Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Reuse topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Regional authority and engineering firm pitch reusing treated wastewater to add 11–16 MGD for Corpus Christi
Summary
A planned partnership with the Gulf Coast Authority and engineering firm Ardura would capture treated effluent from Oso and Greenwood plants and convey it to the Nueces River or large industrial users, delivering 11–16 million gallons per day within roughly 18–24 months, consultants said.
Consultants for the Gulf Coast Authority (GCA) and engineering firm Ardura presented a proposal to Corpus Christi City Council on Sept. 9 to accelerate use of treated municipal wastewater as a near‑term water supply option. The two organizations described a build‑out that could deliver roughly 11–16 million gallons per day (MGD) of reclaimed water from the city’s Oso and Greenwood wastewater treatment plants to either the Nueces River or directly to large industrial customers.
Jonathan Sandhu of the Gulf Coast Authority explained GCA operates regional treatment plants on a pass‑through, not‑for‑profit basis and can act as a conduit operator and long‑term manager. Ardura partner Chris Cananico described a project spine — a polyethylene pipeline aligned with portions of the city’s south transmission corridor — that could be fused and laid rapidly, lowering schedule and construction complexity compared with more conventional ductile‑iron installations.
Consultants estimated capital costs that scale with flow: in February 2025 dollars they outlined a midpoint cost of roughly $4.30–$5.10 per thousand gallons for the larger flow cases, and $5.47–$6.70 per thousand gallons if inflation through 2025–26 is included. They compared those figures with other water‑source options the city has considered and said reuse could be cost‑competitive with several alternatives already on study, noting the city already owns and controls the effluent streams.
Timeline and delivery: the firms said a development agreement and initial permitting could enable construction and delivery within about 18–24 months in an accelerated scenario. The longest route shown — to the Nueces River — would require more pipe length and higher pumping cost; a shorter, industry‑service configuration would be quicker and cheaper but requires customer commitments. Ardura emphasized use of high‑density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe for rapid deployment and indicated HDPE life is long (engineers cited multi‑decade reliability).
Council questions focused on environmental effects, permitting and bond‑rating implications. Staff said Garver, currently under contract to study several reuse and potable‑reuse pathways, could coordinate with any such partnership; Garver’s ongoing desktop work would complement a GCA/Ardura development track. Staff and consultants said the reuse plan would need Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and possibly USACE permits in coordination with FEMA and other agencies for river return options, and consultants recommended starting the permitting process in parallel with the development agreement to preserve an 18–24 month window.
Why it matters: Council has debated longer‑term water supply strategies while balancing rate impacts and voter concerns. Reclaimed‑water projects reuse existing treated flows, lower consumptive water demand and can defer or complement large, expensive desalination projects. If a reliable industrial offtake can be secured, such projects can supply additional water without building a full‑scale new freshwater resource.
What’s next: Councilmembers expressed interest in more detail but did not vote on any commitment. Staff said any formal partnership would require a development agreement, further TCEQ permitting work and likely coordination with GCA’s legal and finance teams. Consultants and staff said they would return with a proposed memorandum of understanding and a plan for next steps if council wishes to pursue the option.
