CHAPTER FIVE INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENTponds for evaporation and percolation, irrigation reuse or injection into deep aquifers. Sludge refers to the accumulated solid residues of the treatment

CHAPTER FIVE

INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT

SANITARY SEWER

SUBELEMENT

Updated: EAR BASED AMENDMENTS

July 11, 2006, Ord. No. 2006-A12

December 11, 2007, Ord. No. 2007-A37 (Sanitary Sewer Sub-element)

September 16, 2008, Ord. No. 2008-A27

(Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water Sub-elements)

November 10, 2009, Ord. No. 2009-A24 (Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water Sub-elements)

February 14, 2012, Ord. No. 2012-A02

(Drainage Sub-element)

February 26, 2013, Ord. No. 2013-A04 (Potable Water Sub-element)

February 25, 2014, Ord. No. 2014-A06

(Drainage Sub-element)

February 28, 2017, Ord. No. 2017-A09 (Sanitary Sewer, Potable Water, and Drainage

Sub-elements

Infrastructure Element Sanitary Sewer Subelement

5-51

I. BACKGROUND

A. Terms and Concepts

1. Regional Facilities

Regional facilities are large-scale sanitary sewer systems, which generally provide service to densely populated areas. Presently there are six regional sewage treatment plants in operation in the unincorporated area of Citrus County with an additional facility planned. These facilities are comprised of three components, which perform the basic functions of collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage.

The collection system is composed of a network of sewer pipes, which collect sewage (also called wastewater) from individual establishments and convey it to a central location for treatment. The collection network is generally laid out in a pattern roughly analogous to the branching pattern of a tree. Figure 5-3 illustrates this pattern and the terminology applied to sewers within the system. This classification scheme identifies sewers according to their location within the network and not according to their size. Since sewage flow within the network is from the periphery toward the treatment plant, this scheme allows for easy identification of downstream components, which will be affected by sewage flows from a peripheral area.

A regional treatment plant serves a fairly large geographic area and treats the sewage to remove solid and organic materials. The treatment plant is the component of the regional sanitary sewer facility, which functions to remove solid and organic materials from the sewage.

There are a large number of processes, which can accomplish this, but they should generally be grouped into one of three categories depending on the proportion of materials removed. The three levels of treatment are Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Treatment.

a. Primary Treatment

This refers to the removal of between 30 to 35 percent of the organic materials and up to 50 percent of the solids from the sewage. This is also referred to as physical treatment because screens and settling tanks are the most common methods used to remove the solids.

b. Secondary Treatment

Following primary treatment, additional steps are taken so that between 80 and 90 percent of organic materials and solids are removed. This level of


5-52

treatment usually requires multiple steps involving one biological process and one or more processes for removal of suspended solids.

c. Tertiary Treatment

Sewage may also contain quantities of synthetic organic compounds or inorganic chemicals, which may create pollution problems, if not removed. Tertiary (or advanced) treatment adds steps to primary and secondary processes to remove these pollutants. The most common tertiary processes remove compounds of phosphorus and nitrogen. The effluent of advanced treatment processes often approaches potable water purity.

d. Effluent Disposal Methods

Effluent and sludge are the waste products of the treatment process. Effluent is the treated wastewater, which flows out of the treatment plant. Effluent disposal options include discharge to a water body, storage within percolation ponds for evaporation and percolation, irrigation reuse or injection into deep aquifers. Sludge refers to the accumulated solid residues of the treatment process. Prior to final disposal, sludge is usually subjected to an additional biological treatment process to remove pathogens and physical dewatering processes to facilitate transportation and disposal. Common disposal methods include burial in solid waste landfills and land application as a soil conditioner for agricultural purposes. In addition, the placement of septage on permitted agricultural lands in areas of suitable nature (areas closed to surface waters) occurs.


5-53


5-54

2. Package Treatment Plants

Package treatment plants are essentially small treatment systems, which have a collection network, treatment plant, and disposal system. Package plants may be designed to provide any level of treatment, but plants providing secondary treatment are most commonly used. Package plants are available in a range of capacities up to one million gallons per day. They are generally used to serve isolated development and are usually partially or completely pre-assembled by the manufacturer prior to shipment to the site of use.

3. Septic Systems

Septic systems are usually used to serve single housing units, although relatively large-scale systems have proven successful. The system consists of two components, the septic tank and the drain field. The tank receives wastewater from the home and provides a period of settling, during which time a significant portion of the suspended solids settle out. The settled solids are gradually decomposed by anaerobic bacteria in the tank. The remaining liquids are discharged by displacement through underground drainage pipes into the drainfield and percolate into the soil where microorganisms and filtration processes purify the liquids. A modified onsite sewage disposal system improves on the septic tank design by providing aeration and promoting more efficient treatment. These systems, called aerobic treatment systems, are capable of 95 percent or higher treatment and are utilized in coastal zones or larger commercial facilities. Septic tanks generally require cleaning every three to five years to remove accumulated solids. These solids, called septage, are generally transported to approved agricultural sites or regional sanitary sewer facilities for treatment prior to disposal.

4. Reclaimed Water and Reuse

Reclaimed water is treated wastewater that has received at least secondary treatment and basic disinfection and is reused after flowing out of a domestic wastewater treatment facility. Reuse is the deliberate application of reclaimed water, in compliance with Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and water management district rules, for a beneficial purpose. Reclaimed water can be used for a wide range of beneficial purposes, including the following:

• Landscape irrigation (irrigation of golf courses, parks, highway medians,

playgrounds, residential properties, etc. • Agricultural irrigation (including irrigation of nurseries/ornamentals and

edible crops)


5-55

• Aesthetic uses (decorative ponds, pools, and fountains) • Ground water recharge • Industrial uses (for cooling, process, or wash waters) • Wetlands creation, restoration, or enhancement • Toilet flushing • Fire protection (use in hydrants or sprinklers) • Other use purposes

Reuse Program

Subsection 373.250(1) and 403.064(1), F.S., establish the following state reuse objectives:

The encouragement and promotion of water conservation and reuse of reclaimed water, as defined by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), are state objectives and are considered to be in the public interest. In response to this objective, the DEP, the water management districts, and the Public Service Commission (PSC) have implemented a comprehensive reuse program designed to encourage and promote reuse of reclaimed water. Among the key components of the reuse program are included:

• Provisions in the state’s Water Policy, Chapter 62-40, Florida

Administrative Code (F.A.C.), which encourage, promote, and require reuse and water conservation.

