C150069 Benefits & Potential Roles Report

• Contract/PO #: C150069
• Contractor Name: Colorado State University
• Contract Type: MOU
• Water District: 0
• Loan Projects - Doc Type: Report

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

ordinances, a special water rate structure for the secondary system, and a policy that ensures that 0& W is
in full control of secondary system development, makes it possible for the D& W stockholders to realize
the many benefits of providing secondary water service. The canal company continues to operate on a
nonprofit basis. Although until recently there has been little discussion of the possibility of pressuring
agricultural water deliveries under the 0& W system, this appears to be changing, and may be partly
influenced by funds available through the 2002 Farm Bill for on-farm and group (lateral) projects.

Meanwhile, the municipalities located in or near the D& W irrigation system have benefited
enormously from the development of the pressurized secondary supply. Although many municipalities in
Utah have subsequently developed their own secondary systems, the benefits of having a canal company
in the immediate vicinity providing secondary service is a great savings to them.l Potable water treatment
facility expansion costs are reduced. A reliable water entity is in charge of the secondary system, thereby
assuring municipalities that they will not have to assume management of the secondary system in the
future. Finally, since the canal company is operated on a nonprofit basis, municipalities are assured that
water charges to homeowners for the secondary service are commensurate with what would normally be
expected from a utility.

Municipalities in Utah have realized enormous benefits from pressurized secondary supply,
mainly through reduced costs associated with domestic water treatment, but also by way of ensuring that
the higher quality water available in the region can be earmarked for potable use in the future. This is not
to suggest that agriculturalists are thus left with the poorer quality water, only that the community in
general can achieve a more rational use of water over time. Pressurized secondary water systems do not
create more water for a region. Rather, these systems rationalize the use of water in both the economic
and conservation sense, while ensuring that water rates in the locality remain reasonable. We would
simply point out that revenue from secondary supply can help agricultural water suppliers too, through
perhaps somewhat reduced water costs or annual assessments for irrigated agriculture by way of general
improvements in canal company and irrigation district delivery systems. Customer satisfaction of
secondary systems is very high in Utah, for both those operated by canal companies and municipalities.2

The Nampa-Meridian Case Study

The Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District (NMID), Nampa, Idaho, although originally developed to
provide irrigation water to cropland, is now almost 90 percent urbanized. This has brought about a
gradual transfer of open ditch deliveries to pressurized raw water deliveries for residential lots. NMID
now has about 40,000 individual water accounts, the vast majority of which are represented by residential
water users. Meanwhile, NMIO has developed a wide range of ordinances, covenants, contracts and
agreements protecting their irrigation facilities from construction activities associated with residential
subdivision development. NMIO operates very much like a conventional utility company, with its own
dedicated rights-of-way, water billing, growth management planning capabilities and professional staff.
This is not to suggest that NMID is not subject to the headaches of growth in its service area. However,
the district status in the community is greatly enhanced by providing secondary service. Further,
cooperation from local municipalities is more readily assured, now that they have a more direct stake in
the irrigation district's future. The irrigation district is a "player" in the community.

Colorado Examples

Although other instances can be identified in the Rocky Mountain region to highlight the success
of these pressurized secondary systems, the evolution of this practice in Colorado has been slow, at least
until recently. This appears to be because the practice was either not perceived as being needed, for
various reasons unpopular in the minds of people, or because the state was not attentive to emerging
trends in other parts of the region. Another factor is that many of our mutual irrigation company boards

17