HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 08/28/2012 - WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND MANAGEMENT POLICY UPDATEDATE: August 28, 2012
STAFF: Donnie Dustin
Kevin Gertig
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Water Supply and Demand Management Policy Update.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Utilities staff has been working to update the City’s Water Supply and Demand Management Policy.
Much of the work on the Policy update was performed in 2011, which included gathering input from
a Community Working Group (CWG), Water Board and others. At the January 10, 2012 work
session, City Council did not feel the Policy update was ready for formal adoption. Concerns were
mostly related to the water supply planning criteria values. Staff has worked to more clearly
describe these criteria, and has discussed various options for adjusting them with the Water Board.
In addition to addressing the criteria, the updated Policy continues the objective of providing a
reliable supply of water while managing the level of demand, and has added provisions to guide the
Utilities in being more sustainable with this valuable resource.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What feedback does Council have regarding the update of this policy?
2. Is this policy ready for formal Council consideration?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
History
The current Policy was adopted by City Council in September 2003 (Resolution 2003-104). Since
the Policy’s adoption, there has been a significant reduction in water use as planning continues for
future water needs. This planning includes substantial efforts related to the Environmental Impact
Study for the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir being directed by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps). Updating the Policy will provide further direction regarding the planning,
management, and maintenance of the City’s water supply system needed to assure a safe, reliable
drinking water supply and incorporates an appropriate level of water conservation. It will also
provide guidance on how the City may use its valuable water resources to meet other beneficial
purposes for its citizens and the surrounding community.
Much of the work on the Policy update was performed in 2011 and included educating and gathering
input from a Community Working Group (CWG) that had diverse water related backgrounds and
perspectives. After six meetings with the CWG, a draft Policy update was developed that
August 28, 2012 Page 2
incorporated many of the Group’s issues and concerns. The proposed Policy update was presented
to Water Board at its November 17, 2011 meeting. After much discussion, the Board voted
unanimously to recommend to City Council support for the draft policy. The Policy update was
presented to City Council during a work session on January 10, 2012. The City Council did not feel
the Policy update was ready for adoption and requested additional information.
Much of the material developed for the Policy update, CWG and Water Board was provided to the
City Council for the January 10, 2012 work session. Materials provided for that meeting are still
available for review on the City’s website at www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/agendas.php.
One of the key updated Policy sections that was discussed during the January 10, 2012 work session
(as well as by the CWG and Water Board) was the water supply planning criteria. The three main
planning criteria used to develop the City’s water supply system are the drought criterion, storage
reserve factor and planning demand level. These criteria determine the amount of water supplies
and/or facilities the city needs (e.g., the amount of storage required) and should be somewhat
conservative to account for uncertainties in water supply planning. The following describes each of
these criteria separately.
Drought Criterion
The drought criterion defines the level of reliability for the City’s water supply system. In general,
water supply systems yield less in more severe droughts. For example, a water supply system that
can provide 30,000 acre-feet of water through a 1-in-50 year drought might only be able to provide
20,000 acre-feet during a 1-in-100 year drought. The City has used a 1-in-50 year drought criterion
since the 1988 Water Supply Policy. This criterion has provided a reliable supply system to date,
but not without issues during the early 2000s drought.