• Water management strict rules, which encourage and promote reuse. • Comprehensive rules governing reuse in Chapter 62-610, F.A.C. • The anti-degradation policy in Chapters 62-4 and 62-302, F.A.C., which

encourages reuse over new or expanded surface water discharges. • Provisions in Subsections 403.064(13) and (14), F.S., which limit effluent

disposal by deep well injection and surface water discharges within water resource caution areas to wells and discharges serving as back-ups to reuse systems, when reuse has been determined to be feasible.

• Statutory and rule requirements for preparation of reuse feasibility studies and associated Guidelines for Preparation of Reuse Feasibility Studies (DER 1991).

• Provisions in the Florida APRICOT Act, which facilitated back-up discharges for reuse projects (Subsection 403.086(7), F.S.) and eliminated previous statutory barriers to reuse projects involving ground water recharge (Subsection 403.859(7), F.S.), SWFWMD, 1997).

B. Regulatory Framework

1. Federal

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) is the controlling national legislation relating to the provision of sanitary sewer service. The goal of this Act


5-56

is the restoration and/or maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. The Act established the national policy of implementing area wide waste treatment and management programs to ensure adequate control of sources of pollutants. Under Section 201 of the FWPCA, grants were made available to local governments to construct facilities to treat “point sources” of pollution, which include effluent from sewage treatment processes. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is responsible for implementing the Act.

2. State

The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is responsible for ensuring that the state carries out responsibilities assigned to it under the FWPCA. DEP has adopted rules for the regulation of wastewater facilities in Chapter 62-600, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). These rules apply to facilities, which treat flows exceeding 10,000 gallons per day for domestic establishments, 3,000 gallons per day for food service establishments, where the sewage contains industrial or toxic or hazardous chemical wastes. Additional state regulatory authority may be found in Chapters 373 and 403, Florida Statutes, as well as DEP rules Chapter 62-4, 62-302, 62-610 which address reuse water conservation, and water quality. All Florida Statutes may be found on the Online Sunshine website at http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Welcome/index.cfm and the Florida Administrative Code may be found on the Florida Department of State’s website at https://www.flrules.org.

The Department of Health regulates septic tank and drain field installation within the state. These requirements have been adopted by rule in Chapter 64E-6.

3. Local

To ensure economic efficiency in the operation of the regional sanitary sewer facilities which it provides, Citrus County has adopted design standards and review procedures to ensure that all connections to the system are compatible with the system design. The Citrus County Public Health Unit (CCPHU), Environmental Health Section, oversees permitting, set-up, and operation of individual septic systems in accordance with County and state rules and regulations The DEP inspects and monitors all wastewater facilities in Citrus County. In addition, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) adopted an ordinance, which requires that new sanitary sewer systems be designed to specific standards and dedicated to the County when warranted. Management, construction, and operation of the County’s utility systems is the responsibility of the Department of Water Resources.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Welcome/index.cfm

https://www.flrules.org/


5-57

II. EXISTING CONDITIONS

A. Citrus County 201 Facilities Plan

According to the FWPCA, municipalities must provide the best practicable waste treatment technology. The law also provided for federal grants to municipalities to meet the provisions stipulated. A section of the law (201) established a three-step process for obtaining grants. Even though these grants (201) are no longer available, they are included here to provide historical perspective. The first step in this process involves the establishment of a facility plan, which includes an inventory of existing conditions, analysis of alternative plans, and selection of a plan. The facility plan must include an area sufficient to analyze the cost effectiveness of waste treatment alternatives. In 1976, two consulting engineering firms prepared 201 Facility Plans for the Cities of Crystal River and Inverness, respectively. For purposes of these studies, Citrus County was divided into three planning areas: Crystal River, Southwest Citrus County, and Inverness (refer to Figure 5-4). One aspect of these plans, which should be mentioned, concerns implementation. The FWPCA contains a requirement that the implementing agency (in two of these cases) the Cities of Crystal River and Inverness) must serve the area outlined in its plan without regard to whether such area is a part of the municipality. If this objective is not carried out, federal assistance in funding construction of sewer facilities will be withheld. This requirement is significant in determining who will become the lead agency in providing sewer service and where service facilities will be located.

B. Wastewater Master Plan

In September 1986, an analysis was conducted of wastewater facilities by consulting engineers as a basis for long range planning. Conceptual designs were developed for wastewater facilities in areas where land use and environmental factors indicated a need for sanitary sewer service. The study covered the entire limits of Citrus County; however, certain sectors were eliminated:

• Existing sewer service areas, which cannot, for political, legal, or other reasons, be integrated into a Countywide wastewater system. These areas include the Cities of Crystal River and Inverness, Citrus Springs Utilities, Rolling Oaks Utilities, and Florida Water Services Corporation (Florida Water Services facilities are now owned by the Florida Government Utilities Authority)


5-58

• Those areas of the County, which were designated as low intensity on the Generalized Future Land Use Map and are not feasible to provide utility service (Glace and Radcliffe, 1986, page 2)

C. Citrus County Comprehensive Plan 1995-2020

The majority of residences in Citrus County are served by individual septic systems. However, many of the new major developments are being served by regional treatment plants. Presently, there is one privately owned regional treatment plants and five County owned facilities. Plans for an additional County facility are underway. In addition, there were 81 treatment plants operating in Citrus County in 2000. These facilities are listed in Appendix C. The analysis, conducted in 1986 by Glace and Radcliffe, Inc., Consulting Engineers, represents the most current comprehensive guide for decision making concerning wastewater treatment facilities. For purposes of brevity, this Subelement contains a synopsis of the report’s conclusions and is referenced throughout. The findings and recommendations were used as the basis for planning and the formulation of goals, objectives, and policies throughout the planning period. The study concluded that neither the Coastal nor Lakes Areas are generally suitable for the disposal of treated wastewater due to poor soil characteristics. Soils in the Central Ridge Area are well drained and are well suited for the disposal of treated wastewater. However, inadequate sewage disposal varies widely across the County. Generally, these problems relate to the specific conditions within the Coastal, Lakes, and River and Central Ridge Areas (refer to Figure 5-5).

