requested by another Party or the OAC shall be produced within twenty-one (21) days of the date the record request was received. Nothing in this Agreement supplants any Party's obligations under the Washington Public Records Act. SECTION 5. OAC ACTION Page 318 of 374 King County Regional Agreement Page 5 For Opioid Abatement Council Amendment Number 1 A.The OAC shall take action by way of motion and such motions shall be adopted if approved by a favorable majority vote. B.Any action by the OAC shall not be effective unless approved by a quorum of the members. The OAC quorum shall be a simple majority of its members. SECTION 6. FINANCING OF OAC ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS A.The OAC Administrator shall act as the fiscal agent for the OAC and shall hold funds and pay, either directly or through reimbursement, administrative costs related to the OAC ("OAC Administrative Costs"). B.Beginning in 2023, each Party shall contribute 10% of its allocation of Opioid Funds to an appropriate fund held by King County Treasury to pay for OAC Administrative Costs. The OAC Administrator shall annually calculate and notify each Party and King County Treasury of the amount of each Party's required contribution. Within 90 (ninety) days of receiving notification, King County Treasury shall transfer the appropriate amounts from each Party's Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) account to the OAC Administrative Costs fund. King County Treasury and a Party may agree on a procedure other than REET transfer for accepting a Party's contribution. C.Each Party's share of responsibility for annual OAC Administrative Costs shall be proportionate to the number of Opioid Funds the Party received in that year as compared to the amount received by other Parties. D.OAC administrative expenses shall not exceed 10% of the Parties' combined annual Opioid Funds received or actual costs, whichever is less. This does not preclude a Party from using 10% of its remaining allocation of Opioid Funds, after it's OAC Administrative Cost contribution, for its own administrative costs as outlined in the MOU and in Section 4.D.10. E.Beginning in 2024, the OAC Administrator shall provide the Parties with an annual accounting for the prior year (July 1 to June 30) of all actual OAC Administrative Costs along with the allocation showing each Party's proportionate share of the costs. F.If the amount contributed by a Party to the OAC Administrative Costs fund under Section 6.B in a year exceeds that Party's proportionate share of the OAC Administrative Costs for that year, King County Treasury shall retain some or all of the excess amount in the OAC Administrative Costs fund for payment of OAC Administrative Costs in later years and reduce that Party's required contribution for the following year by that same amount. Any excess contributions remaining in the fund after termination and payment of all OAC Administrative Costs will be returned to the contributing Party for use as authorized by the MOU. Page 319 of 374 King County Regional Agreement Page 6 For Opioid Abatement Council Amendment Number 1 SECTION 7. DURATION This Agreement shall be effective for the time period that the political subdivisions receive payments under any of the Opioid Litigation claims and shall continue to be effective until one year after the final payment of such funds. SECTION 8. TERMINATION This Agreement shall be self-terminating one year after the final distribution of funds and all reporting finalized through or by the Parties to the MOU. SECTION 9. MODIFICATIONS OR AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be modified or amended upon written agreement by all participating Parties, except that the OAC may amend the definitions of Opioid Litigation and National Settlement Agreements in order to make this Agreement applicable to future opioid litigation settlements. Any modifications or amendments to the Agreement must be consistent with the terms of the MOU and the Settlements. This agreement may be amended as follows: (1)The OAC shall provide all Parties with written notice of the proposed amendment. (2)Any Party objecting to the amendment shall have ninety (90) days to provide with OAC with a written objection. (3)If one or more Party(ies) objects, the proposed amendment is rejected. (4)If no Party objects to the proposed amendment within 90 days of the notice described in (1) above, the OAC shall schedule a vote on the prop osed amendment. (5)If unanimously approve by all four members of the OAC, the amendment is adopted and effective immediately. (6)If an amendment is adopted, the OAC shall provide the Parties with written notice of the amendment and the effective date. Notwithstanding the above, the OAC may by unanimous vote of all four OAC members and without prior notice to the Parties, amend the definitions of Opioid Litigation and National Settlement Agreements in order to make this Agreement applicable to future opioid litigation settlements. SECTION 10. HEADINGS The article headings in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to, define, limit, or extend the scope or intent of the articles to which they appertain. SECTION 11. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. This Agreement sets forth the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all previous discussions and agreements. Understandings, representations, or warranties not contained in this Agreement, or a written amendment hereto shall not be binding on any Party. Page 320 of 374 King County Regional Agreement Page 7 For Opioid Abatement Council Amendment Number 1 SECTION 12. SEVERABILITY In the event any term or condition of this Agreement or application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other terms, conditions, or applications of this Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition, or application. To this end the terms and conditions of this Agreement are declared severable. In the event any portion of this Agreement should become invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 13. NON-DISCRIMINATION The Parties, their employees, and agents shall not discriminate against any person based on any reason prohibited by Washington state or federal law as adopted or subsequently amended. SECTION 14. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The Parties shall observe all federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations, to the extent that they may be applicable to the terms of this Agreement. SECTION 15. GOVERNING LAW; VENUE This Agreement has and shall be construed as having been made and delivered in the State of Washington, and the laws of the State of Washington shall be applicable to its construction and enforcement. Any action at law, suit in equity, or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement or any provisions hereto shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within King County, Washington, unless relocation or commencement elsewhere is required by law. WHEREFORE, the undersigned executive authorities do hereby approve and adopt the Agreement as set forth herein. Done on this _______ day of July, 2025 ________________________________ Nancy Backus Mayor On Behalf Of The City of Auburn ________________________________ Nadine Chan Interim Chief, APDE and CDIP, PHSKC Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention Section of Public Health - Seattle and King County Page 321 of 374 ONE WASHINGTON MOU Page 322 of 374 1 ONE WASHINGTON MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN WASHINGTON MUNICIPALITIES Whereas, the people of the State of Washington and its communities have been harmed by entities within the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain who manufacture, distribute, and dispense prescription opioids; Whereas, certain Local Governments, through their elected representatives and counsel, are engaged in litigation seeking to hold these entities within the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain of prescription opioids accountable for the damage they have caused to the Local Governments; Whereas, Local Governments and elected officials share a common desire to abate and alleviate the impacts of harms caused by these entities within the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain throughout the State of Washington, and strive to ensure that principals of equity and equitable service delivery are factors considered in the allocation and use of Opioid Funds; and Whereas, certain Local Governments engaged in litigation and the other cities and counties in Washington desire to agree on a form of allocation for Opioid Funds they receive from entities within the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain. Now therefore, the Local Governments enter into this Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) relating to the allocation and use of the proceeds of Settlements described. A.Definitions As used in this MOU: 1.“Allocation Regions” are the same geographic areas as the existing nine (9) Washington State Accountable Community of Health (ACH) Regions and have the purpose described in Section C below. 2.“Approved Purpose(s)” shall mean the strategies specified and set forth in the Opioid Abatement Strategies attached as Exhibit A. 3.“Effective Date” shall mean the date on which a court of competent jurisdiction enters the first Settlement by order or consent decree. The Parties anticipate that more than one Settlement will be administered according to the terms of this MOU, but that the first entered Settlement will trigger allocation of Opioid Funds in accordance with Section B herein, and the formation of the Opioid Abatement Councils in Section C. 4.“Litigating Local Government(s)” shall mean Local Governments that filed suit against any Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participant pertaining to the Opioid epidemic prior to September 1, 2020. Page 323 of 374 2 5.“Local Government(s)” shall mean all counties, cities, and towns within the geographic boundaries of the State of Washington. 6.“National Settlement Agreements” means the national opioid settlement agreements dated July 21, 2021 involving Johnson & Johnson, and distributors AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health and McKesson as well as their subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, and directors named in the National Settlement Agreements, including all amendments thereto. 7.“Opioid Funds” shall mean monetary amounts obtained through a Settlement as defined in this MOU. 8.“Opioid Abatement Council” shall have the meaning described in Section C below. 9.“Participating Local Government(s)” shall mean all counties, cities, and towns within the geographic boundaries of the State that have chosen to sign on to this MOU. The Participating Local Governments may be referred to separately in this MOU as “Participating Counties” and “Participating Cities and Towns” (or “Participating Cities or Towns,” as appropriate) or “Parties.” 10.“Pharmaceutical Supply Chain” shall mean the process and channels through which controlled substances are manufactured, marketed, promoted, distributed, and/or dispensed, including prescription opioids. 11.“Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participant” shall mean any entity that engages in or has engaged in the manufacture, marketing, promotion, distribution, and/or dispensing of a prescription opioid, including any entity that has assisted in any of the above. 12.“Qualified Settlement Fund Account,” or “QSF Account,” shall mean an account set up as a qualified settlement fund, 468b fund, as authorized by Treasury Regulations 1.468B-1(c) (26 CFR §1.468B-1). 13.“Regional Agreements” shall mean the understanding reached by the Participating Local Counties and Cities within an Allocation Region governing the allocation, management, distribution of Opioid Funds within that Allocation Region. 