Storage Reserve Factor
A storage reserve factor is a criterion to have a certain percent of annual demand in storage through
the design drought criterion (1-in-50 year drought). This storage reserve provides a short-term
supply to address emergency situations, such as pipeline shutdowns (which can and have occurred
during drought conditions). Acquiring storage in the Poudre Basin for meeting the storage reserve
would help diversify the City’s water supply system, which is highly reliant on CBT storage. The
storage reserve factor can be equated to the number of months of demand that can be met as shown
in the following table:
Storage
Reserve
Factor
# of Winter
Month
Demands
# of
Summer
(July) Month
Demands
0% 0.0 0.0
5% 0.9 0.4
10% 1.8 0.7
15% 2.8 1.1
20% 3.7 1.5
25% 4.6 1.8
August 28, 2012 Page 3
Planning Demand Level
The planning demand level is the amount of demand the water supply system should be developed
to meet. Since acquiring water supplies takes many years, projecting future demands is required to
determine which supplies and/or facilities need to be acquired. The planning demand level is
measured in gallons per capita per day (GPCD) and is used along with projected population and
large contractual use needs to determine future demand levels (and thus water supplies and/or
facilities to acquire). The planning demand level can be higher than current use or water
conservation goals to account for uncertainties in water supply planning that might reduce the yield
of the City’s water supplies. The City’s current average water use is 150 GPCD and the 2009 Water
Conservation Plan has a goal to reduce use to 140 GPCD by the year 2020.
The water supply planning criteria values initially presented in the updated Policy were those being
used by the Corps in the permitting process for the Utilities proposed enlargement of Halligan
Reservoir, which has been ongoing for several years. The criteria presented in the updated Policy
and the values currently being used in the Halligan permitting process are the 1-in-50 year drought
criterion, a planning demand level of 162 GPCD (2002-2007 average) and a 15% storage reserve
factor. Although there were some divergent views from CWG members on these planning criteria,
the majority of CWG members felt that the water supply planning criteria (used in the Halligan
permitting process) were set at reasonable levels. The Water Board also discussed and considered
changes to these criteria during its November 2011 meeting; however, the majority of the Water
Board decided these criteria should remain the same to avoid potential delay to the Halligan
Reservoir permitting process.
At the January 2012 work session, Council expressed concern with having a planning demand level
that is above our current water use level and water conservation goal, and wanted a clearer
explanation of the planning criteria and how they relate to our water supply needs, the size of
Halligan Reservoir and our water use and conservation efforts. As a result, they did not feel the
policy was ready for adoption. A summary of their feedback during the work session is attached,
along with staff responses to Council’s issues (Attachments 1 and 2).
Following the City Council work session, Utilities staff contacted the Corps to ask how changes to
the planning criteria in the Policy would affect the Halligan Reservoir permitting process. Their
input was that the Corps conducts an independent study of the City’s water supply needs and that
the planning criteria values being used in the process seemed reasonable. Prior to issuance of a
permit, the Corps will revisit these values and make adjustments as necessary. Given this input, staff
believes there can be some flexibility in the water supply planning criteria values used in the updated
Policy.
Utilities staff met with the Water Board’s Water Supply Committee on April 16, 2012 and the full
Water Board on July 19, 2012 to discuss potential options for changing the water supply planning
criteria. Changes to these criteria focused mainly on revising the planning demand level and the
storage reserve factor (SRF). Several options for changing these criteria were presented by staff,
including the previous 162 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) and 15% SRF, 150 GPCD and 15%
SRF and 140 GPCD and 20% SRF. After some discussion, the Water Board voted unanimously to
revise the updated Policy to include the planning criteria suggested by the Water Supply Committee
of 150 GPCD and 20% storage reserve factor. Their discussions are described in the attached Letter
of Support and Water Board Minutes.
August 28, 2012 Page 4
In addition to the issues regarding the water supply planning criteria, Council wanted the updated
Policy to include more focus on economic development and water innovation, as well as a
discussion on the relationship of population growth to water supply and demand planning. A revised
draft Policy is attached that includes these changes, along with the revised water supply planning
criteria recommended by Water Board.
Once the updated Policy is approved, Utilities staff and their consultants will create a report that
summarizes the updated Policy and provide supporting information that will be provided to City
Council and the public.
In summary, the Water Board’s recommended changes to the water supply planning criteria and the
options presented to them should provide an adequate and reliable water supply with only a slight
change to the previously projected amount of water supplies and/or facilities required to meet the
city’s future needs. Also, the updated Policy will provide further direction regarding the planning,
management, and maintenance of the City’s water supply system needed to assure a safe, reliable
drinking water supply and incorporates an appropriate level of water conservation. It will also
provide guidance on how the City may use its valuable water resources to meet other beneficial
purposes for its citizens and the surrounding community.