1. Coastal Area

This area is characterized by spring-fed rivers meandering through tidal marshlands. Uplands in this area have been developed residentially. In most parts of this region, septic systems have been used as the major source of sewage disposal. One major exception is the Riverhaven Village development, which was served by its own central treatment plant. (Editor’s Note: This plant has since been decommissioned as a result of a FDEP Consent Order resulting from a history of problems at the plant. Wastewater flows from Riverhaven have been redirected to the County’s Meadowcrest facility.) The cumulative impact of additional septic systems has been linked to nutrient and bacteria related problems in the adjacent rivers and estuarine systems. Specific impacts from septic system leachate include high coliform bacteria counts in numerous locations. To counteract increased degradation the Crystal, Withlacoochee, Homosassa, Hall’s, and Chassahowitzka Rivers have been


5-59


5-60


5-61

designated Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW). The Salt and St. Martin’s Rivers are afforded similar protection due to their presence within the St. Martin’s Marsh Aquatic Preserve. OFW status precludes the DEP from issuing any permit that will result in a decrease of water quality. Citrus County’s coastal rivers are also a protected habitat for the Florida manatee, an endangered species. The continued nutrient enrichment of Crystal River from septic system leachate, as well as, stormwater runoff and other sources causes waterweeds to grow rapidly in the river. This led to the use of copper sulfate to kill waterweeds. A study by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service indicates that manatees from this region have a higher concentration of copper in their bodies than those from other areas. Presumably, this results because the manatees ingest the copper sulfate when feeding. The long-range effect of this chemical on the manatee is not known. Beaches, rivers, and shell fishing areas, specifically oystering areas, have experienced pollution impacts to the extent that such areas have been intermittently closed to commercial and recreational activities. Under certain conditions these incidents can be directly attributed to septic system leachate contamination. Typically, the problem inherent in utilizing an alternative sewage treatment and disposal system that has less impact on the environment is economic. Disposal of effluent from central treatment facilities into coastal estuarine areas is not viewed positively by the DEP. This requires transport of effluent inland for disposal. However, DEP has permitted in several locations in Florida to the experimental use of overland flow of effluent through marsh and swampland to eliminate nutrients. In either case, the cost of effluent disposal will be relatively high in the Coastal Area. The cost comparison between septic systems and central sewage treatment has changed, resulting in a substantial increase in the cost of installing septic systems. Increased costs for fill material for septic system drainfields have raised septic system installation costs. This cost is close to the unit’s costs associated with a central sewerage system and provides impetus to develop these systems in the Coastal Area. In addition, use of septic systems for commercial development is being discouraged and/or prohibited due to potential groundwater contamination risks. Citrus County has installed a sewer force main to the Chassahowitzka area, which will be further discussed below.

2. Central Ridge

This area contains mostly sandy soil, which is suitable for percolation of septic tank effluent. However, there are some locations that are vulnerable to high-


5-62

density development which utilize septic system disposal systems (refer to Conservation Element). This relates to the high leakance rate and the lack of confining layers to prevent contamination of the underlying aquifer. In order to prevent groundwater pollution and protect the aquifer, the placement of septic systems is limited. In accordance with current state requirements, if individual wells (private water systems) are used, septic systems can only be used if the development density is two units per acre or less. If the density is greater than two units per acre, septic systems may only be used in conjunction with a public water system. However, high-density developments (six to 20 units per acre) must be connected to central water and sewer facilities. In an effort to further reduce negative impacts from septic system densities, the County currently limits new developments to one acre or larger parcels where private wells and septic systems are proposed.

3. Lakes and River Area

The Tsala Apopka Chain of Lakes is a complex combination of lakes, swamps, marshes, and pockets of uplands. Hydraulically, water does not percolate far into the soils of this area. In fact, water comes to the surface throughout this area. Consequently, lake levels are a reflection of water levels within the underground aquifer and the adjacent Withlacoochee River, which directly connects to the Chain of Lakes. Because water does not percolate downward significantly in this area, the use of septic systems is not recommended. The effluent tends to leach directly into the water table and then into the lakes. Unfortunately, the many scattered developments throughout the area have historically utilized septic systems. Even though most of the development is low to medium density, there has still been a gradual reduction of water quality. As development pressure continues in the Lakes and River Area, the need for a better means of sewage disposal is required if water quality is to be preserved.

D. Septic System Suitability of Soils

In August of 1984, a soil survey was prepared for Citrus County, Florida by the Soil Conservation Service. (SCS) The survey was prepared in cooperation with the University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Citrus County BCC, and the Gulf Soil and Water Conservation District. A portion of the survey discussed soil suitability in relation to the use of septic systems. The soils in Citrus County have been categorized into three classifications of septic system suitability. Figure 5-5 depicts the three classifications, which include slight, moderate, and severe. These classifications relate to the impact a septic system might have upon the ecosystem of an area because of the soil character. The three ratings of the soils are given in terms of their limitations for septic system use.


5-63

The areas with a slight degree of limitation have properties favorable for the use of septic systems. To protect the environment from detrimental effects by the septic system in these areas, namely ground water contamination, little preventive maintenance and site preparation are needed. The soils with a slight designation coincide roughly with the Central Ridge region of the County. These soils are nearly level to sloping, excessively drained to somewhat poorly drained, and sandy to depths of 20 to 80 inches. The slight classification has two subcategories. Subcategory #1 (Candler-Lake-Astatula) may be a hazard to the groundwater, where there are many septic systems because of rapid filtration. In general, however, these areas are well suited for septic system usage with minimal alteration to the soil in order to protect the groundwater from contamination. The areas with a moderate limitation for septic system use require more site preparation than the slight limitation areas to protect the environment. Sites containing these soils require treatment such as artificial drainage, control of runoff to reduce erosion, extended septic system absorption fields, additional excavation, or some other modification to protect the environment. The moderately limited soils form a narrow transitional area between the slightly and severely limited soils. The moderately limited soils are on nearly level to sloping terrain, well drained to somewhat poorly drained, sandy to depths of 20 to over 40 inches, and located over loamy material. The soils severely limited for the use of septic systems are limited in their natural state because of such properties as steep slopes, bedrock near the surface, flooding, high shrink-swell potential, a seasonal high water table, or low strength. This level of limitation generally requires major expenditures for soil reclamation. This involves constructing a larger drain field and a larger mound than needed for a moderate limitation area. A large portion of Citrus County is designated as having a severe limitation for septic system use. The Coastal, Lake, and River Areas of Citrus County contain much of the severe limitation areas. These soils are somewhat poorly drained to very poorly drained, nearly level to sloping soils, nearly level soils on coastal swamps, tidal marches and flood plains, and nearly level and depressional soils of the River Valley low lands. (It is important to realize that this description of soil suitability for septic system use is generalized. For a more detailed analysis refer to the Soil Survey for Citrus County.)

E. Citrus County Utilities Wastewater Facilities Plan 2000, and Reuse Master Plan

2000.

