Water Treatment Plant 4 – Jollyville Transmission Main (JTM)

When/if the new water plant on Lake Travis is completed, the treated water will flow through a transmission main to the Jollyville
Reservoir at McNeil and US 183. How did we end up with a transmission main that crosses through some of the most sensitive area
of the Bull Creek Preserve (part of the Balcones Canyonlands Preserve)?

This Story Dates Back to the 1980s

WTP4 began with the passage of a bond package
and purchase of the first plant site near the
headwaters of Bull Creek. In the 1980s we knew
far less than we do now about springs, karst,
groundwater flows, vireos, warblers, and
salamanders. Construction of this plant was
placed on hold for several reasons. A few years
later, in 1996, the Balcones Canyonland Preserve,
which includes the Bull Creek Preserve, was
established with a permit from the US Fish and
Wildlife Service.

Flash forward to 2005

Austin Water Utility (AWU) must build a new water treatment plant because the city is about to run out of water. (Sound familiar?)
However, members of the city’s environmental board look at the site data and lead a charge to convince the city council the site is
too sensitive for this project. AWU searches for another site. In 2007, the city purchases undeveloped land on Bullick Hollow Road.

Who’s Got the Transmission Main

If the first WTP4 site was too fragile for a water plant, do you suppose the surrounding land might be also? Here is a murky part of
the story. The environmental reports from 2005 discuss the plant site, but not the JTM. The first analysis of the JTM I found in public
documents was a 2009 engineering report. Did someone forget to consider how water would get from the plant to the reservoir?
Did someone not care how the water would get from the new plant to the reservoir? AWU staff remains silent on this issue.

Can’t Throw a Rock Without Hitting a Spring

The Preconstruction Groundwater Assessment for the Jollyville Transmission Main WTP4, prepared by Black & Veatch and Daniel B.
Stephens & Associates, dated December 2010 has some interesting exhibits in the back. One shows the route of the JTM (marked in
black) and springs. It would be
hard to hit more springs if you
tried. These springs are part
of a complex and interlinked
network that ultimately feeds
Bull Creek, which then
supplies Lady Bird Lake. (The
city’s other water treatment
plant is on Lady Bird Lake.)
Remember Moss Gully Spring
Moss Gully Spring does not flow anymore. Years ago, the city drilled a test bore (inches in diameter) in the Bull Creek Preserve. Then
the flow in nearby Moss Gully Spring ceased. Scientists discovered the little bore punctured a water path to the spring, which sent
the water in a different direction. AWU likes to say there is no correlation between the two events. However, their own description
of their attempt to restore the water flow in 2009 suggests otherwise. From the BCCP Annual Report 2009, Page 24
Working with WPDRD staff on measures and a plan to restore flow to Moss Gully spring. WPDRD oversaw this project but unfortunately miscalculated
measurements and backfilled concrete beyond the spring conduit. BCP staff plan to attempt to fix this problem and restore flow back to Moss Gully.

Not the Kind of Variance That Keeps Austin Weird

In 2011, the engineering firm designing the JTM submitted site plans to the city’s planning department. The variances are hard to
fathom coming on the heels of months of AWU assurances that the contractors will follow the most stringent rules and procedures
to protect the environment. Here are three troubling variances:
Drill the ten-foot diameter tunnel inside the buffer zone of Pit Creek,
Blast at the shaft sites, and
Blast in tunnel crossings of critical water quality zones that are not perpendicular.

Drilling a 10-foot wide tunnel is done with boring machines. Most of us have no reference for a
machine like this. This picture, which is from an AWU presentation, gives you an idea.

City code establishes buffer and critical water quality zones to protect the environment. These zones
usually surround caves and springs or run parallel to a creek. They are around 200 feet for a creek
and 300 feet for a spring or cave. The city’s own environmental specialists say setback zones must
prohibit construction to protect the creeks and springs.

Everyone knows blasting means using dynamite to crush the rock. AWU staff said it will be controlled blasting and people on the
surface will not feel a thing. That is fine for the surface, but what about underneath? This area is honeycombed with caves and
underground water flows. A test bore can be drilled in one place and show nothing and another can be drilled a few feet away with
quite different results.

Shafts are 30 to 40-feet in diameter and 100-200-feet deep. Their function

is to remove rocks and earth, insert and remove machinery, insert pipes,
and pump grout. One of the sites is fewer than 200 feet from Bull Creek and
fewer than 100 feet from homes (in the middle of a neighborhood and just
down the street from a school). The adjacent picture also is from an AWU
presentation.

Confusing Choice with Chance

AWU makes these variances for drilling and blasting sound like a reasonable
choice. What are the chances of a 10-foot diameter tunnel crossing 7 miles of fragile land disrupting more springs?

The Options
AWU is ignoring one of their options. Reroute the transmission main to miss this sensitive area. It will take more time, but the city
tells us we are conserving more water, so our faucets will not run dry July 2014. It will cost more money. Let’s add the millions of
dollars invested in the Bull Creek Preserve and the potential fallout if the preserve is ruined to the other side of the balance sheet.
Now it is reasonable to consider another route.

What Can You Do

Write the mayor and council members and ask them to follow the city’s own rules and to stop the transmission main site plan.

Log on and send those emails now. http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council/groupemail.htm