ATTACHMENTS
1. January 10, 2012 City Council Work Session Summary
2. Response to City Council Feedback
3. Draft Updated Water Supply & Demand Management Policy
4. Water Board Recommendation
5. Water Board Minutes (relevant portion from July 19, 2012 meeting)
6. PowerPoint Presentation
7. Glossary of Water Resources Terms
Utilities
electric · stormwater · wastewater · water
700 Wood Street
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6700
970.221.6619 – fax
970.224.6003 – TDD
utilities@fcgov.com
fcgov.com/utilities
M E M O R A N D U M
Date: January 11, 2012
To: Mayor and City Councilmembers
Through: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Brian Janonis, P.E., Utilities Executive Director
From: Kevin R. Gertig, Water Resources & Treatment Operations Manager
Dennis A. Bode, P.E., Water Resources Manager
Donnie Dustin, P.E., Water Resources Engineer
Re: January 10, 2012 Work Session Summary – Water Supply and Demand
Management Policy
At the January 10 Work Session, Kevin Gertig provided introductions followed by a brief
executive summary presentation from Donnie Dustin. The summary presentation highlighted key
points on an update to the Water Supply and Demand Management Policy (Policy) from a more
comprehensive presentation that was previously provided. Councilmember Kottwitz was absent.
Additional staff members present included Brian Janonis, Dennis Bode, and Laurie D’Audney.
Consultants to staff present included Lee Rozaklis of AMEC Earth & Environmental, Inc. and
Barbara Lewis of Catalyst, Inc.
The purpose of the Work Session was to address Council member questions regarding the Policy
update and see if the updated Policy was ready for formal consideration. The outcome of the
discussion was that the updated Policy needs more explanation and is not ready for adoption.
Council Feedback:
Provide a clearer explanation and display of the water supply planning criteria and how
they relate to our water supply needs, the size of Halligan Reservoir and our water use
and conservation efforts.
Develop a sensitivity analysis on the impacts to the City from more severe droughts.
Provide a description or report on the City’s overall water supply plan.
Include more focus on economic development and water innovation in the Policy.
Provide information about the water districts that serve City citizens.
Include discussion on the relationship of population growth to water supply and demand
planning in the Policy.
Next Steps:
Staff will work to address the comments and feedback it received and will present this
information at another work session with Council.
ATTACHMENT 1
Storage # of Winter # of Summer
Reserve Month (July) Month
Factor Demands Demands
0% 0.0 0.0
5% 0.9 0.4
10% 1.8 0.7
15% 2.8 1.1
20% 3.7 1.5
25% 4.6 1.8
City of Fort Collins Utilities
Water Supply and Demand Management Policy Update
Response to City Council Feedback from January 10, 2012 Work Session
August 17, 2012
The following provides staff responses to the City Council feedback as documented in
the work session summary memorandum dated January 11, 2012.
Provide a clearer explanation and display of the water supply planning criteria
and how they relate to our water supply needs, the size of Halligan Reservoir
and our water use and conservation efforts.
The three main planning criteria used to develop the City’s water supply system are the
drought criterion, storage reserve factor and planning demand level. These criteria
determine the amount of water supplies and/or facilities the City needs (e.g., the amount
of storage required) and should be somewhat conservative to account for uncertainties in
water supply planning. The following describes each of these criteria separately.
Drought Criterion
The drought criterion defines the level of reliability for the City’s water supply system. In
general, water supply systems yield less in more severe droughts. For example, a water
supply system that can provide 30,000 acre-feet of water through a 1-in-50 year drought
might only be able to provide 20,000 acre-feet during a 1-in-100 year drought. The City
has used a 1-in-50 year drought criterion since the 1988 Water Supply Policy. This
criterion has provided a reliable supply system to date, but not without issues during the
early 2000s drought.