In February 1999, the Citrus County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and the Citrus County Utilities Division (CCUD) engaged the firm of C & D Engineering, Inc., to prepare a wastewater facilities plan and a reuse master plan for the orderly


5-64

expansion of CCUD’s Central Wastewater System through the year 2020. The emphasis was on the integration and maximum utilization of all the existing facilities and identifying the extent and timing of infrastructure required to meet future needs. The Wastewater Facilities Plan and the Reuse Master Plan were approved by the BCC on January 9, 2001, and are on file in the Department of Development Services. A complete citation for the documents is located at the end of the date and analysis sections of this element. The project documented existing service areas, wastewater flows, collection system facilities, treatment plants, and reuse facilities. Computer models of the various elements of the existing system were developed and various alternatives for future expansion were evaluated. Population data were broken down by Census Block Group and projections made in five-year increments through 2020. Citrus County Planning District Population Projections were used to help estimate where growth would occur. The primary emphasis of the study concerned County owned facilities in unincorporated lands in the County, exclusive of the service areas of the City of the Crystal River, City of Inverness, Floral City Water Association, Rolling Oaks Utilities, and Florida Water Services, Inc. (Florida Water Services facilities are now owned by the Florida Government Utilities Authority).

III. FACILITIES INVENTORY

A. Regional Facilities

Citrus County is presently served by five regional wastewater treatment facilities. Three of these facilities (Brentwood, Canterbury, and Meadowcrest) are operated and maintained by the County Public Utilities Division. Citrus County has acquired two additional wastewater treatment facilities, formerly operated by the Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA). These include Citrus Springs and Sugarmill Woods. The remaining regional facility is owned, operated, and maintained by Rolling Oaks Utilities, a private utility company. In addition, the Cities of Crystal River and Inverness operate regional facilities. The service areas for these facilities are shown in Figure 5-6. The service areas are subject to change according to subsequent development activity. Many service areas overlap with areas served by package wastewater treatment systems or septic systems. The regional wastewater systems serve predominantly single family homes. The capacity analysis, general information, and planned improvements for each facility are provided in the adopted Wastewater Facilities Plan (C & D Engineering, 2000). Level of service indicated the extent or degree of service provided by, or proposed to be provided by, a facility based on and related to the operational characteristics of the facility, Chapter 9-J-5.011 (f) 1. and 3., F.A.C. The level of service for each regional


5-65

wastewater is adequate. All facilities have the resources to assure that an adequate level of service is provided for future connections. The general condition of the facilities is defined as the functioning of the components of the system and the quality of the effluent discharged. All of the regional wastewater facilities except one are relatively new and all are functioning satisfactorily. The expected life of all the regional facilities is projected to be 25 to 50 years in length. After that time, the facilities will require maintenance to continue operation. The one exception is that the wastewater plant owned by Rolling Oaks Utilities is reaching end of life. Engineering for its replacement began in 2007. The current demand for these facilities represents the number of connections, average flow, and estimated population served.


5-66


5-67

An overview of the major findings for each facility is outlined below.

1. Brentwood

This facility was constructed in 1984 and serves an area of approximately 21,000 acres. The system is projected to be expanded from 500,000 gallons per day to 1,500,000 per day in 2008. Additionally, it will be upgraded so that effluent will be of reuse quality. Any expansion of the treatment plant will be done at the current site. In addition to serving single family dwelling units, the facility serves low density multifamily dwellings, public and semi-public buildings and commercial establishments located principally along CR-486.

2. Meadowcrest

Approved planned developments such as Crystal Oaks, and Crystal Glen have enlarged the service area to approximately 13,000 acres. The land uses, predominantly served by the Meadowcrest facility, are single family and low density multifamily residential. General commercial land uses, along SR-44, and additional single family and low density multifamily residential areas are projected to be served by the facility. No plans for replacement of any system components are planned, with the exception of regular maintenance. Expansion is projected to take place in 2007 to a capacity of 1.5 million gallons per day. Additionally, it will be upgraded so that effluent will be of reuse quality. The Meadowcrest Wastewater Treatment Plant is a 0.5 (MGD) (AADF) extended aeration activated sludge facility with denitrification. The facility is designed for secondary treatment. Effluent currently is disposed into two on-site percolation ponds. When upgraded to revise quality, an agreement has been negotiated to supply the Black Diamond golf course, which will then lower their amount of water withdrawal from the Floridan aquifer.

3. Canterbury Lakes

This facility was constructed via a cooperative agreement between the County and private developers. The land uses, predominantly served by the facility, are residential with some commercial flow. The service area covers approximately 30,000 acres and the system, a package treatment plant, is inadequate to accommodate projected future flows in the area. Consequently, the service area is proposed to be connected to the Brentwood system.


5-68

4. Rolling Oaks Utilities

Currently the necessary infrastructure to serve the area depicted in Figure 5-6 is not in place. This service area represents the entire Beverly Hills Development of Regional Impact, which will be served by Rolling Oaks.

Expansion is planned to increase capacity to serve the needs of future development. Due to concerns of nitrate loading and other factors, Rolling Oaks Utilities constructed new percolation ponds for effluent disposal. Only minor replacement due to regular maintenance is performed.

5. Florida Governmental Utilities Authority (formerly Florida Water Services

Corporation)

The FGUA facilities were acquired by Citrus County in 2007. The County will be adding a force main and other infrastructure to divert some of the flow from the Citrus Springs wastewater facility to the Meadowcrest wastewater treatment facility. The necessary infrastructure to serve the entire service area is not yet in place. The area within the Sugarmill Woods Development that is served by the facility is expanding, as needed, to accommodate growth. Expansion of the facility is underway and service is available south of US-98. There are no plans for replacement of any major component parts of the system, except for preventive maintenance. The treatment plant is currently under expansion to accommodate approximately 150 additional connections per year.

6. Homosassa Wastewater Service Area

The Homosassa Wastewater Service Area is located in southwest Citrus County and covers an area of approximately 101,000 acres. The area is to be served by a proposed sewer collection and transmission system. Problems with the former Riverhaven Village Wastewater Plant have necessitated proceeding with a collection system that can be rapidly implemented, yet maintain sufficient flexibility to be integrated into a Countywide wastewater system. The Riverhaven facility has been removed from service and wastewater is being conveyed to the Meadowcrest Wastewater Treatment Plant pending construction of a future Homosassa Regional Reuse Facility. Presently, the remainder of the service area is served by individual septic tanks and small package plants, many of which have been identified as sources of pollution to the Homosassa River and other water bodies.


5-68A

B. Package Treatment Facilities

An inventory of Citrus County’s Package Treatment Facilities is contained in Appendix C. An updated inventory is shown in the Wastewater Facilities Plan, Table 2 - Existing Wastewater Plans (C & D Engineering, 2000), which has been added to Appendix C.


5-69

In many instances the responsible entity is a utility company or homeowners association. In others, the responsible person is the owner of the system. Because the geographic service area is usually a small subdivision or a manufactured home park, ranging in size from a few to several hundred acres, it is represented as a point on Figure 5-7. The predominant land uses served by most of the package treatment facilities are, by order of frequency, manufactured home parks, recreational vehicle (RV) parks, low density multifamily dwellings, public/semipublic buildings and grounds, single family dwellings, commercial centers, and isolated commercial structures. Other land uses represented in the inventory include utilities, single family manufactured homes, recreation and open space, and single family mixed land uses. Approximately one-half of the package treatment facilities serve manufactured home and RV parks. The number of service connections for each plant ranges from one to over 250 with one system projected to have over 300. The systems serving only one connection are generally schools, but also include a motel, hospital, and restaurants. The average flow to the package facilities ranges from several hundred to 50,000+ gpd. Almost 11,000 persons are estimated to be served by the facilities listed in the inventory. The estimated number of persons served by any plant ranges from less than 10 to almost 600. Some systems will eventually serve nearly 1,000 persons when their respective developments reach build-out. Many systems, such as those serving schools and commercial establishments, serve people only part of the day. The number of persons served by this type of facility is based on Equivalent Residential Units (ERU). It is assumed each ERU has a population of 2.29 persons. The design capacity for each facility is defined as the flow of wastewater the facility was constructed to accept. The design capacities range from 3,000 to 100,000 gpd. Currently, all the package facilities combined have the capacity to accept almost 1.8 mgd. This is approximately three times the current average flow to the treatment plants. The capacity analysis for the facilities, (Appendix C) indicates that several systems are currently operating substandard. These facilities are currently under DEP enforcement. In addition, the level of service is inadequate in several service areas, due to the lack of sufficient capacity or inadequate treatment, and the County has implemented a building moratorium in agreement with the DEP. The facilities with an unsatisfactory general condition are those that accept too much flow for their capacity or do not satisfactorily treat it. An overloaded system cannot treat wastewater properly and, thus, inadequately treated wastes are discharged to the environment.


5-70

General performance also includes the impact a system has on the environment. In general, wastewater treatment systems do not pose serious threats to human health, since they prevent untreated wastes from coming in contact with potable water sources. Improvements to these facilities include expansion or linkage to regional wastewater treatment systems. Package facilities generally expand either to accommodate additional connections, to increase capacity or to provide additional treatment to wastewater (tertiary treatment). Several package plants are currently being or are proposed to be expanded. Some facilities in need of expansion are not planned for such. Facilities expanding to provide additional treatment (tertiary treatment) do so to reuse the effluent for irrigation. Several facilities may be linked to regional facilities in the future. The recently updated Citrus County Wastewater Facilities Plan and Reuse Master Plan (C & D, 2000) contain a proposal for a regional wastewater facility to serve the entire Homosassa region. Several package wastewater treatment plants inventoried are proposed to be linked to the proposed Homosassa Regional Wastewater System when it is constructed. The County has acquired a site for a future Homosassa Regional Wastewater Reuse Facility off CR-490 near Rock Crusher Road.


5-71


5-72

IV. NEEDS ASSESSMENT

A. Regional Facilities

This section examines the need for facility improvements during the planning period. Improvement needs were derived from the Wastewater Facilities Plan (C & D Engineering, Inc., 2000) and the Reuse Master Plan (C & D Engineering, Inc., 2000), and are based on demand for capacity to serve existing and projected population and land uses. Capacity needs are assessed for County owned and operated regional facility service areas only, since these are viewed as the long-term means of providing for sanitary sewer needs in the County. Flow determinations and demand were calculated in the 2000 study. (To meet the requirements of Chapter 91-5, F.A.C., this plan is here referenced and considered a support document). The 2000 overall system flow of wastewater was estimated to be approximately 0.353 MGD (C & D Engineering, 2000, Table 9). Based upon the County’s goals regarding the expansion of the wastewater treatment system to serve development within the designated service areas, future 2020 wastewater flows are estimated to be about 2.76 MGD (C & D Engineering, 2000, Table 10). This is based upon the assumptions that all new development in these areas will be served by the system, and all existing people not on the system currently, will remain disconnected from the system. These assumptions could skew predictions of future flows should new projects be permitted to use package treatment plans and septic systems or should large numbers of people on septic systems and package plants be brought into the central system. Monitoring will be necessary to maximize opportunities to fully utilize system expansions, and to target existing developed areas for connection while accommodating new development. Citrus County recognizes the need to eliminate existing septic tanks and small, ineffective package treatment plants through its utility service areas and replaces them with centralized wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal facilities. Removal of these ineffective systems is a vital step in protecting water quality of important area water bodies such as the Homosassa River, Crystal River/King’s Bay, Chassahowitzka River, Withlacoochee River, and the Tsala Apopka Lake Chain. In addition, the County recognizes the value of water conservation and the important role wastewater reuse can play in conserving potable groundwater resources. The initial impetus for the County’s reuse program came from the targeting of critical areas experiencing water quality degradation in the Homosassa Wastewater Facility Service Area for removal of ineffective septic tanks and package treatments plants, and the need to treat and dispose of the increased effluent flows coming into the central system. The construction of pumping stations and transmission lines to Meadowcrest to allow the abandonment of the small package treatment at Riverhaven Village and eliminate its discharges to neighboring wetlands was begun in 1999. This new system will provide the backbone for a regional collection system that will allow the County to provide sanitary sewer service along the US-19 corridor and abandon other ineffective package wastewater treatment plants. The initial phases of the


5-73

reclaimed water system are expected to serve large users of groundwater for irrigation (golf courses) in the central portions of the County, which are characterized by typically deep, sandy soils, excessively drained, droughty, with extremely low fertility, generally unsuitable for crop cultivation, or landscaping. Future phases of the reuse system will look at serving residential communities, which also use excessive irrigation for residential landscaping due to poor soil conditions. Sanitary sewer service areas were determined based on existing and proposed land use and geographic features. The potential of being served by an existing wastewater utility was also considered in the development of service areas. Areas that consisted of large lots (two acres or more) were generally excluded since these densities were not sufficient to justify the expense of sewer service. This exclusion did not apply where wastewater disposal problems exist (Glace and Radcliffe, Inc., 1986, page 18). The Citrus County Regional Wastewater Treatment Inventory and Analysis is located in Appendix B. The sanitary sewer needs in each of the four regional service areas; Meadowcrest, Brentwood, Canterbury Lakes, and Homosassa of the County are briefly outlined below.

1. Meadowcrest Wastewater Service Area

The Meadowcrest Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility is a relatively new (1995) facility with a current treatment capacity of 0.50 MGD (AADF). The facility was designed to allow for phased expansions up to 1.80 MGD (AADE). In 2008 construction will begin to expand capacity of the Meadowcrest wastewater treatment plant to 2.0 MGD. Additionally, it was designed to allow effluent filtration and other features to be added to make it a reuse facility capable of treating and delivering high quality water for landscape irrigation, agricultural irrigation, industrial uses, fire protection, and other uses to help conserve potable groundwater resources. Because of the location, age, size, condition, design, and expandability of this existing facility, full expansion and utilization of this facility is recommended through the planning period (2020). Several forcemains will be installed to divert flow from the Brentwood and the Citrus Springs Plants to the Meadowcrest Plant. These changes are the result of a slow down in projected growth and constitute a major deviation from the Citrus County Wastewater Treatment Plan, 2000.