14.“Settlement” shall mean the future negotiated resolution of legal or equitable claims against a Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participant when that resolution has been jointly entered into by the Participating Local Governments. “Settlement” expressly does not include a plan of reorganization confirmed under Title 11of the United States Code, irrespective of the extent to which Participating Local Governments vote in favor of or otherwise support such plan of reorganization. Page 324 of 374 3 15.“Trustee” shall mean an independent trustee who shall be responsible for the ministerial task of releasing Opioid Funds from a QSF account to Participating Local Governments as authorized herein and accounting for all payments into or out of the trust. 16.The “Washington State Accountable Communities of Health” or “ACH” shall mean the nine (9) regions described in Section C below. B.Allocation of Settlement Proceeds for Approved Purposes 1.All Opioid Funds shall be held in a QSF and distributed by the Trustee, for the benefit of the Participating Local Governments, only in a manner consistent with this MOU. Distribution of Opioid Funds will be subject to the mechanisms for auditing and reporting set forth below to provide public accountability and transparency. 2.All Opioid Funds, regardless of allocation, shall be utilized pursuant to Approved Purposes as defined herein and set forth in Exhibit A. Compliance with this requirement shall be verified through reporting, as set out in this MOU. 3.The division of Opioid Funds shall first be allocated to Participating Counties based on the methodology utilized for the Negotiation Class in In Re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Case No. 1:17-md-02804-DAP. The allocation model uses three equally weighted factors: (1) the amount of opioids shipped to the county; (2) the number of opioid deaths that occurred in that county; and (3) the number of people who suffer opioid use disorder in that county. The allocation percentages that result from application of this methodology are set forth in the “County Total” line item in Exhibit B. In the event any county does not participate in this MOU, that county’s percentage share shall be reallocated proportionally amongst the Participating Counties by applying this same methodology to only the Participating Counties. 4.Allocation and distribution of Opioid Funds within each Participating County will be based on regional agreements as described in Section C. C.Regional Agreements 1.For the purpose of this MOU, the regional structure for decision- making related to opioid fund allocation will be based upon the nine (9) pre- defined Washington State Accountable Community of Health Regions (Allocation Regions). Reference to these pre-defined regions is solely for the purpose of Page 325 of 374 4 drawing geographic boundaries to facilitate regional agreements for use of Opioid Funds. The Allocation Regions are as follows: King County (Single County Region) Pierce County (Single County Region) Olympic Community of Health Region (Clallam, Jefferson, and Kitsap Counties) Cascade Pacific Action Alliance Region (Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Thurston, and Wahkiakum Counties) North Sound Region (Island, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, and Whatcom Counties) SouthWest Region (Clark, Klickitat, and Skamania Counties) Greater Columbia Region (Asotin, Benton, Columbia, Franklin, Garfield, Kittitas, Walla Walla, Whitman, and Yakima Counties) Spokane Region (Adams, Ferry, Lincoln, Pend Oreille, Spokane, and Stevens Counties) North Central Region (Chelan, Douglas, Grant, and Okanogan Counties) 2.Opioid Funds will be allocated, distributed and managed within each Allocation Region, as determined by its Regional Agreement as set forth below. If an Allocation Region does not have a Regional Agreement enumerated in this MOU, and does not subsequently adopt a Regional Agreement per Section C.5, the default mechanism for allocation, distribution and management of Opioid Funds described in Section C.4.a will apply. Each Allocation Region must have an OAC whose composition and responsibilities shall be defined by Regional Agreement or as set forth in Section C.4. 3.King County’s Regional Agreement is reflected in Exhibit C to this MOU. 4.All other Allocation Regions that have not specified a Regional Agreement for allocating, distributing and managing Opioid Funds, will apply the following default methodology: a.Opioid Funds shall be allocated within each Allocation Region by taking the allocation for a Participating County from Exhibit B and apportioning those funds between that Participating County and its Participating Cities and Towns. Exhibit B also sets forth the allocation to the Participating Counties and the Participating Cities or Towns within the Counties based on a default allocation formula. As set forth above in Section B.3, to determine the allocation to a county, this formula utilizes: (1) the amount of opioids shipped to the county; (2) the number of opioid deaths that occurred in that county; and (3) the number of people who suffer opioid use disorder in that county. To determine the allocation within a county, the formula utilizes historical federal data showing how the specific Counties and the Cities and Towns within the Counties have Page 326 of 374 5 made opioids epidemic-related expenditures in the past. This is the same methodology used in the National Settlement Agreements for county and intra-county allocations. A Participating County, and the Cities and Towns within it may enter into a separate intra-county allocation agreement to modify how the Opioid Funds are allocated amongst themselves, provided the modification is in writing and agreed to by all Participating Local Governments in the County. Such an agreement shall not modify any of the other terms or requirements of this MOU. b.10% of the Opioid Funds received by the Region will be reserved, on an annual basis, for administrative costs related to the OAC. The OAC will provide an annual accounting for actual costs and any reserved funds that exceed actual costs will be reallocated to Participating Local Governments within the Region. c.Cities and towns with a population of less than 10,000 shall be excluded from the allocation, with the exception of cities and towns that are Litigating Participating Local Governments. The portion of the Opioid Funds that would have been allocated to a city or town with a population of less than 10,000 that is not a Litigating Participating Local Government shall be redistributed to Participating Counties in the manner directed in C.4.a above. d.Each Participating County, City, or Town may elect to have its share re-allocated to the OAC in which it is located. The OAC will then utilize this share for the benefit of Participating Local Governments within that Allocation Region, consistent with the Approved Purposes set forth in Exhibit A. A Participating Local Government’s election to forego its allocation of Opioid Funds shall apply to all future allocations unless the Participating Local Government notifies its respective OAC otherwise. If a Participating Local Government elects to forego its allocation of the Opioid Funds, the Participating Local Government shall be excused from the reporting requirements set forth in this Agreement. e.Participating Local Governments that receive a direct payment maintain full discretion over the use and distribution of their allocation of Opioid Funds, provided the Opioid Funds are used solely for Approved Purposes. Reasonable administrative costs for a Participating Local Government to administer its allocation of Opioid Funds shall not exceed actual costs or 10% of the Participating Local Government’s allocation of Opioid Funds, whichever is less. f.A Local Government that chooses not to become a Participating Local Government will not receive a direct allocation of Opioid Funds. The portion of the Opioid Funds that would have been allocated to a Local Government that is not a Participating Local Government shall be Page 327 of 374 6 redistributed to Participating Counties in the manner directed in C.4.a above. g.As a condition of receiving a direct payment, each Participating Local Government that receives a direct payment agrees to undertake the following actions: i.Developing a methodology for obtaining proposals for use of Opioid Funds. ii.Ensuring there is opportunity for community-based input on priorities for Opioid Fund programs and services. iii. Receiving and reviewing proposals for use of Opioid Funds for Approved Purposes. iv. Approving or denying proposals for use of Opioid Funds for Approved Purposes. v.Receiving funds from the Trustee for approved proposals and distributing the Opioid Funds to the recipient. vi. Reporting to the OAC and making publicly available all decisions on Opioid Fund allocation applications, distributions and expenditures. h.Prior to any distribution of Opioid Funds within the Allocation Region, The Participating Local Governments must establish an Opioid Abatement Council (OAC) to oversee Opioid Fund allocation, distribution, expenditures and dispute resolution. The OAC may be a preexisting regional body or may be a new body created for purposes of executing the obligations of this MOU. i.The OAC for each Allocation Region shall be composed of representation from both Participating Counties and Participating Towns or Cities within the Region. The method of selecting members, and the terms for which they will serve will be determined by the Allocation Region’s Participating Local Governments. All persons who serve on the OAC must have work or educational experience pertaining to one or more Approved Uses. j.The Regional OAC will be responsible for the following actions: i.Overseeing distribution of Opioid Funds from Participating Local Governments to programs and services within the Allocation Region for Approved Purposes. Page 328 of 374 7 ii.Annual review of expenditure reports from Participating Local Jurisdictions within the Allocation Region for compliance with Approved Purposes and the terms of this MOU and any Settlement. iii. In the case where Participating Local Governments chose to forego their allocation of Opioid Funds: (i) Approving or denying proposals by Participating Local Governments or community groups to the OAC for use of Opioid Funds within the Allocation Region. (ii) Directing the Trustee to distribute Opioid Funds for use by Participating Local Governments or community groups whose proposals are approved by the OAC. (iii) Administrating and maintaining records of all OAC decisions and distributions of Opioid Funds. iv. Reporting and making publicly available all decisions on Opioid Fund allocation applications, distributions and expenditures by the OAC or directly by Participating Local Governments. v.Developing and maintaining a centralized public dashboard or other repository for the publication of expenditure data from any Participating Local Government that receives Opioid Funds, and for expenditures by the OAC in that Allocation Region, which it shall update at least annually. vi. If necessary, requiring and collecting additional outcome- related data from Participating Local Governments to evaluate the use of Opioid Funds, and all Participating Local Governments shall comply with such requirements. vii. Hearing complaints by Participating Local Governments within the Allocation Region regarding alleged failure to (1) use Opioid Funds for Approved Purposes or (2) comply with reporting requirements. 