Storage Reserve Factor
A storage reserve factor is a criterion to have a certain percent of annual demand in
storage through the design drought criterion (1-in-50 year drought). This storage reserve
provides a short-term supply to address emergency situations, such as pipeline shutdowns
(which can and have occurred during drought conditions). Acquiring storage in the
Poudre Basin for meeting the storage reserve would help diversify the City’s water
supply system, which is highly reliant on CBT storage. The storage reserve factor can be
equated to the number of months of demand that can be met as shown in the following
table:
ATTACHMENT 2
1
Reliability Halligan Size
Criterion (acre-feet)
1-in-50 9,000
1-in-100 12,400
1-in-500 28,300
Planning Demand Level
The planning demand level is the amount of demand the water supply system should be
developed to meet. Since acquiring water supplies takes many years, projecting future
demands is required to determine which supplies and/or facilities need to be acquired.
The planning demand level is measured in gallons per capita per day (GPCD) and is used
along with projected population and large contractual use needs to determine future
demand levels (and thus water supplies and/or facilities to acquire). The planning demand
level can be higher than current use or water conservation goals to account for
uncertainties in water supply planning that might reduce the yield of the City’s water
supplies. The City’s current average water use is 150 GPCD and the 2009 Water
Conservation Plan has a goal to reduce use to 140 GPCD by the year 2020.
The agenda item summary and presentation for the August 28, 2012 work session will
provide additional description of the water supply planning criteria and how they relate to
various water supply and demand factors.
Develop a sensitivity analysis on the impacts to the City from more severe
droughts.
The specific request was to provide a sensitivity analysis for greater droughts and what
that would do for some of the City’s needs and requirements. Staff conducted model runs
to determine the size of Halligan Reservoir required to meet the reliability criterion at the
1-in-50, 1-in-100 and 1-in-500 year drought levels. The results indicate the following
sizes of Halligan required:
All model runs were made with the projected Water Utility service area population in
2050 of approximately 165,100, a 150 GPCD planning demand level and maintaining a
15% storage reserve factor. As another means of describing drought sensitivity, a model
run was made with the same demands (165,100 population and 150 GPCD) and 9,000
acre-feet of storage at Halligan through the 1-in-500 year drought. The results indicate
water supply shortages of about 10,200 acre-feet or about 27% of future average demands
and all reservoirs would be drained (i.e., no storage reserve).
Provide a description or report on the City’s overall water supply plan.
In general, the City’s water supply plan for meeting future projected water demands is to
acquire additional storage through the Halligan Reservoir enlargement project and some
operational gravel pit storage, as well as acquiring some additional agricultural water
rights through the City’s raw water requirements. The additional storage will allow the
City to better manage its existing (and future) water rights that have been acquired over
ATTACHMENT 2
2
many years, which will increase the firm yield of the City’s current water supply system
for meeting projected demands as well as providing other benefits. The City will also
explore other ways of increasing its water supplies, such as entering into water sharing
arrangements with agricultural entities. A more thorough description of the City’s water
supply plan will be included in the Policy update summary report, which will be provided
once the updated Policy is approved.
Include more focus on economic development and water innovation in the
Policy.
The draft updated Policy presented at the January 10, 2012 work session mentioned “the
social benefits of having a reliable and high quality water supply for health and safety,
economic prosperity and healthy landscapes, as well as a healthy natural environment”
and “considering the effects (developing water supplies) has to our local and regional
economies”. This language, along with some additional language that has been added to
the introduction of the revised draft updated Policy, emphasizes the importance of
economic development and water innovation.
Provide information about the water districts that serve City citizens.
The water districts that serve City citizens include the East Larimer County (ELCO), Fort
Collins Loveland, West Fort Collins and Sunset Water Districts as shown in the attached
map. Currently, these districts serve about 21% of households within the current City
limits and about 27% of households within the City’s Growth Management Area (GMA).
