Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Water Supply Reserve Account – Grant Appli cation Form <br />Form Revised July 2006 <br />_______________________________________ <br /> <br />3. <br />Please provide an overview of water project or activity to be funded including – type of ac tivity, amount of funding <br /> <br />requested, statement of what the activity is intended to accomplish, the need for the activity, the problems and <br /> <br />opportunities to be addressed, expectations of the participants, why the activity is important, the service area or <br />g eographic location, and any relevant issues. Please include any relevant Tabor issues. Please refer to Criteria and <br /> <br />Guidance document for additional detail on information to include. <br /> <br /> <br />SUMMARY: <br /> <br />ACTIONS NEEDED: <br /> <br />We need to accomplish four things: <br /> <br /> <br />(A) sleeve the 30 ” CMP outlet tube so that it can take pressure <br />without risking leakage that could compromise the integrity of <br /> <br />the dam (and a prerequisite for (C) below) , <br /> <br />(B) screen the headgate structure to prevent trash from blocking <br /> <br />flow, <br /> <br /> <br />(C) directly connect the outlet structure to the delivery pipeline <br /> <br />for control, <br /> <br /> <br />(D) add flow measurement ability to the pipeline. <br />Engineering has put the cost to do this at $1 10 K and we are asking for <br /> <br />$8 7.5 K in grant funding to help, with members making up the difference <br /> <br />(approximately 20%) . The engineering estimate is up from our original <br />application, after clarification on the 300 feet of pipe that needs <br /> <br />rep lacing. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />JUSTIFICATION: <br /> <br />This local NRCS salinity pipeline project has been “completed”, but we <br />are left with several issues which would be totally resolved by the <br /> <br />above actions and could be completed this year (depending on timing of <br /> <br />funds): <br /> <br />? <br /> <br />The pipeline i s indirectly connected to the dam headgate without <br />adequate controls, resulting in inefficient operation with manual <br /> <br />oversite that cosumes several manhours per day. To attempt to <br /> get water to upper members on the pipeline, flow rate is set <br />high, resulting in excess water spilling over the overflow, <br /> <br />wasting it for productive use. <br /> <br />? <br /> <br />Our measuring device was removed and not replaced so we are <br />unable to measure actual usage which is required. <br /> <br />? <br /> <br />Our member contribution was planned at 25%, but the actual <br /> <br />numbers cam e in at 33% (with NRCS funding 67%) because the <br /> <br />project came in higher, for several reasons. That percentage <br />difference doesn’t tell the whole story – the delta actually <br /> <br />meant members had to pay approximately TWICE what they originally <br /> <br />planned in dollars , which they’re obviously paying, but not <br />happily . <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />(See attached – continued) <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />