Centennial WSD 1996 WCPlan

• Project Type: Water Conservation Plan
• Project Name: Centennial Water & Sanitation District Water Conservation Plan
• Title: Water Management Study
• Date: 8/10/1995
• County: Arapahoe
• Water Conservation - Doc Type: Complete Plan

1
1
I
I
J
I

I
!
I
I
I
.i
I
I
I

5-6

Table 5-2 Water Audit Summary for 1987 Through 1991

. 1987 .1988 1989 1990 1991
Total production, million gallons .848 939 1,116 1,267 1,494
Total billed, million gallons 669 807 1,055 1,167 1,328
Percent of production billed, percent 78.9 85.9 94.5 92.1 88.9
Warer accounted for but not billed", million gallons 22 15 22 21 30
Percent of water accounted for but not billed, 2.6 1.6 2.0 1.7 2.0
percent
Total gallons unaccounted for, million gallons 157 J17 38 79 136
Percent of total gallons unaccounted for, percent 18.5 12.5 3.4 6.2 9.1

"Distribution system maintenance including fluahing, line breaks, new lines, etc.

Irrigation With Nonpotable Groundwater. The District utilizes nonpotable
groundwater from two wells for golf course irrigation. Using this nonpotable source saves up
to 50 million gallons per year of treated water at a significantly reduced cost.

Augmentation Plan. As identified in Chapter 4, the District utilizes an augmentation
plan to extend and make the best use of water resources.

PUBLIC SURVEY

As part of this study, the District and its water consultant developed a public survey to
detennine customer opinion of water services, water and wastewater rates, and conservation.

The District distributed the survey, attached in Appendix B, to_l,lQQI1x:jpjeJlts._ District_
- . . staff -applied -a- welghfeO~ -ranaom samplfug -procedure- iOueach -residential customer class to
detennine how the surveys were distributed. About 22 percent or 238 recipients responded by
mailing or personally delivering completed surveys to the District's offices.

The survey responses showed that most of the residents (74 percent) rate water service
as good or very good. Twenty-one of the comments related to water service centered on the
taste and aesthetic quality of the water. Low water pressure was cited as a concern in several
instances. Fifty-six percent felt that the cost was about right for water service, and 39 percent
thought the cost was too high. For the cost of sewer service, 64 percent thought the cost was
about right, and 31 percent indicated that the cost was too high.

On the question of basing sewer fees on interior water consumption, 49 percent were
favorable to the change from flat fees and would support it. Twenty-six percent would not
support the change, while 24 percent were undecided. From the 27 comments received on this
question, there was evidence that many of the respondents were confused and did not grasp the

21-6657