By the year 2035, it is anticipated that these districts will serve about 35% of households
within the City’s GMA. Although the area these districts serve is about 45% of the
existing City limits and about 55% of the GMA, the majority of the City’s households are
within the City of Fort Collins’ Water Utility service area.
Most of the water supplies these districts currently use are from the Colorado-Big
Thompson (CBT) project, which is delivered to their water treatment plant via
Horsetooth Reservoir. In recent years, some of these districts have acquired agricultural
rights within the Poudre River basin and converted them to municipal use. These rights
can be taken off the Poudre River in summer months through the Pleasant Valley
Pipeline. The districts will continue to acquire and convert additional agricultural rights
in the Poudre River basin, as well as develop storage capacity to manage these rights and
provide drought storage. Several of these districts are actively acquiring gravel pits
storage in the Poudre River basin and the Fort Collins Loveland Water District is a
participant in the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP).
Include discussion on the relationship of population growth to water supply and
demand planning in the Policy.
The revised draft Policy update now includes a section (Section 1.4) that describes the
relationship of population growth to water supply and demand planning.
ATTACHMENT 2
3
¦¨§25
ut287
INTERSTATE 25
S SHIELDS ST
S COLLEGE AVE
S TAFT HILL RD
E VINE DR
S TIMBERLINE RD
LAPORTE AVE
E PROSPECT RD
E DOUGLAS RD
E DRAKE RD
W DRAKE RD
N TAFT HILL RD
S COUNTY ROAD 5
E TRILBY RD
S LEMAY AVE
COUNTY ROAD 54G
N SHIELDS ST
W PROSPECT RD
W VINE DR
W MULBERRY ST
E COUNTY ROAD 30
S OVERLAND TRL
W TRILBY RD
E MULBERRY ST
W COUNTY ROAD 38E
S COUNTY ROAD 23
E HARMONY RD
E LINCOLN AVE
E COUNTY ROAD 38
S COUNTY LINE RD
N OVERLAND TRL
CARPENTER RD
N LEMAY AVE
KECHTER RD
N COUNTY ROAD 9
TERRY LAKE RD
S COUNTY ROAD 19
N COUNTY ROAD 11
N COU
NTY ROAD 5
S CENTENNIAL DR
GREGORY RD
S COUNTY ROAD 9
S COUNTY ROAD 7
E COUNTY ROAD 54
N COUNTY ROAD 23
S US HIGHWAY 287
INTERSTATE 25
S LEMAY AVE
S COUNTY ROAD 5
Water Features
GMA
Major Streets
City Limits
.Railroad
Water Districts
0 5,000 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000
Feet
1
Draft 7-29-2012 (Update of the 2003 Policy)
City of Fort Collins
Water Supply and Demand Management Policy
The City of Fort Collins’ Water Supply and Demand Management Policy provides a
foundational framework for water supply and demand management decisions concerning the
City’s water supply system. Operational and management actions and decisions by the Water
Utility will be consistent with the provisions of this policy.
Objective
To provide a sustainable and integrated approach to 1) ensuring an adequate, safe and reliable
supply of water for the beneficial use by customers and the community and 2) managing the level
of demand and the efficient use of a scarce and valuable resource consistent with the preferences
of Water Utility customers and in recognition of the region’s semi-arid climate.
This objective aligns with the 2010 Plan Fort Collins that provides a comprehensive 25-year
vision for the future development of Fort Collins. Policy ENV 21.2 of Plan Fort Collins states,
“Abide by Water Supply and Demand Management Policy: Provide for an integrated approach to
providing a reliable water supply to meet the beneficial needs of customers and the community
while promoting the efficient and wise use of water.”