5.Participating Local Governments may agree and elect to share, pool, or collaborate with their respective allocation of Opioid Funds in any manner they choose by adopting a Regional Agreement, so long as such sharing, pooling, or collaboration is used for Approved Purposes and complies with the terms of this MOU and any Settlement. Page 329 of 374 8 6.Nothing in this MOU should alter or change any Participating Local Government’s rights to pursue its own claim. Rather, the intent of this MOU is to join all parties who wish to be Participating Local Governments to agree upon an allocation formula for any Opioid Funds from any future binding Settlement with one or more Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participants for all Local Governments in the State of Washington. 7.If any Participating Local Government disputes the amount it receives from its allocation of Opioid Funds, the Participating Local Government shall alert its respective OAC within sixty (60) days of discovering the information underlying the dispute. Failure to alert its OAC within this time frame shall not constitute a waiver of the Participating Local Government’s right to seek recoupment of any deficiency in its allocation of Opioid Funds. 8.If any OAC concludes that a Participating Local Government’s expenditure of its allocation of Opioid Funds did not comply with the Approved Purposes listed in Exhibit A, or the terms of this MOU, or that the Participating Local Government otherwise misused its allocation of Opioid Funds, the OAC may take remedial action against the alleged offending Participating Local Government. Such remedial action is left to the discretion of the OAC and may include withholding future Opioid Funds owed to the offending Participating Local Government or requiring the offending Participating Local Government to reimburse improperly expended Opioid Funds back to the OAC to be re-allocated to the remaining Participating Local Governments within that Region. 9.All Participating Local Governments and OAC shall maintain all records related to the receipt and expenditure of Opioid Funds for no less than five (5) years and shall make such records available for review by any other Participating Local Government or OAC, or the public. Records requested by the public shall be produced in accordance with Washington’s Public Records Act RCW 42.56.001 et seq. Records requested by another Participating Local Government or an OAC shall be produced within twenty-one (21) days of the date the record request was received. This requirement does not supplant any Participating Local Government or OAC’s obligations under Washington’s Public Records Act RCW 42.56.001 et seq. D.Payment of Counsel and Litigation Expenses 1.The Litigating Local Governments have incurred attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses relating to their prosecution of claims against the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participants, and this prosecution has inured to the benefit of all Participating Local Governments. Accordingly, a Washington Page 330 of 374 9 Government Fee Fund (“GFF”) shall be established that ensures that all Parties that receive Opioid Funds contribute to the payment of fees and expenses incurred to prosecute the claims against the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participants, regardless of whether they are litigating or non-litigating entities. 2.The amount of the GFF shall be based as follows: the funds to be deposited in the GFF shall be equal to 15% of the total cash value of the Opioid Funds. 3.The maximum percentage of any contingency fee agreement permitted for compensation shall be 15% of the portion of the Opioid Funds allocated to the Litigating Local Government that is a party to the contingency fee agreement, plus expenses attributable to that Litigating Local Government. Under no circumstances may counsel collect more for its work on behalf of a Litigating Local Government than it would under its contingency agreement with that Litigating Local Government. 4.Payments from the GFF shall be overseen by a committee (the “Opioid Fee and Expense Committee”) consisting of one representative of the following law firms: (a) Keller Rohrback L.LP.; (b) Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP; (c) Goldfarb & Huck Roth Riojas, PLLC; and (d) Napoli Shkolnik PLLC. The role of the Opioid Fee and Expense Committee shall be limited to ensuring that the GFF is administered in accordance with this Section. 5.In the event that settling Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participants do not pay the fees and expenses of the Participating Local Governments directly at the time settlement is achieved, payments to counsel for Participating Local Governments shall be made from the GFF over not more than three years, with 50% paid within 12 months of the date of Settlement and 25% paid in each subsequent year, or at the time the total Settlement amount is paid to the Trustee by the Defendants, whichever is sooner. 6.Any funds remaining in the GFF in excess of: (i) the amounts needed to cover Litigating Local Governments’ private counsel’s representation agreements, and (ii) the amounts needed to cover the common benefit tax discussed in Section C.8 below (if not paid directly by the Defendants in connection with future settlement(s), shall revert to the Participating Local Governments pro rata according to the percentages set forth in Exhibits B, to be used for Approved Purposes as set forth herein and in Exhibit A. 7.In the event that funds in the GFF are not sufficient to pay all fees and expenses owed under this Section, payments to counsel for all Litigating Local Governments shall be reduced on a pro rata basis. The Litigating Local Governments will not be responsible for any of these reduced amounts. Page 331 of 374 10 8.The Parties anticipate that any Opioid Funds they receive will be subject to a common benefit “tax” imposed by the court in In Re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Case No. 1:17-md-02804-DAP (“Common Benefit Tax”). If this occurs, the Participating Local Governments shall first seek to have the settling defendants pay the Common Benefit Tax. If the settling defendants do not agree to pay the Common Benefit Tax, then the Common Benefit Tax shall be paid from the Opioid Funds and by both litigating and non-litigating Local Governments. This payment shall occur prior to allocation and distribution of funds to the Participating Local Governments. In the event that GFF is not fully exhausted to pay the Litigating Local Governments’ private counsel’s representation agreements, excess funds in the GFF shall be applied to pay the Common Benefit Tax (if any). E.General Terms 1.If any Participating Local Government believes another Participating Local Government, not including the Regional Abatement Advisory Councils, violated the terms of this MOU, the alleging Participating Local Government may seek to enforce the terms of this MOU in the court in which any applicable Settlement(s) was entered, provided the alleging Participating Local Government first provides the alleged offending Participating Local Government notice of the alleged violation(s) and a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged violation(s). In such an enforcement action, any alleging Participating Local Government or alleged offending Participating Local Government may be represented by their respective public entity in accordance with Washington law. 2.Nothing in this MOU shall be interpreted to waive the right of any Participating Local Government to seek judicial relief for conduct occurring outside the scope of this MOU that violates any Washington law. In such an action, the alleged offending Participating Local Government, including the Regional Abatement Advisory Councils, may be represented by their respective public entities in accordance with Washington law. In the event of a conflict, any Participating Local Government, including the Regional Abatement Advisory Councils and its Members, may seek outside representation to defend itself against such an action. 3.Venue for any legal action related to this MOU shall be in the court in which the Participating Local Government is located or in accordance with the court rules on venue in that jurisdiction. This provision is not intended to expand the court rules on venue. 4.This MOU may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. The Participating Local Governments approve the use of electronic signatures for execution of this MOU. All use of electronic signatures Page 332 of 374 11 shall be governed by the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act. The Parties agree not to deny the legal effect or enforceability of the MOU solely because it is in electronic form or because an electronic record was used in its formation. The Participating Local Government agree not to object to the admissibility of the MOU in the form of an electronic record, or a paper copy of an electronic document, or a paper copy of a document bearing an electronic signature, on the grounds that it is an electronic record or electronic signature or that it is not in its original form or is not an original. 5.Each Participating Local Government represents that all procedures necessary to authorize such Participating Local Government’s execution of this MOU have been performed and that the person signing for such Party has been authorized to execute the MOU. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank – Signature Pages Follow] Page 333 of 374 12 This One Washington Memorandum of Understanding Between Washington Municipalities is signed this _____ day of ___________________, 2022 by: 4894-0031-1574, v. 2 Page 334 of 374 EXHIBIT A Page 335 of 374 1 O P I O I D A B A T E M E N T S T R A T E G I E S PART ONE: TREATMENT A.TREAT OPIOID USE DISORDER (OUD) Support treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and any co-occurring Substance Use Disorder or Mental Health (SUD/MH) conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Expand availability of treatment for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including all forms of Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2.Support and reimburse services that include the full American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) continuum of care for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including but not limited to: a.Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT); b.Abstinence-based treatment; c.Treatment, recovery, or other services provided by states, subdivisions, community health centers; non-for-profit providers; or for-profit providers; d.Treatment by providers that focus on OUD treatment as well as treatment by providers that offer OUD treatment along with treatment for other SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction; or e.Evidence-informed residential services programs, as noted below. 3.Expand telehealth to increase access to treatment for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including MAT, as well as counseling, psychiatric support, and other treatment and recovery support services. 4.Improve oversight of Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) to assure evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising practices such as adequate methadone dosing. 5.Support mobile intervention, treatment, and recovery services, offered by qualified professionals and service providers, such as peer recovery coaches, for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction and for persons who have experienced an opioid overdose. 6.Support treatment of mental health trauma resulting from the traumatic experiences of the opioid user (e.g., violence, sexual assault, human trafficking, or adverse childhood experiences) and family members (e.g., surviving family members after an overdose Page 336 of 374 2 or overdose fatality), and training of health care personnel to identify and address such trauma. 7.Support detoxification (detox) and withdrawal management services for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including medical detox, referral to treatment, or connections to other services or supports. 8.Support training on MAT for health care providers, students, or other supporting professionals, such as peer recovery coaches or recovery outreach specialists, including telementoring to assist community-based providers in rural or underserved areas. 9.Support workforce development for addiction professionals who work with persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 10.Provide fellowships for addiction medicine specialists for direct patient care, instructors, and clinical research for treatments. 11.Provide funding and training for clinicians to obtain a waiver under the federal Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (DATA 2000) to prescribe MAT for OUD, and provide technical assistance and professional support to clinicians who have obtained a DATA 2000 waiver. 12.Support the dissemination of web-based training curricula, such as the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry’s Provider Clinical Support Service-Opioids web- based training curriculum and motivational interviewing. 13. Support the development and dissemination of new curricula, such as the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry’s Provider Clinical Support Service for Medication-Assisted Treatment. B.SUPPORT PEOPLE IN TREATMENT AND RECOVERY Support people in treatment for and recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Provide the full continuum of care of recovery services for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including supportive housing, residential treatment, medical detox services, peer support services and counseling, community navigators, case management, and connections to community-based services. 2.Provide counseling, peer-support, recovery case management and residential treatment with access to medications for those who need it to persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. Page 337 of 374 3 3.Provide access to housing for people with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including supportive housing, recovery housing, housing assistance programs, or training for housing providers. 4.Provide community support services, including social and legal services, to assist in deinstitutionalizing persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co- usage, and/or co-addiction. 5.Support or expand peer-recovery centers, which may include support groups, social events, computer access, or other services for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 6.Provide employment training or educational services for persons in treatment for or recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co- addiction. 7.Identify successful recovery programs such as physician, pilot, and college recovery programs, and provide support and technical assistance to increase the number and capacity of high-quality programs to help those in recovery. 8.Engage non-profits, faith-based communities, and community coalitions to support people in treatment and recovery and to support family members in their efforts to manage the opioid user in the family. 9.Provide training and development of procedures for government staff to appropriately interact and provide social and other services to current and recovering opioid users, including reducing stigma. 10.Support stigma reduction efforts regarding treatment and support for persons with OUD, including reducing the stigma on effective treatment. C.CONNECT PEOPLE WHO NEED HELP TO THE HELP THEY NEED (CONNECTIONS TO CARE) Provide connections to care for people who have – or are at risk of developing – OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction through evidence- based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Ensure that health care providers are screening for OUD and other risk factors and know how to appropriately counsel and treat (or refer if necessary) a patient for OUD treatment. 2.Support Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs to reduce the transition from use to disorders. 3.Provide training and long-term implementation of SBIRT in key systems (health, schools, colleges, criminal justice, and probation), with a focus on youth and young adults when transition from misuse to opioid disorder is common. Page 338 of 374 4 4.Purchase automated versions of SBIRT and support ongoing costs of the technology. 5.Support training for emergency room personnel treating opioid overdose patients on post-discharge planning, including community referrals for MAT, recovery case management or support services. 6.Support hospital programs that transition persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, or persons who have experienced an opioid overdose, into community treatment or recovery services through a bridge clinic or similar approach. 7.Support crisis stabilization centers that serve as an alternative to hospital emergency departments for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co- usage, and/or co-addiction or persons that have experienced an opioid overdose. 8.Support the work of Emergency Medical Systems, including peer support specialists, to connect individuals to treatment or other appropriate services following an opioid overdose or other opioid-related adverse event. 9.Provide funding for peer support specialists or recovery coaches in emergency departments, detox facilities, recovery centers, recovery housing, or similar settings; offer services, supports, or connections to care to persons with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction or to persons who have experienced an opioid overdose. 10.Provide funding for peer navigators, recovery coaches, care coordinators, or care managers that offer assistance to persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction or to persons who have experienced on opioid overdose. 11.Create or support school-based contacts that parents can engage with to seek immediate treatment services for their child; and support prevention, intervention, treatment, and recovery programs focused on young people. 12.Develop and support best practices on addressing OUD in the workplace. 13.Support assistance programs for health care providers with OUD. 14.Engage non-profits and the faith community as a system to support outreach for treatment. 15.Support centralized call centers that provide information and connections to appropriate services and supports for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 16.Create or support intake and call centers to facilitate education and access to treatment, prevention, and recovery services for persons with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. Page 339 of 374 5 17.Develop or support a National Treatment Availability Clearinghouse – a multistate/nationally accessible database whereby health care providers can list locations for currently available in-patient and out-patient OUD treatment services that are accessible on a real-time basis by persons who seek treatment. D.ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF CRIMINAL-JUSTICE-INVOLVED PERSONS Address the needs of persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co- usage, and/or co-addiction who are involved – or are at risk of becoming involved – in the criminal justice system through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Support pre-arrest or post-arrest diversion and deflection strategies for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including established strategies such as: a.Self-referral strategies such as the Angel Programs or the Police Assisted Addiction Recovery Initiative (PAARI); b.Active outreach strategies such as the Drug Abuse Response Team (DART) model; c.“Naloxone Plus” strategies, which work to ensure that individuals who have received naloxone to reverse the effects of an overdose are then linked to treatment programs or other appropriate services; d.Officer prevention strategies, such as the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) model; e.Officer intervention strategies such as the Leon County, Florida Adult Civil Citation Network or the Chicago Westside Narcotics Diversion to Treatment Initiative; f.Co-responder and/or alternative responder models to address OUD-related 911 calls with greater SUD expertise and to reduce perceived barriers associated with law enforcement 911 responses; or g.County prosecution diversion programs, including diversion officer salary, only for counties with a population of 50,000 or less. Any diversion services in matters involving opioids must include drug testing, monitoring, or treatment. 2.Support pre-trial services that connect individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction to evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, and related services. 3.Support treatment and recovery courts for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, but only if these courts provide referrals to evidence-informed treatment, including MAT. Page 340 of 374 6 4.Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction who are incarcerated in jail or prison. 5.Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction who are leaving jail or prison have recently left jail or prison, are on probation or parole, are under community corrections supervision, or are in re-entry programs or facilities. 6.Support critical time interventions (CTI), particularly for individuals living with dual- diagnosis OUD/serious mental illness, and services for individuals who face immediate risks and service needs and risks upon release from correctional settings. 7.Provide training on best practices for addressing the needs of criminal-justice- involved persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction to law enforcement, correctional, or judicial personnel or to providers of treatment, recovery, case management, or other services offered in connection with any of the strategies described in this section. E.ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF PREGNANT OR PARENTING WOMEN AND THEIR FAMILIES, INCLUDING BABIES WITH NEONATAL ABSTINENCE SYNDROME Address the needs of pregnant or parenting women with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, and the needs of their families, including babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome, through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Support evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising treatment, including MAT, recovery services and supports, and prevention services for pregnant women – or women who could become pregnant – who have OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, and other measures to educate and provide support to families affected by Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome. 2.Provide training for obstetricians or other healthcare personnel that work with pregnant women and their families regarding treatment of OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 3.Provide training to health care providers who work with pregnant or parenting women on best practices for compliance with federal requirements that children born with Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome get referred to appropriate services and receive a plan of safe care. 4.Provide enhanced support for children and family members suffering trauma as a result of addiction in the family; and offer trauma-informed behavioral health treatment for adverse childhood events. Page 341 of 374 7 5.Offer enhanced family supports and home-based wrap-around services to persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including but not limited to parent skills training. 