2. Brentwood Wastewater Service Area

The Brentwood Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility is a relatively new (1995) facility with a current treatment capacity of 0.45 MGD (AADF). The facility was designed to allow for phased expansion up to 2.007 MGD (AADF) and can accommodate the addition of effluent filtration and other features to allow it to become a reuse facility capable of treating and delivering high quality water for irrigation and other uses for which water of potable quality is not required. Because of the location, age, size, condition, design, and expandability of this


5-74

existing facility, full expansion and utilization of this facility is recommended through the planning period (2020).

3. Canterbury Lakes Wastewater Service Area

The Canterbury Lakes Wastewater Treatment Facility is a relatively small (0.095-MGD AADF) package type, wastewater treatment plant. The facility is not designed for ease of expansion or equipped with the major unit processes and reliability features that one would find on a typical “public access” quality reuse facility. Because of the location, age, size, condition, design, and expandability of this facility, full utilization is recommended only until such time as its service area and collection system can be combined with and become a part of the Brentwood Wastewater Service Area. In this way, the benefits of centralized treatment and operations can be realized. A master lift station modification at the Canterbury Lakes wastewater treatment plant will divert flow to the Brentwood plant. This will allow Canterbury to receive additional growth. The Apache Shores package wastewater plant will divert flows to Canterbury. The Apache Shores plant has compliance issues with its DEP permits and is inefficient.

4. Homosassa Wastewater Service Area

Numerous documented problems with septic tanks and package treatment plants in the low lying coastal areas which comprise the Homosassa area, and associated water quality degradation resulting from nutrient loading and fecal coliform bacterial contamination has prompted Citrus County to extend centralized sewer services to the area. Citrus County has recently completed the construction of a force main and master pump station from Riverhaven Village to the Meadowcrest Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility as part of a central wastewater collection system designed to serve the Homosassa Springs area. The next phase of this centralized system, construction of force mains along US-19 south to Yulee Drive, is currently under construction and sewer main lines will then be extended into Old Homosassa. The County owns a site for a future Homosassa Regional wastewater Reuse Facility off County Road 490 near Rock Crusher Road. Based upon population projections alone, coupled with the fully expanded capacities of the Meadowcrest Facilities, construction of the Homosassa Regional Wastewater Reuse Facility would not be required until after the year 2020.

5. Alternatives Analysis

Two alternatives were analyzed for implementation, a three-plant configuration and a two-plant configuration. Both configurations will meet projected demand; however, depending upon the amount of new development and opportunities to take package treatment plants and septic tanks off line, the three-plant configuration will likely be implemented in the long term. The differences between the systems plant configuration will likely be implemented in the long term. The differences between the systems plant configuration proposed by the


5-74A

two alternatives are not great, the major difference is the addition of a third wastewater treatment facility, the majority of the collection and transmission system is the same for both alternatives. Due to funding uncertainties and



5-75

existing priority projects, the two-plant alternative will be pursued initially with the County retaining the flexibility to construct the third wastewater treatment plant when demand is sufficient. Over the long term, the three-plant configuration will probably be implemented because it maximizes opportunities to take package plants and septic tanks off line while being adaptable to the County’s goals regarding expansion of the public wastewater system within designated service areas.

The primary wastewater collection system is proposed to be extended geographically, so that it can collect wastewater from the entire service area (C & D Engineering, 2000, Figure 15). In addition, improvements will be necessary to upgrade facilities to meet current public reuse standards and to construct a reclaimed water distribution system. Both of the proposed two alternatives assume that future population growth in the service areas will be served by the central wastewater system and that existing people, not currently connected to the system, would remain disconnected until such time as water quality issues or local assessment projects warrant connection. However, this assumption is not consistent with the County’s stated goal of eliminating ineffective, existing on-site treatment systems and, depending upon the number of people served by such systems and the residential densities of those areas, future demand for central wastewater collection and treatment facilities might exceed the 2.76 MGD estimated for the year 2020. The demand volume of 2.76 MGD represents an estimated population of about 30,600 persons, about 18 percent of the projected 2020 population. The County clearly needs to maintain flexibility in system configuration to accommodate future growth while addressing ground and surface water quality issues. Interlocal Agreements In accordance with previous studies and proposals, the County and City of Inverness have entered into an interlocal agreement to discourage the proliferation of septic systems and package treatment facilities in environmentally sensitive areas and promote compact orderly growth. The agreement allows the City to provide sewer service to a specified area of unincorporated Citrus County within the Inverness area (Figure 5-8). A similar agreement with the City of Crystal River was finalized in 1997. Reducing the number of package wastewater treatment facilities within the County can be accomplished by incorporating, whenever possible, these facilities into the regional systems. Another method to reduce the number of package facilities (although not easily attained) is to require developers of proposed projects to link to, or construct, regional wastewater treatment systems instead of constructing package plant systems or provide regional scale monitoring. The Inventory and Analysis of Citrus County’s Package Wastewater Treatment Facilities is located in Appendix C.


5-76

B. Package Wastewater Treatment Facilities

Theoretically, no package wastewater treatment facility is thought to have detrimental impacts on the environment if operated correctly. In reality, many package wastewater treatment facilities may be harmful to the environment. A reduction in the number of package wastewater treatment facilities will mean a reduction in the harmful effects caused by these systems. By using fewer package and more regional wastewater treatment facilities, monitoring of effluent is more thorough and treatment of wastewater is more cost efficient due to economies of scale. Reducing the number of package wastewater treatment facilities within the County can be accomplished by incorporating, wherever possible, these facilities into the regional systems. Another method to reduce the number of package facilities, (although not easily attained) is to require developers of proposed projects to link treatment facilities, monitoring of effluent is more thorough and treatment of wastewater is more cost efficient, due to economies of scale. Reducing the number of package wastewater treatment facilities within the County can be accomplished by incorporating, wherever possible, these facilities into the regional systems. Another method to reduce the number of package facilities (although not easily attained) is to require developers of proposed projects to link to, or construct, regional wastewater treatment systems instead of constructing package plant systems or provide regional scale monitoring. The Inventory and Analysis of Citrus County's Package Wastewater Treatment Facilities is located in Appendix C.