This Water Supply and Demand Management Policy calls for a “sustainable and integrated
approach” to water demand and water resources management. Sustainability is defined within
the context of the triple-bottom-line decision making in Plan Fort Collins as, “To systematically,
creatively, and thoughtfully utilize environmental, human, and economic resources to meet our
present needs and those of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which
we depend.” Aligning with Plan Fort Collins, the Water Utility will take a leadership role by
incorporating the triple-bottom-line in its management of water supply and demand. When this
core value is applied to the use and development of our valuable water resources, the Utility will
strive to:
Avoid, minimize or offset impacts to our environment
Consider the social benefits of having a reliable and high quality water supply for health and
safety, economic prosperity and healthy landscapes, as well as a healthy natural environment
Analyze the cost to provide such supplies, while also considering the effects it has to our
local and regional economies
Managing water supply and demand is a dynamic process that evolves along with changes in
data management and technology, legal and political environments, economic development and
water innovation, and as the State’s population continues to increase. Given these factors, it is
important to maintain an up-to-date effective policy that is based on current data. The policy’s
terms and conditions should be reviewed and updated by 2020, or sooner if desired by the City
Council or the Utilities Executive Director.
ATTACHMENT 3
2
1.0 WATER USE EFFICIENCY AND DEMAND MANAGEMENT
The City views its water use efficiency program as an important proactive response to supply
variability and climate change. Elements of the City’s conservation program include reducing
indoor demand through improved technology, leak reduction and behavior change and reducing
outdoor demand through improved irrigation efficiency and reasonable changes in landscaping.
The City believes water use efficiency is of vital importance for many reasons, including to:
Foster a conservation ethic and eliminate waste
Demonstrate a commitment to sustainability
Provide water for multiple beneficial purposes
Reduce the need for capital expansion projects and certain operational costs
Prepare for potential impacts of climate change
1.1 Water Use Efficiency Goals for Treated Water Use
The City’s 2009 Water Conservation Plan1 established a goal of reducing the City’s treated water
use to 140 gallons per capita per day (gpcd)2 by the year 20203. The City will utilize water use
efficiency measures and programs with the aim of reducing its water use to an average of 140
gpcd, subject to 1) continuing study of the water requirements of the City’s urban landscaping, 2)
impacts on water demand due to changes in land use policies, building codes and housing trends,
3) additional studies on climate change, and 4) changes in the water use goal as may be adjusted
by any subsequent water conservation plans. This water use goal is subject to change as
discussed above and is intended as a goal that can be met while sustaining reasonable indoor and
outdoor values of the City.
The per capita peak daily demand4 will be reduced or maintained to be no more than 350 gpcd by
the year 2020, but may be adjusted by any subsequent water conservation plans.
1.2 Water Use Efficiency Program
Policy ENV 21.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Conservation measures should be implemented in
accordance with the Water Conservation Plan and periodically adjusted to reflect new and
effective conservation measures.” The City will optimize water use efficiency through the
programs and measures specified in its Water Conservation Plan. These programs and measures
1 State guidelines are changing the terminology of Water Conservation Plans to Water Use Efficiency Plans, and
likewise conservation is being changed to water use efficiency. For purposes of this policy, water use efficiency is
referred to as water conservation; however, the terminology may be used interchangeably.
2 Gallon per capita per day (gpcd) calculations are based on the total treated water produced at the Water Treatment
Facility for use by Water Utility customers (minus large contractual customers and other sales or exchange
arrangements) divided by the estimated population of the Water Utility’s service area.
3 This goal represents an 8.5% reduction in water use compared to Fort Collins’ 2006-2010 average daily water use
of 153 gpcd. It represents a 29% reduction in water use compared to Fort Collins’ pre-drought (1992-2001) average
daily water use of 197 gpcd.
4 The peak daily demand is 2.5 times the average daily use water conservation goal and is based on historic ratios of
average to peak daily use.
ATTACHMENT 3
3
include educational programs, incentive programs, regulatory measures and operational
measures. Specific measures and programs are outlined in the Water Conservation Plan.