6.Support for Children’s Services – Fund additional positions and services, including supportive housing and other residential services, relating to children being removed from the home and/or placed in foster care due to custodial opioid use. PART TWO: PREVENTION F.PREVENT OVER-PRESCRIBING AND ENSURE APPROPRIATE PRESCRIBING AND DISPENSING OF OPIOIDS Support efforts to prevent over-prescribing and ensure appropriate prescribing and dispensing of opioids through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Training for health care providers regarding safe and responsible opioid prescribing, dosing, and tapering patients off opioids. 2.Academic counter-detailing to educate prescribers on appropriate opioid prescribing. 3.Continuing Medical Education (CME) on appropriate prescribing of opioids. 4.Support for non-opioid pain treatment alternatives, including training providers to offer or refer to multi-modal, evidence-informed treatment of pain. 5.Support enhancements or improvements to Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs), including but not limited to improvements that: a.Increase the number of prescribers using PDMPs; b.Improve point-of-care decision-making by increasing the quantity, quality, or format of data available to prescribers using PDMPs or by improving the interface that prescribers use to access PDMP data, or both; or c.Enable states to use PDMP data in support of surveillance or intervention strategies, including MAT referrals and follow-up for individuals identified within PDMP data as likely to experience OUD. 6.Development and implementation of a national PDMP – Fund development of a multistate/national PDMP that permits information sharing while providing appropriate safeguards on sharing of private health information, including but not limited to: a.Integration of PDMP data with electronic health records, overdose episodes, and decision support tools for health care providers relating to OUD. Page 342 of 374 8 b.Ensuring PDMPs incorporate available overdose/naloxone deployment data, including the United States Department of Transportation’s Emergency Medical Technician overdose database. 7.Increase electronic prescribing to prevent diversion or forgery. 8.Educate Dispensers on appropriate opioid dispensing. G.PREVENT MISUSE OF OPIOIDS Support efforts to discourage or prevent misuse of opioids through evidence-based, evidence- informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Corrective advertising or affirmative public education campaigns based on evidence. 2.Public education relating to drug disposal. 3.Drug take-back disposal or destruction programs. 4.Fund community anti-drug coalitions that engage in drug prevention efforts. 5.Support community coalitions in implementing evidence-informed prevention, such as reduced social access and physical access, stigma reduction – including staffing, educational campaigns, support for people in treatment or recovery, or training of coalitions in evidence-informed implementation, including the Strategic Prevention Framework developed by the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). 6.Engage non-profits and faith-based communities as systems to support prevention. 7.Support evidence-informed school and community education programs and campaigns for students, families, school employees, school athletic programs, parent- teacher and student associations, and others. 8.School-based or youth-focused programs or strategies that have demonstrated effectiveness in preventing drug misuse and seem likely to be effective in preventing the uptake and use of opioids. 9.Support community-based education or intervention services for families, youth, and adolescents at risk for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 10.Support evidence-informed programs or curricula to address mental health needs of young people who may be at risk of misusing opioids or other drugs, including emotional modulation and resilience skills. 11.Support greater access to mental health services and supports for young people, including services and supports provided by school nurses or other school staff, to Page 343 of 374 9 address mental health needs in young people that (when not properly addressed) increase the risk of opioid or other drug misuse. H.PREVENT OVERDOSE DEATHS AND OTHER HARMS Support efforts to prevent or reduce overdose deaths or other opioid-related harms through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Increase availability and distribution of naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses for first responders, overdose patients, opioid users, families and friends of opioid users, schools, community navigators and outreach workers, drug offenders upon release from jail/prison, or other members of the general public. 2.Provision by public health entities of free naloxone to anyone in the community, including but not limited to provision of intra-nasal naloxone in settings where other options are not available or allowed. 3.Training and education regarding naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses for first responders, overdose patients, patients taking opioids, families, schools, and other members of the general public. 4.Enable school nurses and other school staff to respond to opioid overdoses, and provide them with naloxone, training, and support. 5.Expand, improve, or develop data tracking software and applications for overdoses/naloxone revivals. 6.Public education relating to emergency responses to overdoses. 7.Public education relating to immunity and Good Samaritan laws. 8.Educate first responders regarding the existence and operation of immunity and Good Samaritan laws. 9.Expand access to testing and treatment for infectious diseases such as HIV and Hepatitis C resulting from intravenous opioid use. 10.Support mobile units that offer or provide referrals to treatment, recovery supports, health care, or other appropriate services to persons that use opioids or persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 11.Provide training in treatment and recovery strategies to health care providers, students, peer recovery coaches, recovery outreach specialists, or other professionals that provide care to persons who use opioids or persons with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 12.Support screening for fentanyl in routine clinical toxicology testing. Page 344 of 374 10 PART THREE: OTHER STRATEGIES I.FIRST RESPONDERS In addition to items C8, D1 through D7, H1, H3, and H8, support the following: 1.Current and future law enforcement expenditures relating to the opioid epidemic. 2.Educate law enforcement or other first responders regarding appropriate practices and precautions when dealing with fentanyl or other drugs. J.LEADERSHIP, PLANNING AND COORDINATION Support efforts to provide leadership, planning, and coordination to abate the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Community regional planning to identify goals for reducing harms related to the opioid epidemic, to identify areas and populations with the greatest needs for treatment intervention services, or to support other strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list. 2.A government dashboard to track key opioid-related indicators and supports as identified through collaborative community processes. 3.Invest in infrastructure or staffing at government or not-for-profit agencies to support collaborative, cross-system coordination with the purpose of preventing overprescribing, opioid misuse, or opioid overdoses, treating those with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, supporting them in treatment or recovery, connecting them to care, or implementing other strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list. 4.Provide resources to staff government oversight and management of opioid abatement programs. K.TRAINING In addition to the training referred to in various items above, support training to abate the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1.Provide funding for staff training or networking programs and services to improve the capability of government, community, and not-for-profit entities to abate the opioid crisis. 2.Invest in infrastructure and staffing for collaborative cross-system coordination to prevent opioid misuse, prevent overdoses, and treat those with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, or implement other Page 345 of 374 11 strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list (e.g., health care, primary care, pharmacies, PDMPs, etc.). L.RESEARCH Support opioid abatement research that may include, but is not limited to, the following: 1.Monitoring, surveillance, and evaluation of programs and strategies described in this opioid abatement strategy list. 2.Research non-opioid treatment of chronic pain. 3.Research on improved service delivery for modalities such as SBIRT that demonstrate promising but mixed results in populations vulnerable to opioid use disorders. 4.Research on innovative supply-side enforcement efforts such as improved detection of mail-based delivery of synthetic opioids. 5.Expanded research on swift/certain/fair models to reduce and deter opioid misuse within criminal justice populations that build upon promising approaches used to address other substances (e.g. Hawaii HOPE and Dakota 24/7). 6.Research on expanded modalities such as prescription methadone that can expand access to MAT. Page 346 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Adams County Adams County 0.1638732475% Hatton Lind Othello Ritzville Washtucna County Total:0.1638732475% Asotin County Asotin County 0.4694498386% Asotin Clarkston County Total:0.4694498386% Benton County Benton County 1.4848831892% Benton City Kennewick 0.5415650564% Prosser Richland 0.4756779517% West Richland 0.0459360490% County Total:2.5480622463% Chelan County Chelan County 0.7434914485% Cashmere Chelan Entiat Leavenworth Wenatchee 0.2968333494% County Total:1.0403247979% Clallam County Clallam County 1.3076983401% Forks Port Angeles 0.4598370527% Sequim County Total:1.7675353928% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-1 Page 347 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Clark County Clark County 4.5149775326% Battle Ground 0.1384729857% Camas 0.2691592724% La Center Ridgefield Vancouver 1.7306605325% Washougal 0.1279328220% Woodland*** Yacolt County Total:6.7812031452% Columbia County Columbia County 0.0561699537% Dayton Starbuck County Total:0.0561699537% Cowlitz County Cowlitz County 1.7226945990% Castle Rock Kalama Kelso 0.1331145270% Longview 0.6162736905% Woodland*** County Total:2.4720828165% Douglas County Douglas County 0.3932175175% Bridgeport Coulee Dam*** East Wenatchee 0.0799810865% Mansfield Rock Island Waterville County Total:0.4731986040% Ferry County Ferry County 0.1153487994% Republic County Total:0.1153487994% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-2 Page 348 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Franklin County Franklin County 0.3361237144% Connell Kahlotus Mesa Pasco 0.4278056066% County Total:0.7639293210% Garfield County Garfield County 0.0321982209% Pomeroy County Total:0.0321982209% Grant County Grant County 0.9932572167% Coulee City Coulee Dam*** Electric City Ephrata George Grand Coulee Hartline Krupp Mattawa Moses Lake 0.2078293909% Quincy Royal City Soap Lake Warden Wilson Creek County Total:1.2010866076% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-3 Page 349 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Grays Harbor County Grays Harbor County 0.9992429138% Aberdeen 0.2491525333% Cosmopolis Elma Hoquiam McCleary Montesano Oakville Ocean Shores Westport County Total:1.2483954471% Island County Island County 0.6820422610% Coupeville Langley Oak Harbor 0.2511550431% County Total:0.9331973041% Jefferson County Jefferson County 0.4417137380% Port Townsend County Total:0.4417137380% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-4 Page 350 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation King County King County 13.9743722662% Algona Auburn***0.2622774917% Beaux Arts Village Bellevue 1.1300592573% Black Diamond Bothell***0.1821602716% Burien 0.0270962921% Carnation Clyde Hill