ArkansasComments28

• Basin: Arkansas
• Title: Comments 28
• Date: 3/21/2004
• SWSI - Doc Type: Comments

Page I ot 1.

-:t

Gilbert, Hanna

From: SeEtta Moss [[e-mail]]
Sent: Sunday, March 21,2004 1 :08 AM
To: [e-mail]; SWSI (Statewide Water Supply Initiative)
Subject: Pueblo Basin-SWSI

Rick and Sue,

1. I have gone through my email several times and the only message I find from the SWSI
staff since our Meeting #2 was from Sue Morea in Jan sending us copies of news articles in
the Denver papers on SWSI. Your overheads at the last meeting stated "Supply
Methodology memo to be distributed by January 30, 2004" with comments due back by
February 13. I have not received this memo and I understand that other participants also
have not received it. As this is listed as part of our preparation for Meeting #3, I must
assume that you are behind schedule.
2. I am submitting the following as a Supply Methodology: legislation must be enacted that
requires all water utilities in the state to reduce "unaccounted-for water leakage" to 8%
(which I understand Is feasible with current technologies and is being done by Denver
Water) and to require water audits for leak detection. Although I understand that only
larger cities are doing this due to financial constraints, it would be a much more effective
use of state monies to help subsidize smaller utilities than to build dams or take more water
from our Western slope rivers to supply the front range. I know that a nearby small
community, Williamsburg, utility that gets its water from the Florence water utility had
horrendous leaks which resulted in a threat to cut them off from water by Florence if they
did not correct this substantial water drain. Following is excerpted from a 7-31-02 article in
the Canon City Daily Record about this: "Williamsburg needs to repair its water lines,"
"You're blowing 819,000 gallons," Gamache said. "We could float the Titanic on it."
3. I am also submitting this as a Supply Methodology: legislation must be enacted that
prohibits all governments including home rule cities from using water to clean their street,
"sweeping" sidewalks with water, opening fire hydrants for recreational use (so children can
cool off in the water) and other such extravagant and wasteful water practices. Following is
excerpted from a 3-26-03 article in the Canon City Daily Record: "Florence City Manager
Tom Plltingsrud said the city uses about 30,000 gallons a week to clean the streets. 'We
have the water to do it," Florence Mayor Peter Gamache said. "As long as we have the
water, we will clean our streets.'" And these from a 7-17-03 article in the same newspaper:
"The Fremont County Road and Bridge Department has agreed to stop using water to grade
the roads in Penrose after a public outcry from residents." "The county is probably wasting
8,000 gallons of water at a time when they come out here, Harmon said." And I personally
still see public agencies using water from hoses to sweep sidewalks instead of using
brooms.
4. Additionally I am submitted this for Supply Methodology: legislation must be enacted that
requires utilities to use renewable energy as a specific way to increase water supplies in this
state. According to a 2002 report by the Los Alamos National Laboratory electric production
requires "enormous" quantities of water, second only to agricultural irrigation. USGS
statistics note that in Colorado in 2000 a total of 138 million gallons of water each day were
used to produce electricity! "Switching to renewable energy has many benefits including
saving considerable amounts of water that can be used for other purposes. This legislation
needs to be in addition to that submitted by Representative Spradley in this legislative
session, which though a good beginning does not go far enough.

I am aware that some may consider the above submissions as conservation methods. I do