Laserfiche WebLink
<br />!-. <br /> <br />-. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Page 2 <br />July 7, 1995 <br /> <br />5. Table 1 in the Appendix displays data using five different units of measurement (most of <br />which are not conventional units of municipal water usage) making it almost unpossible for <br />the reader to follow and to derive conclusions. It's not clear what columns 4 (Monthly <br />Demand) and 5 (Daily Demand) are supposed to represent. Does the column heading <br />Residential Demand refer to in-house, domestic use? <br /> <br />6. On page 8, the results or conclusions from Table 1 should be spelled out in terms of <br />average monthly irrigation season use, peak monthly irrigation season use, and the domestic <br />and irrigation components of each. <br /> <br />7. In the second paragraph on page 8, the growing season is not defmed. In the same <br />paragraph, where did the 500 gpd figure come from? What is the basis for the 1.5 multiplier? <br />From Table 1, it appears as if the irrigation component of average monthly irrigation season <br />demand is about 250 gallons per day per dwelling unit (gpd/du). Does the 800 gpd estimate <br />indicate that irrigation usage will increase from 250 to 800 gpd/du or 500 to 800 gpd/du? In <br />either case, it raises a serious question about the need to sell the irrigation water on a metered <br />basis rather than a flat rate. <br /> <br />8. The third paragraph on page 8 states "As connections are made to the RWIS, 800 gallons <br />per day (2.3 new domestic service connections)" become available to the water treatment <br />plant. How was this number derived? If the existing irrigation component of residential use <br />is 250 or 500 gpd/du (as indicated above, it's not clear which is assumed) then the reduction <br />in treated water demand per dwelling unit resulting from the RWIS is 250 or 500 gpd, not <br />800. How does all of this relate to the 1,145 new residential service connections estimated in <br />the last paragraph on page 8? <br /> <br />9. Treated water demand projections and treatment capacity requirements with and without the <br />RWIS should be provided to demonstrate the impact of the project and to substantiate the <br />1,145 residential service connection estimate discussed in comment no. 8 above. The with- <br />and without- estimate would also provide a basis for a comparison of alternatives which is <br />missing from the report. <br /> <br />10. What is the estimated water use, by year, for the RWIS? What is the cost in terms of <br />dollars per acre-foot of water supplied? : <br /> <br />11. On page 9, how do the ditch and irrigation company shares relate to the municipal rights <br />described on the same page? How are the irrigation shares currently used? Which, if any, of <br />these rights \mIl be used in the RWIS? <br /> <br />12. On page 10, which water is presently diverted through the town in small ditches? <br />