Covington 0.0118134406% Des Moines 0.1179764526% Duvall Enumclaw***0.0537768326% Federal Way 0.3061452240% Hunts Point Issaquah 0.1876240107% Kenmore 0.0204441024% Kent 0.5377397676% Kirkland 0.5453525246% Lake Forest Park 0.0525439124% Maple Valley 0.0093761587% Medina Mercer Island 0.1751797481% Milton*** Newcastle 0.0033117880% Normandy Park North Bend Pacific*** Redmond 0.4839486007% Renton 0.7652626920% Sammamish 0.0224369090% SeaTac 0.1481551278% Seattle 6.6032403816% Shoreline 0.0435834501% Skykomish Snoqualmie 0.0649164481% Tukwila 0.3032205739% Woodinville 0.0185516364% Yarrow Point County Total:26.0505653608% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-5 Page 351 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Kitsap County Kitsap County 2.6294133668% Bainbridge Island 0.1364686014% Bremerton 0.6193374389% Port Orchard 0.1009497162% Poulsbo 0.0773748246% County Total:3.5635439479% Kittitas County Kittitas County 0.3855704683% Cle Elum Ellensburg 0.0955824915% Kittitas Roslyn South Cle Elum County Total:0.4811529598% Klickitat County Klickitat County 0.2211673457% Bingen Goldendale White Salmon County Total:0.2211673457% Lewis County Lewis County 1.0777377479% Centralia 0.1909990353% Chehalis Morton Mossyrock Napavine Pe Ell Toledo Vader Winlock County Total:1.2687367832% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-6 Page 352 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Lincoln County Lincoln County 0.1712669645% Almira Creston Davenport Harrington Odessa Reardan Sprague Wilbur County Total:0.1712669645% Mason County Mason County 0.8089918012% Shelton 0.1239179888% County Total:0.9329097900% Okanogan County Okanogan County 0.6145043345% Brewster Conconully Coulee Dam*** Elmer City Nespelem Okanogan Omak Oroville Pateros Riverside Tonasket Twisp Winthrop County Total:0.6145043345% Pacific County Pacific County 0.4895416466% Ilwaco Long Beach Raymond South Bend County Total:0.4895416466% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-7 Page 353 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Pend Oreille County Pend Oreille County 0.2566374940% Cusick Ione Metaline Metaline Falls Newport County Total:0.2566374940% Pierce County Pierce County 7.2310164020% Auburn***0.0628522112% Bonney Lake 0.1190773864% Buckley Carbonado DuPont Eatonville Edgewood 0.0048016791% Enumclaw***0.0000000000% Fife 0.1955185481% Fircrest Gig Harbor 0.0859963345% Lakewood 0.5253640894% Milton*** Orting Pacific*** Puyallup 0.3845704814% Roy Ruston South Prairie Steilacoom Sumner 0.1083157569% Tacoma 3.2816374617% University Place 0.0353733363% Wilkeson County Total:12.0345236870% San Juan County San Juan County 0.2101495171% Friday Harbor County Total:0.2101495171% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-8 Page 354 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Skagit County Skagit County 1.0526023961% Anacortes 0.1774962906% Burlington 0.1146861661% Concrete Hamilton La Conner Lyman Mount Vernon 0.2801063665% Sedro-Woolley 0.0661146351% County Total:1.6910058544% Skamania County Skamania County 0.1631931925% North Bonneville Stevenson County Total:0.1631931925% Snohomish County Snohomish County 6.9054415622% Arlington 0.2620524080% Bothell***0.2654558588% Brier Darrington Edmonds 0.3058936009% Everett 1.9258363241% Gold Bar Granite Falls Index Lake Stevens 0.1385202891% Lynnwood 0.7704629214% Marysville 0.3945067827% Mill Creek 0.1227939546% Monroe 0.1771621898% Mountlake Terrace 0.2108935805% Mukilteo 0.2561790702% Snohomish 0.0861097964% Stanwood Sultan Woodway County Total:11.8213083387% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-9 Page 355 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Spokane County Spokane County 5.5623859292% Airway Heights Cheney 0.1238454349% Deer Park Fairfield Latah Liberty Lake 0.0389636519% Medical Lake Millwood Rockford Spangle Spokane 3.0872078287% Spokane Valley 0.0684217500% Waverly County Total:8.8808245947% Stevens County Stevens County 0.7479240179% Chewelah Colville Kettle Falls Marcus Northport Springdale County Total:0.7479240179% Thurston County Thurston County 2.3258492094% Bucoda Lacey 0.2348627221% Olympia 0.6039423385% Rainier Tenino Tumwater 0.2065982350% Yelm County Total:3.3712525050% Wahkiakum County Wahkiakum County 0.0596582197% Cathlamet County Total:0.0596582197% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-10 Page 356 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Walla Walla County Walla Walla County 0.5543870294% College Place Prescott Waitsburg Walla Walla 0.3140768654% County Total:0.8684638948% Whatcom County Whatcom County 1.3452637306% Bellingham 0.8978614577% Blaine Everson Ferndale 0.0646101891% Lynden 0.0827115612% Nooksack Sumas County Total:2.3904469386% Whitman County Whitman County 0.2626805837% Albion Colfax Colton Endicott Farmington Garfield LaCrosse Lamont Malden Oakesdale Palouse Pullman 0.2214837491% Rosalia St. John Tekoa Uniontown County Total:0.4841643328% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-11 Page 357 of 374 EXHIBIT B Local County Government % Allocation Yakima County Yakima County 1.9388392959% Grandview 0.0530606109% Granger Harrah Mabton Moxee Naches Selah Sunnyside 0.1213478384% Tieton Toppenish Union Gap Wapato Yakima 0.6060410539% Zillah County Total:2.7192887991% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-12 Page 358 of 374 Exhibit C Page 359 of 374 KING COUNTY REGIONAL AGREEMENT King County intends to explore coordination with its cities and towns to facilitate a Regional Agreement for Opioid Fund allocation. Should some cities and towns choose not to participate in a Regional Agreement, this shall not preclude coordinated allocation for programs and services between the County and those cities and towns who elect to pursue a Regional Agreement. As contemplated in C.5 of the MOU, any Regional Agreement shall comply with the terms of the MOU and any Settlement. If no Regional Agreement is achieved, the default methodology for allocation in C.4 of the MOU shall apply. Page 360 of 374 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Meeting Date: Resolution No. 5847 (Gaub) A Resolution adopting the City of Auburn Automated Traffic Safety Camera 2025 Program Expansion Study and Program Overview (Study) and affirming that speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras at the locations recommended in the Study is consistent with State law (RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 5847.) July 21, 2025 Department: Attachments: Budget Impact: Public Works Res 5847 Camera Speed Enforcement 2025 Expansion, Exhibit A - City of Auburn Automated Traffic Safety Camera 2025 Program Expansion Study and Program Overview Administrative Recommendation: City Council to adopt Resolution No. 5847. Background for Motion: To support its goal to reduce and eventually eliminate serious injury and fatal crashes, the City is expanding its automated traffic safety camera program to include speed enforcement at 3 locations identified in the Study proposed to be adopted with this Resolution. Background Summary: Resolution No. 5847 adopts the City of Auburn Automated Traffic Safety Camera 2025 Program Expansion Study and Program Overview (Study) and affirms that speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras at the locations recommended in the Study is consistent with State law. In October 2024, with Resolution No. 5789, the City Council adopted the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP) and established the goal and vision to reduce and eventually eliminate serious injury and fatal crashes. The CSAP identified speeding as one of the main circumstances associated with serious injury and fatal crashes and recommended consideration of speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras to reduce speeding. State law allows for speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras in school speed zones, school walking areas, roadway work zones, hospital speed zones, public park speed zones, State highways within City limits, and locations determined by the City Council to have experienced higher Page 361 of 374 crash risks due to excessive vehicle speeds (General Locations). State law requires an analysis of potential equity impacts and alternatives to camera enforcement for all enforcement locations that were not already in place before June 2024. The Study evaluated General Locations for speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras. The Study evaluated whether or not locations met the State requirements and analyzed potential equity impacts and alternatives to camera enforcement. The study recommends the following General Locations for speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras with the City’s expansion of the automated traffic safety camera program in 2025: eastbound Auburn Way South between the R Street SE bridge and the Muckleshoot Plaza intersection, eastbound 15th Street NW between M Street NW and Ron Crockett Drive, and southbound A Street SE between 17th Street SE and 21st Street SE. Councilmember: Tracy Taylor Staff: Ingrid Gaub Page 362 of 374 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5847 July 12, 2025 Page 1 of 3 Rev. 04/24 RESOLUTION NO. 5847 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE CITY OF AUBURN AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERA 2025 PROGRAM EXPANSION STUDY AND PROGRAM OVERVIEW (STUDY) AND AFFIRMING THAT SPEED ENFORCEMENT WITH AUTOMATED TRAFFIC SAFETY CAMERAS AT THE LOCATIONS RECOMMENDED IN THE STUDY IS CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW WHEREAS, with Resolution 5789, the City Council adopted the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP) and established the goal and vision to reduce and eventually eliminate serious injury and fatal crashes; and WHEREAS, the CSAP identified speeding as one of the main circumstances associated with serious injury and fatal crashes and recommended consideration of speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras to reduce speeding; and WHEREAS, RCW 46.63.250 allows for speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras in school speed zones, school walking areas, roadway work zones, hospital speed zones, public park speed zones, State highways within City limits, and locations determined by the City Council to have experienced higher crash risks due to excessive vehicle speeds (General Locations); and WHEREAS, RCW 46.63.220 requires an analysis of potential equity impacts and alternatives to camera enforcement for all enforcement locations that were not already in place before June 2024; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared the City of Auburn Automated Traffic Safety Camera 2025 Program Expansion Study and Program Overview (Study); and Page 363 of 374 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5847 July 12, 2025 Page 2 of 3 Rev. 04/24 WHEREAS, the Study evaluated General Locations for speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras and evaluated whether or not locations met the State requirements and analyzed potential equity impacts and alternatives to camera enforcement; and WHEREAS, the study recommends speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras on eastbound Auburn Way South between the R Street SE bridge and the Muckleshoot Plaza intersection, eastbound 15th Street NW between M Street NW and Ron Crockett Drive, and southbound A Street SE between 17th Street SE and 21st Street SE (Recommended General Locations). NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RESOLVES as follows: Section 1.City of Auburn Automated Traffic Safety Camera 2025 Program Expansion Study and Program Overview (Study) attached as Exhibit A is hereby adopted. Page 364 of 374 -------------------------------- Resolution No. 5847 July 12, 2025 Page 3 of 3 Rev. 04/24 Section 2.The City affirms that the Recommended General Locations meet the