Laserfiche WebLink
<br />of outdoor watering restrictions in each of these years. Average per capita demand from 1998 - <br />2001 was 180 gpcd. This is the value against which conservation savings projections should be <br />measured since substantial reductions in indoor demand (not just outdoor) were accomplished as <br />part of the drought response effort. An element of the conservation program will be to maintain <br />and extend demand reductions already achieved. <br /> <br /> 70,000 <br /> 60,000 <br /> 50,000 <br />..-.. <br />LL <br /><C <br />'"-' <br />... 40,000 <br />CI) <br />.... <br />ca <br />~ <br />"'C 30,000 <br />CI) <br />.... <br />ca <br />CI) <br />... <br />I- <br /> 20,000 <br /> 10,000 <br /> <br />o <br /> <br /> <br />1998 1999 2000 2001 <br /> <br />2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 <br /> <br />I~Treated Water ~Per Capita I <br />Figure 2: Treated water demand and per capita demand 1998 - 2006 <br /> <br />250 <br /> <br />200 <br /> ....-.. <br /> -c <br /> (J <br />150 C. <br />C') <br /> ""'-'" <br /> co <br /> ..... <br /> c. <br /> co <br />100 () <br /> ... <br /> Q) <br /> c.. <br />50 <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />A breakdown of usage by customer class is provided in Table 4. The "Rate Class Description" <br />column is Aurora Water's general definition of the customer category and the "Service <br />Description" provides additional detail about the type of service and the water provided. The <br />"General Class" identification is the category that these different customers have been grouped <br />into for the purpose of this conservation planning project to allow for forecasting the impacts of <br />conservation measures and programs. <br /> <br />5 <br />