C. Gray Water Systems

One technique that increases the capacity of wastewater treatment facilities is the use of gray water systems. The intent of the gray water system is to send only that portion of the wastewater from homes and businesses to the wastewater treatment plant which contains toilet and kitchen wastes and to dispose of the wastewater from bathing and laundry activities into septic systems. The use of gray water systems allows the various types of wastewater to be treated appropriately. This technique allows more connections to be served and, thus, reduces treatment costs. There may be an additional initial cost to home buyers because both septic and central wastewater treatment facilities are used.


5-77

V. FACILITIES PLAN

Based upon the analysis and findings of the Wastewater Facilities Plan, (C & D Engineering, 2000) it is recommended the County pursue construction of wastewater treatment facilities to serve the areas outlined above, the Meadowcrest, Brentwood, Canterbury Lakes, and allow privately owned facilities to accommodate adjacent areas. The following table summarizes the extended phasing, and approximate construction costs of the recommended improvements program and includes all projects from both the two- and three-plant configurations. A more detailed description of the proposed projects may be found in the Wastewater Facilities Plan, Section 7 - Recommendation.

TABLE 5-8

CITRUS COUNTY WASTEWATER FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM 2009-2013

Project Description and Location Cost Utility System Revenue Bond, Series 2007 $15,978,000 Pump Station/Manhole Rehab 300,000 General Infill Projects 1,250,000 Emergency Generators 150,000 Line Exp. CR486 & SR 44 532,500 Line Exp. CR 486/CR 491 1,242,500 New Master Lift Station & Force Main 2,990,000 Lift Station Upgrade: Meadowcrest (LS#1) 50,000 Expansion US 19 Sewer: Green Acres to Crystal River 6,800,000 Line Exp Citrus Springs: Topeka Line 9,254,700 Lift Station Rehab/Replacement: Sugarmill Woods 1,425,000 Lift Station Rehab/Replacement: Citrus Springs 1,135,600 Lift Station Rehab/Replacement: Point O’ Woods 118,800 WWTP Upgrade: Point O’ Woods 825,000

TOTAL $42,052,100 *Project costs also include potable water systems as outlined in Potable Water Subelement Source: Citrus County Capital Improvement Plan, 2009-2013 Prepared by: Citrus County Community Development Division, 2009


5-78


5-79

VI. FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY

The total costs to construct and connect these wastewater collection and treatment systems were outlined in the preceding table. The implementation of these systems is not economically feasible through existing fiscal resources and thus a variety of new or increased funding sources need to be identified and secured. The County has undertaken a water and sewer rate study to determine new, appropriate rate structures for water and sewer services. Among the issues to be examined will be conservation rate structures (stepped rates) and charges for reclaimed water. Other sources of facilities funding opportunities include various state agency and legislative appropriations, cooperative funding with the Southwest Florida Water Management District, grants, loans, and various kinds of special purpose districts and assessments as provided by State law.

A. Amended Rate Structure and Connection Fees

Another method to finance the proposed wastewater facilities is to adjust the rate structure and connection fees for County utility service. The current County wastewater rate structure varies considerably from conventional rate structures prevailing for municipal wastewater systems through the state (Glace and Radcliffe, Inc., 1986). The difference is that the County’s service availability charge is much higher while the treatment charge is much lower. For low volume users, the current charge is justified. For high volume users; however, revenues are diminished to the extent that the cost to treat the wastewater is greater than the revenues produced from a user. The County may consider adjusting the connection fee to increase the County’s funding capability of the proposed wastewater collection and treatment facilities.

B. Dedication

Many portions of the proposed wastewater collection and treatment facilities can be implemented through developer construction and subsequent deeding to Citrus County Utilities. This option will only prevail in areas that can accommodate large developments in which the developer is willing to construct regional wastewater treatment facilities.

C. Subsidies

Other funding sources include state and federal grants and loans. The County will continue to pursue these revenue sources and funding mechanisms for regional wastewater collection and treatment facilities in areas with existing deficiencies. The County has in the past applied for an FHA loan to fund the Homosassa/Homosassa Springs Area Wastewater Treatment System.


5-80

VII.FUTURE SYSTEM EXPANSION

Citrus County is a member of the Florida Governmental Utilities Authority (FGUA) which was created in 1999 through interlocal agreement so that member local governments could acquire private utility holdings as a group and subsequently acquire individual systems with their jurisdictions. In 2004, FGUA acquired the assets of Florida Water Services. In 2006, Citrus County acquired the FGUA system which included two regional wastewater treatment facilities and supporting infrastructure. The County is in the process of fully evaluating all acquired assets. This evaluation will entail several elements including the system capabilities and maintenance/expansion requirements to maintain adopted levels of service. Another will be revision of CCUD's service territories and possible related realignment of the Planned Service Area. Acquisition of FGUA facilities will greatly expand CCUD's customer base and geographic territory.


5-81

VIII.GOAL, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES

Goal #7 - Needed public wastewater collection and treatment facilities shall be provided in a manner, which protects investments in existing facilities and promotes orderly, compact urban growth.

Level of Service

Objective 7.1 The County shall ensure that at the time a development permit is

issued, adequate facility capacity is available or will be available when needed to service the proposed development.

Policy 7.1.1 The level of service standards of 75 gallons per capita per day

(average flow) and 125 gallons per capita per day (peak flow) shall be used as the basis for determining the availability of facility capacity and the demand generated by a development. The level of service standard for commercial and industrial development shall be 0.16 gallons per square foot of building per day (average flow) and 0.30 gallons per square foot of building per day (peak flow).

Policy 7.1.2 The County shall update facility demand and capacity information

in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan amendment process.

Capital Improvements

Objective 7.2 The County will maintain a five-year schedule of capital improvement needs for public sanitary sewer facilities to be updated annually in conformance with the review process for the Plan’s Capital Improvement Element.

Policy 7.2.1 Proposed capital improvement projects will be evaluated and

ranked according to the following level guidelines.

Level One - whether the project is needed to protect public health and safety, to fulfill the County’s legal commitment to provide facilities and services, to preserve or achieve full use of existing facilities, or if permitted capacity has been reached.

Level Two - whether the project increases efficiency of use of existing facilities, prevents or reduces future improvement costs, provides service to developed areas lacking full service or promotes in-fill development.

Level Three - whether the project represents a logical extension of facilities and services within a designated service area.


5-82

Policy 7.2.2 The County shall pursue various revenue sources and funding

mechanisms to acquire, construct, and maintain needed wastewater collection and treatment facilities such as, but not limited to, state and federally subsidized grants and loans, dedications, millage charge in Sub-County Municipal Service Taxing Unit, and amended rate structures.

Existing Deficiencies and Future Needs

Objective 7.3 Citrus County will provide sanitary sewer facilities to meet

existing and projected demand throughout the planning period by maximizing use of existing facilities and discouraging sprawl development. This shall be accomplished by the creation of two regional wastewater treatment facilities - Homosassa/Homosassa Springs and Hernando - in the planning period.

Policy 7.3.1 Existing deficiencies will be corrected and projected demands met

by undertaking the following projects:

Establishment of a wastewater collection and treatment facility and a regional wastewater treatment and disposal facility to serve the Homosassa/Homosassa Springs Area.

Policy 7.3.2 The provision of sanitary sewer facilities in the Lakes and River

Area shall be coordinated with the City of Inverness, via the Interlocal Agreement where applicable. In the absence of an Interlocal Agreement, the County reserves the right to serve these areas.

Policy 7.3.3 Project shall be undertaken in accordance with the schedule

provided in the Capital Improvements Element.

Policy 7.3.4 No permits shall be issued for new development which would result in an increase in demand in deficient facilities prior to completion of improvements needed to bring the facility up to standard.

Policy 7.3.5 All development must be served by a regional wastewater

treatment facility as soon as the service is available.

Policy 7.3.6 Require proposed development to hook up to existing regional wastewater treatment facilities, when available, and discourage construction of additional package wastewater treatment facilities.


5-83

Policy 7.3.7 Use of on-site wastewater treatment systems shall be limited to the following:

Septic system should be located only on parcels that contain sufficient land area to properly develop the required drain fields or contain soils that are suitable for proper percolation and effluent treatment; and

Existing septic system and package treatment plants may remain in service until such time as centralized service is made available.

Policy 7.3.8 The County shall accept dedicated wastewater collection and

treatment facilities constructed in accordance with County Ordinance or its successor.

Policy 7.3.9 The use of gray water disposal systems shall be encouraged when

feasible. New subdivisions and planned developments within the PSA shall install water lines for reused water in order to ensure the availability of lines for future service.

Policy 7.3.10 Domestic septage should be treated by a regional treatment facility,

or other acceptable method, prior to land application.

Policy 7.3.11 The County shall analyze and strengthen, if applicable, regulations for the application of domestic septage on lands to protect surface and groundwater quality.

Policy 7.3.12 The County shall eliminate and prevent the future discharge of

inadequately treated wastewater into water and wetlands of the state by encouraging the use of spray irrigation and percolation ponds and by decreasing the number of illegal outfalls through Code Enforcement proceedings and/or capital facilities. The application of gray and treated wastewaters for use in irrigation is encouraged in upland areas and should be interpreted as a direct discharge.

Policy 7.3.13 The County shall consider acquisition of the wastewater facilities

owned and operated by the Florida Governmental Utilities Authority, of which it is a member, and integrate them into the Citrus County Utilities Division’s system. The County will evaluate options to expand the number of customers provided services by the system, especially in the Chassahowitzka/Sugarmill Woods area in the southwest part of the County and the Citrus Springs area in the central portion of the County, in order to reduce the number of septic tanks countywide.


5-84

Policy 7.3.14 All development shall connect to systems designed to achieve

Type I or II wastewater treatment standards when available. The standards for Type I and Type II facilities are:

a. Advanced Wastewater Treatment (AWT) levels (3

Milligrams/Liter (mg/L) for nitrogen) for all Type I (design capacity of 500,000 gallons per day to 12.5 million gallons per day) and Type II (100,000 to 500,000 gallons per day) central wastewater treatment facilities using Rapid Infiltration Basins.

b. A treatment standard above secondary treatment of 10

mg/L for nitrogen for all Type I and II wastewater treatment facilities that include the reuse of water. A treatment standard above secondary treatment of 10 mg/L for nitrogen for Type III (less than 100,000 gallons per day).

Policy 7.3.15 All existing central wastewater treatment systems shall be designed

to achieve AWT treatment standards upon expansion and include reuse capabilities.

Policy 7.3.16 All new central wastewater treatment systems shall be designed to

achieve AWT treatment standards and include reuse capabilities. Policy 7.3.17 Reserved Wastewater Reuse

Objective 7.4 By the year 2010, the County will reclaim and reuse as much of the

wastewater collected through the County’s centralized system as weather and other conditions allow, in order to maximize the amount of wastewater recycled for reuse to help reduce the demand for limited high quality groundwater resources for non-potable uses. (Measure: Percentage of total wastewater flows reused.)

Policy 7.4.1 The County shall establish reclaimed wastewater service areas.

Policy 7.4.2 All County owned or operated wastewater treatment facilities shall

be constructed to reclaim wastewater and to distribute it through a reuse distribution system.


5-85

Policy 7.4.3 The County shall establish and enforce design standards for all new utility construction within the County that has the potential to become a part of the County’s central systems in the future and shall require all new, private, regional wastewater facilities to reclaim and recycle as much of their wastewater flows as feasible. Existing private regional wastewater facilities are strongly encouraged to upgrade to advanced treatment and reuse systems and to reclaim and reuse as much wastewater as feasible.

Policy 7.4.4 The County shall seek long term agreements with large users of

groundwater to provide reclaimed water for irrigation of horticultural or agricultural uses, golf courses, recreation and open space areas, and commercial and residential projects.

Policy 7.4.5 All new development projects and subdivisions within the

reclaimed wastewater service area shall construct on-site distribution system for the transmission of reclaimed water or other alternative sources. Such on-site systems shall provide for conveyance of reclaimed water from the project’s boundaries to the lot lines of each parcel within the project to facilitate landscape irrigation with reclaimed water in lieu of potable water, when implemented by the end user of the lot. This requirement may be waived where it can be shown that long term contractual commitments, limited supplies of reclaimed water, or other factors preclude the availability of reclaimed water to the project.

Policy 7.5.6 Reclaimed water irrigation systems shall be designed and installed

to prevent overspray or irrigation of any wetlands, water bodies, sinkholes, or stormwater systems except for reclaimed water storage ponds. Buffers and Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be required to prevent reclaimed water runoff from entering sinks, wetlands, and water bodies.

Policy 7.4.7 The County shall pursue a regional approach, whenever feasible, to

the use of reclaimed water through development of interlocal or contractual agreements with other local governments and surrounding jurisdictions, as well as, private suppliers of wastewater collection and treatment facilities.

REFERENCES 1996 Annual Reuse Report, Southwest Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, Florida Wastewater Facilities Plan for Citrus County Utilities, C & D Engineering, Inc., Lutz, Florida, December 2000 Reuse Master Plan for Citrus County Utilities, C & D, Inc., Lutz, Florida, December 2000 Florida Statutes, http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Welcome/index.cfm

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Welcome/index.cfm

Documents

CHAPTER FIVE INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENTponds for evaporation and percolation, irrigation reuse or injection into deep aquifers. Sludge refers to the accumulated solid residues of the treatment