requirements of RCW 46.63.220 and RCW 46.63.250. Section 3.This Resolution will take effect and be in full force on passage and signatures. Dated and Signed this 21st day of July, 2025. CITY OF AUBURN ____________________________ NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________ Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Jason Whalen, City Attorney Page 365 of 374 2025 Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Study Page 1 of 9 Resolution 5847 Exhibit A City of Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program 2025 Program Expansion Study and Overview, Prepared 7/8/2025 Purpose This document provides the basis for the City Council to establish prioritized locations for general speed enforcement with the expansion of the City’s automated traffic safety camera program in accordance with state requirements. In 2024, Washington State Legislature House Bill 2384 was passed that updated RCW’s related to automated traffic safety cameras. The changes removed the limitations for agencies like the City of Auburn from only using automated traffic safety cameras in school zones, railroad crossings, and signalized intersections. The revised state regulations continue to allow agencies to operate automated traffic safety cameras to enforce speed limits in hospital speed zones, public park speed zones, school speed zones, school walk zones, roadway work zones, and state hig hways that are classifled as City streets per RCW 47.24 (such as Auburn Way South/SR 164). There are no limits to how many speed enforcement cameras agencies may operate in these areas. The state regulations revised by House Bill 2384 now allow agencies to utilize automated traffic safety cameras to enforce speeds at other locations deemed by the City Council to experience higher crash risks due to excessive vehicle speeds. In adopting the 2025-2026 biennial budget, the Auburn City Council approved a program improvement to expand the City’s current photo enforcement from being only in school zones to also enforce speeds outside school zones. The budget included implementation of up to 3 cameras in late 2025 that would be actively enforcing speeds in early 2026. In 2025, the expanded program will place up to 3 additional speed enforcement cameras at locations that are not school speed zones (General Locations), that meet the criteria established in RCW 46.63.250(3)_ and with analysis required per RCW 46.63.220(3): RCW 46.63.250(3): “…The local legislative authority may authorize the use of one additional automated traffic safety camera per 10,000 population to detect speed violations in locations deemed by the local legislative authority to experience higher crash risks due to excessive vehicle speeds…” (Speed and Crash Requirement) RCW 46.63.220(3): “The local legislative authority must prepare an analysis of the locations within the jurisdiction where automated traffic safety cameras are proposed to be located before adding traffic safety cameras to a new location or relocating any existing camera to a new location within the jurisdiction. The analysis must include equity considerations including the impact of the camera placement on livability, accessibility, economics, education, and environmental health when identifying where to locate an automated traffic safety camera. The analysis must also show a demonstrated need for traffic cameras based on one or more of the following in the vicinity of the proposed camera location: Page 366 of 374 2025 Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Study Page 2 of 9 Travel by vulnerable road users, evidence of vehicles speeding, rates of collision, reports showing near collisions, and anticipated or actual ineffectiveness or infeasibility of other mitigation measures.” (Equity and Alternatives Analysis Requirement) Auburn’s 2025 population is estimated to be just over 90,000 and therefore, the City of Auburn may operate up to 9 automated traffic safety cameras to enforce speeds at general locations. Background The City of Auburn’s current Automated Traffic Safety program is intended to reduce speeding in school zones and improve overall safety for children, teachers, and parents. The need for the program was identifled in 2022 when speed studies in 28 different school zones showed that between 7% and 45% of vehicles were signiflcantly exceeding the 20 mph speed limit in active school zones. The program has been successful in reducing non-compliance rates from the initial study in 2022. The initial average non- compliance rate for the school zones where cameras were installed was 27%. By the end of 2024, with the 12 automated traffic safety cameras in place, the average non-compliance rate dropped to under 2%. In 2024, with Resolution 5789 the City Council adopted the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (Safety Plan) and established a target zero vision and goal. The vision is to eventually have no serious injury and fatal crashes on the City’s transportation system. The goal is to reduce serious injuries and fatal crashes by 30% by 2040. Community outreach and engagement helped develop the Safety Plan. In total, 351 public comments related to safety concerns were received and considered through various engagement tools and speeding was frequently one of the most signiflcant concerns shared. The Safety Plan identifles various approaches to support the vision and goal, called safety countermeasures. Automated traffic safety cameras are a proven safety countermeasure that is effective in affecting driver behavior to slow down and therefore reduce the likelihood of serious injury and fatal crashes. Site Selection Approach The following steps were taken to select locations prioritized for automated speed enforcement: 1) Initial Site Selection and Evaluation 2) Detailed Speed Studies 3) Crash to Speed Correlation Evaluation 4) Equity and Alternatives Analysis 5) Selected Sites Initial Site Selection and Evaluation The City’s Traffic Engineering staff of the Public Works Department and the Traffic Unit of the Police Department worked together to identify 14 locations to be considered for study. The initial locations were identifled based on crash history, speeding complaints, information from the Safety Plan, and previously conducted speed studies. The initial locations were evaluated and considered for further study based on the following criteria: Page 367 of 374 2025 Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Study Page 3 of 9 Table 1: Initial Evaluation Criteria Criteria No. Criteria Description 1 Presence on Safety Emphasis Corridor (SEC) as identifled in the 2024 Auburn Comprehensive Safety Action Plan 2 Presence on High Injury Network (HIN) as identifled in the 2025 Draft Regional Safety Action Plan by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) 3 Conditions making enforcement by traffic police officers difficult (limited space along corridor, high speeds, high volumes, multiple lanes) 4 History of crashes and speeding complaints (typically refiected by presence on SEC or HIN) 5 Lack of other safety counter measures (lighting, sidewalks, and/or enhanced crossings) Other evaluation criteria included the posted speed limit, number of lanes, average daily traffic volume, and the roadway classiflcation. Table 2 below lists the evaluation criteria and whether the location was selected to be included in the speed studies performed by the City’s automated traffic safety camera vendor, Verra Mobility. The locations chosen for further study are shaded green. Table 2: Initial Evaluation and Outcome Location Direction Posted Speed (mph) # of Lanes Classification Criteria Present Study S. 277th St between D St NE & I St NE WB 35 2 Principal Arterial 2, 3,4,5 Y 15th St NW between M St NW & Ron Crockett Dr EB 35 2 Principal Arterial 1,3,4,5 Y Auburn Way S between R St Bridge & Muckleshoot Plaza SE EB 35 2 Principal Arterial 1,2,3,4,5 Y Auburn Way S between Dominick St SE & Moses St SE WB 35 1 Principal Arterial 1,2,3,4,5 Y** A St SE between 17th St SE & 29th St SE SB 40 2 Principal Arterial 1,2,3,4,5 Y 124th Ave SE between SE 296th Way & SE 300th Way SB 35 2 Minor Arterial 4 N West Valley Highway between 29th St NW & 37th St NE NB 40 2 Principal Arterial 2,4,5 Y Auburn Way North between 15th St NE & 30th St NE NB 35 2 Principal Arterial 1,2,4 N Harvey Rd between 12th St & 8th St NE NB 35 2 Principal Arterial 1,4 N 8th St NE between Harvey Rd and Pike St NE EB 35 2 Principal Arterial 1,2,4 Y 132 Ave SE (Lea Hill Rd) between SE 308th St and SE 312th Ct SB 35 1 Minor Arterial 1,2,3,4 Y C St SW between 15th St SW & Ellingson Rd SB 45 2 Minor Arterial 2,3,4 N* Lake Tapps Parkway between Lakeland Hills Way & Town Center WB 45 2 Principal Arterial 2,3,4 Y B St NW between 16th St NW & 29th St NW SB 35 1 Minor Arterial 2,3,4,5 Y** * Road construction planned in 2025 w/potential speed limit change would confiict with study. ** Study included through lane and adjacent two-way left turn lane. Page 368 of 374 2025 Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Study Page 4 of 9 Speed Analysis Study From March 11th to March 25th, 2025, the City’s automated traffic safety camera vendor conducted detailed speed studies at the 10 preliminary locations identifled for further study in Table 2. The study data was processed to indicate the total volume of vehicles and the percentage of vehicles that were exceeding the speed limit at given thresholds at each location. In summary, the results showed signiflcant variation in the rates of vehicles that were signiflcantly exceeding the posted speed limit, ranging from 56% to 1%. The highest rates of non-compliance occurred on S. 277th Street (56%), two studied locations on Auburn Way South (SR-164) (50% and 55%), 15th Street NW (26%), and B Street NW (26%). To prioritize locations that had the highest rates of signiflcant speeding, locations with the lowest rates of signiflcant speeding were not selected to move forward. Locations selected for further evaluation are shown in green on Table 3 below. Table 3: Speed Studies Summary Location Total Vehicle Volume1 Vehicles @ Posted + 10 Vehicles @ Posted + 15 Further Evaluation? S. 277th St between D St NE & I St NE 45,679 56% 30% Yes 15th St NW between M St NW & Ron Crockett Dr 50,277 26% 8% Yes Auburn Way S between R St Bridge & Muckleshoot Plaza SE 48,932 55% 24% Yes Auburn Way S between Dominick St SE & Moses St SE 33,059 50% 13% Yes A St SE between 17th St SE & 29th St SE 34,276 10% 3% Yes West Valley Highway between 29th St NW & 37th St NE 18,524 8% 2% No 8th St NE between Harvey Rd and Pike St NE 33,132 1% <1% No 132 Ave SE (Lea Hill Rd) between SE 308th St and SE 312th Ct 18,179 5% 1% No Lake Tapps Pkwy between Lakeland Hills W & Town Center Entrance D/W 24,192 1% <1% No B St NW between 16th St NW & 29th St NW 15,353 26% 8% Yes 1 Two-day total traffic volume Speed and Crash Requirement The Safety Plan identifles Safety Emphasis Corridors throughout the City where most of the crashes causing serious injuries and fatalities (KSI Crashes) have occurred. 59% of all KSI Crashes occurred on the 7 identifled Safety Emphasis Corridor. For each Safety Emphasis Corridor, the Safety Plan identifles the prominent circumstances involved with the KSI Crashes. The most common identifled circumstances include speeding, impaired driving/DUI, failure to yield the right-of-way, and distracted driving. For all corridors, the Safety Plan identifles automated safety cameras as a countermeasure to be considered for improving driver behavior, reducing speeds, and lessening the likelihood of KSI Crashes. General speed enforcement with automated traffic safety cameras at locations on these identifled corridors would meet Page 369 of 374 2025 Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Study Page 5 of 9 the Speed and Crash Requirement. Locations not located on these corridors may still meet the Speed and Crash Requirement but would require additional analysis to substantiate that the criteria has been met. Locations on Safety Emphasis Corridors were prioritized to move forward into the Equity and Alternatives Analysis and are shown in green on Table 4. The two locations that would require additional analysis to evaluate crash history and speed correlation were not selected to move forward into the equity and alternatives analysis with this current program expansion but may be considered with future prog ram expansion(s). Table 4: Locations on Safety Emphasis Corridors Location On Safety Emphasis Corridor? Next Step S. 277th St between D St NE & I St NE No Additional analysis would be needed to evaluate crash history. 