My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Evergreen MD 2003 WCPlan
CWCB
>
Water Conservation
>
Backfile
>
Evergreen MD 2003 WCPlan
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/24/2011 4:20:18 PM
Creation date
9/30/2006 9:02:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Conservation
Project Type
Water Conservation Plan
Project Name
Evergreen Metropolitan District Water & Wastewater Water Conservation Plan
Title
Water Conservation Plan
Date
5/22/2003
County
Jefferson
Water Conservation - Doc Type
Complete Plan
Document Relationships
Evergreen MD 2003 WCPlan Approval Ltr
(Message)
Path:
\Water Conservation\Backfile
Evergreen MD 2003 WCPlan Implm Plan
(Attachment)
Path:
\Water Conservation\Backfile
Evergreen MD 2003 WCPlan Proof of Notice
(Message)
Path:
\Water Conservation\Backfile
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
62
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />EVERGREEN METROPOLITAN DISTRICT <br />DROUGHT CONDITIONS 2002 REPSONSE <br />SUMMARY REPORT <br /> <br />September 30, 2002 <br />Dave Lighthart <br /> <br />Baclmround <br /> <br />Evergreen Metropolitan District operation's staff began to have concerns about an approaching <br />drought early in 2002, Visual observations of snow pack in the Mount Evans drainage, coupled with <br />information on snow pack conditions gained from news reports, indiCated snow conditions were <br />extremely poor entering the spring, Snow measurements taken at the EMD wastewater fucility the fIrst <br />four months of the year indicated 28.3 inches of measured snow, resulting in 2,31 inches of moisture, <br />This is an average of slightly more than Y, inch of moisture a month, We began monitoring stream <br />flows from the Morrison and Evergreen gages on April 30th, Flows were running about 25% of <br />normaL Further evidence was the fact there was no infiltration occurring in the wastewater collection <br />systems at the time we normally see it. <br /> <br />The initial meeting ofthe Evergreen Drought Committee occurred in April. A review of the existing <br />water conservation plan, including the drought levels and their respective responses, was done, Some <br />modification of the drought levels occurred, with a combining of some of the level responses, The <br />most current version of the Water Conservation Plan, dated April 25, 2002, contains the revised <br />Emergency Response Plan. <br /> <br />Sequence of Events <br /> <br />I. A level I drought was called on May 1st, <br />. An article appeared in the Canyon Courier explaining the situation and volunteer <br />measures to be taken to conserve water, <br />. To monitor stream flow conditions, EMD staffreviewed a USGS website containing <br />graphs for all gaging station, Flow readings for each day were detennined by the <br />average of the graph for the respective day, <br />. Management detennined that a 7 -day average of the flow readings from each gage <br />would be used to assess the stream flows, This would eliminate the potential of making <br />daily changes to the Conservation program, <br /> <br />2, Mandatory restrictions were called on May 20th, Note: EMD's restrictions were one of the <br />earliest on the Front Range; one month before Denver Water acknowledged a drought existed, <br />. Conditions dictated bypassing Level 2 Drought and going to Level 3, Again, an article <br />appeared in the Canyon Courier detailing the mandatory restrictions and rate changes, <br />Gerry went on TV with the news, <br />. A notice of the watering restrictions was sent to each customer. <br />. The outside watering restrictions helped to keep the water plant flows at an average <br />summer flow of 1.6 MGD. <br />. The flows were the lowest in a three-year period, <br />. A positive aspect of the drought and restrictions was that these restricted flows helped <br />the plant keep up with demand during construction of the Zenon plant, when normal <br />summer flows may have stretched us to the limit <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.