15th St NW between M St NW & Ron Crockett Dr Yes Equity and Alternatives Analysis Auburn Way S between R St Bridge & Muckleshoot Plaza SE Yes Equity and Alternatives Analysis Auburn Way S between Dominick St SE & Moses St SE Yes Equity and Alternatives Analysis A St SE between 17th St SE & 29th St SE Yes Equity and Alternatives Analysis B St NW between 16th St NW & 29th St NW No Additional analysis would be needed to evaluate crash history. Equity and Alternatives Analysis Requirement Equity considerations include evaluation of the impact of camera placement on livability, accessibility, economics, education, and environmental health. The analysis also evaluates whether other mitigation measures besides traffic cameras have been effective and whether new or additional measures would be feasible and likely to be effective in reducing crashes caused by speeding. Camera enforcement can have a positive effect on the livability, accessibility, economics, education, and environmental health of the areas in which they are placed. Camera enforcement encourages drivers to obey posted speed limits which creates a safer environment for other vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists. The reduction of high speeds that are the result of camera enforcement make it more comfortable and therefore more likely that people will be more willing to walk, bike, and use transit which has a positive effect on accessibility, economics and environmental health. Those who receive infractions also beneflt from the program as the infraction and associated fee encourage and educate them to learn to slow down which reduces the likelihood that they will be seriously injured or killed in a crash or cause others to be seriously injured or killed. Since camera placement has a positive impact on the area in which they are placed, consistent with the City’s equity policies in its Comprehensive Transportation Plan, the potential placement locations were evaluated from an income demographics standpoint. This evaluation helps ensure that locations selected for placement are not underserving or overserving any particular income demographic. The City’s goal is to Page 370 of 374 2025 Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Study Page 6 of 9 balance the automated enforcement, so that the distribution of income demographics served by the cameras refiects the distribution of income demographics in the City. Table 5 summarizes the overall income demographics of the registered owners of the vehicles travelling in the listed locations. This information was collected using the Placer.AI data service provided to the City. Table 5: Income Demographics Location Median Household Income1 Comparison of Auburn Median Income2 Note 15th St NW between M St NW & Ron Crockett Dr $88,000 95% Location is 5% lower than median income Auburn Way S between R St Bridge & Muckleshoot Plaza SE $92,000 >99% Location is nearly equal to median income Auburn Way S between Dominick St SE & Moses St SE $103,000 111% Location is 11% higher than median income A St SE between 17th St SE & 29th St SE $94,000 101% Location is 1% higher than median income 1 Per Placer AI data collection tool 2 Median income in Auburn is $92,824 The income demographic information shown on Table 5 suggests that placement of automated traffic safety cameras in one or more of the locations would not weigh more heavily on, or provide more beneflt to, income demographics signiflcantly below or above the median household income in Auburn. However, all 4 locations are in, or along, areas identifled as “disadvantaged communities” in the Safety Plan. People living in these areas are more likely to rely on active transportation and transit services (where available) and are therefore more likely to be out walking or biking on and along the roadways. It follows that increasing driver compliance with posted speed limits on roads in, and along, these areas will increase safety and comfort to the people who rely on walking, biking, and transit . In some cases, placement of camera enforcement in one location may cause traffic to divert and potentially speed in another location. In those situations, the area being served by the enforcement would beneflt but it could be at the detriment of another location. The short list of study locations from Tables 4 and 5 were evaluated to determine if diversion of traffic on to other corridors would be likely to occur and what the potential impacts and mitigation for the diversion could be. The results are summarized in Table 6 below. Page 371 of 374 2025 Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Study Page 7 of 9 Table 6: Traffic Diversion Evaluation Location Diversion Potential Potential impact of diverted drivers on community and potential mitigation Eastbound 15th St NW between M St NW & Ron Crockett Dr Diversion not expected. N/A Eastbound Auburn Way S between R St Bridge & Muckleshoot Plaza SE Some diversion may occur: Auburn Way S to Howard Rd to R St SE to Riverwalk Dr to Auburn Way S This alternate route is already utilized to by-pass congestion on Auburn Way S and therefore also experiences congestion during peak commute times and during events at the White River Amphitheater. Some additional diverted traffic may occur, however, mitigation measures have already been constructed or will soon be constructed with planned projects, and no appreciable impact is anticipated: Traffic calming measures have been recently installed on Howard Rd near Auburn Way S. A roundabout at the intersection of R St SE and Howard Rd/21st St SE is in design and planned for construction in 2026. Sidewalks, street lighting, and other safety improvements have been recently constructed on Riverwalk Dr and at the intersection of Riverwalk Dr and Auburn Way S. Westbound Auburn Way S between Dominick St SE & Moses St SE Diversion not expected. N/A Southbound A St SE between 17th St SE & 29th St SE Some diversion may occur: 17th St SE to F St SE, M St SE, or and Auburn Way S. to Howard Rd to R St SE Traffic calming measures have been recently installed on Howard Rd near Auburn Way S. A roundabout at the intersection of R St SE and Howard Rd/21st St SE is in design and planned for construction in 2026. Traffic calming measures (speed cushions, raised pedestrians, and signage) have recently been installed on F St SE, G St SE, K St SE, and M St SE. Additionally, school zone photo enforcement is in place on M St SE. In addition to evaluation of equity criteria, the analysis also looks at potential alternatives to camera enforcement. For each location, the study identifles what measures have already been taken to reduce speeding and lower the risk of serious injury and fatal crashes caused by speeding. The study also considers what other measures cou ld be taken and the feasibility and anticipated effectiveness of those measures. The alternatives analysis information is shown on Table 7. Page 372 of 374 2025 Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Study Page 8 of 9 Table 7: Alternatives to Camera Enforcement Location Already Implemented Measures Potential Other Measures Additional Traditional Speed Enforcement Physical Traffic Calming Other Potential Mitigation Eastbound 15th St NW between M St NW & Ron Crockett Dr Dynamic message sign, traditional enforcement, signage, streetlights, road channelization changes High traffic volumes and low numbers of infractions issued w/traditional enforcement has only minor positive impacts to general driver behavior. No other feasible measures due to high volumes and need to serve snow plows, freight and transit. Additional street lighting and pedestrian facilities. Eastbound Auburn Way S between R St Bridge & Muckleshoot Plaza SE Lane narrowing, lowered speed limit, dynamic message sign, street lighting, sidewalks, signage, median/centerline hardening No location for officers to provide traditional enforcement due to roadway characteristics. No other feasible measures due to high volumes and need to serve snow plows, freight and transit. No potential mitigation that hasn’t already been implemented. Westbound Auburn Way S between Dominick St SE & Moses St SE Traditional enforcement Additional traditional enforcement may be feasible. High traffic volumes and low numbers of infractions issued w/traditional enforcement has only minor positive impacts to general driver behavior. No other feasible measures due to high volumes and need to serve snow plows, freight and transit. Additional street lighting and pedestrian facilities. Southbound A St SE between 17th St SE & 29th St SE Traditional enforcement, sidewalks, street lighting, traffic signal improvements High traffic volumes and low numbers of infractions issued w/traditional enforcement has only minor positive impacts to general driver behavior. No other feasible measures due to high volumes and need to serve snow plows, freight and transit. No potential mitigation that hasn’t already been implemented. Selected Locations The flnal selection of locations was based on consideration of all data and criteria as summarized on Table 8. Sites proposed for implementation in 2026 are shown in green on the table. Page 373 of 374 2025 Auburn – Automated Traffic Safety Camera Study Page 9 of 9 Table 8: Final Selection for Initial Program Expansion Location Direction Selected for Initial Program? Reasons Selected or Not Selected S. 277th St between D St NE & I St NE WB N Additional crash and speed correlation analysis is needed. 15th St NW between M St NW & Ron Crockett Dr EB Y Meets all legislative criteria and supports City safety goal. Auburn Way S between R St Bridge & Muckleshoot Plaza SE EB Y Meets all legislative criteria and supports City safety goal. Auburn Way S between Dominick St SE & Moses St SE WB N Traditional enforcement feasible. Of the two locations considered on Auburn Way S, this location has better potential for traditional enforcement and mitigation measures such as additional street lighting and pedestrian facilities. Placing cameras at two locations on Auburn Way S. while other locations would not have any was not seen as being the most equitable approach with this initial expansion and may disproportionately impact the adjacent community along this corridor. A St SE between 17th St SE & 29th St SE SB Y Meets all legislative criteria and supports City safety goal. 124th Ave SE between SE 296th Way & SE 300th Way SB N Traditional enforcement feasible and effective. West Valley Highway between 29th St NW & 37th St NE NB N Lower levels of signiflcant speeding. Auburn Way North between 15th St NE & 30th St NE NB N Traditional enforcement feasible and effective. Harvey Rd between 12th St & 8th St NE NB N Traditional enforcement feasible and effective. 8th St NE between Harvey Rd and Pike St NE EB N Lower levels of signiflcant speeding. 132 Ave SE (Lea Hill Rd) between SE 308th St and SE 312th Ct SB N Lower levels of signiflcant speeding. C St SW between 15th St SW & Ellingson Rd SB N Construction projects underway. Not fully studied. Lake Tapps Parkway between Lakeland Hills Way & Town Center WB N Lower levels of signiflcant speeding. B St NW between 16th St NW & 29th St NW SB N Additional crash and speed correlation analysis is needed. Page 374 of 374