The overall effectiveness of these measures and programs will be evaluated on a regular basis
and if necessary, modifications will be made to increase effectiveness or to modify the City’s
water use goal. An annual water conservation report will be prepared to describe the status and
results of the various measures and programs. The Water Conservation Plan will be updated at a
minimum of every seven years, as currently required by the State of Colorado.
1.3 Water Rate Structures
The City will have stable water rate structures with transparent accountability for all classes of
customers. The water rate structures will provide an economic incentive to use water efficiently
while also providing sufficient revenue for operational and maintenance purposes. Examples of
structures that may be utilized include 1) tiered rates with increasing prices as water use
increases, 2) seasonal blocks with higher rates during the irrigation season, and 3) water budget
approaches based on appropriate targets for individual customers.
The City will annually review the effectiveness of its water rate structures as part of its financial
analyses regarding Water Utility revenue, expenses and rates. Specific studies or changes to the
rate structure may be made upon identification of the need to revise it. Any changes to the rate
structure will require City Council approval.
1.4 Population Growth
Population growth is an important factor in determining the City’s water supply needs, since
increases in population generally increase the need for additional supplies. Population growth
projections and associated water demand are mostly a function of land use planning,
development densities, annexation and other growth related issues that can be affected by City
Council decisions. The Water Utility will continue to work closely with the Current Planning
Department, which provides population projections that may be effected by changes in City
policies related to growth.
2.0 WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY
The City needs to meet future water demands in an efficient and reliable manner. Policy ENV
21.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Water supply reliability criteria will take into consideration
potential effects of climate change and other vulnerabilities. Water supplies and related facilities
shall be acquired or developed after careful consideration of social, economic and environmental
factors.” One of the Water Utility’s primary objectives is to provide an adequate and reliable
supply of water to its customers and other water users. Key principles that need to be considered
when addressing water supply for municipal use include:
Providing water supply system reliability and flexibility
Considering a broad portfolio of resources that do not overly depend on any one source
Maintaining a water storage reserve for unforeseen circumstances
Maintaining water supply infrastructure and system security
ATTACHMENT 3
4
Being a steward of the City’s water resources, which includes watershed management
Collaboration with the City’s regional water providers and users
Maintaining awareness of state, national and worldwide trends and adapting as needed to
meet our customer needs
2.1 Water Supply Planning Criteria
An integral component of the City’s water supply planning efforts is to maintain computer
models that estimate the yield of its existing and future water supplies. The following water
supply planning criteria are key parameters used in these models that provide a foundation for
planning future supplies.
2.1.1 Planning Demand Level
The reliability of the City’s water supply should be maintained to meet an average per capita
demand level of 150 gpcd5,6. This planning level provides a value that is higher than the water
use goal to address uncertainties inherent in water supply planning.
It is important to have a planning number that can be used for development of long-range water
supply facilities. Because water supply system infrastructure may take many years to permit and
construct, it is desirable to use conservative assumptions to size facilities that may be needed for
the long-term. A planning demand level should be larger than the water use goal, primarily
because of the uncertainties related to projected water demands, yields from specific water
rights, climate change and other unanticipated effects.
2.1.2 Drought Criterion
The reliability and capacity of the City’s water supply system should be maintained to meet the
planning level demand during at least a l-in-50 year drought event in the Cache la Poudre River
Basin. Water rights should be acquired and facilities (including storage capacity) should be
planned and constructed sufficiently ahead of the time to maintain the 1-in-50 year drought
criterion, considering the time required to obtain water court decrees and permit and construct
diversion, conveyance and/or storage facilities. In using this criterion, the City seeks to provide a
balance among water supply reliability, the financial investment necessary to secure such
reliability and the environmental impacts associated with water storage and diversions.
5 The 150 gpcd value is based upon the normalized 2006-2011 average daily use.
6 The average per capita demand planning level is used for facility planning purposes. Gallons per capita per day
(gpcd) calculations are based on the total treated water produced at the Water Treatment Facility for use by Water
Utility customers (minus large contractual customers and other sales or exchange arrangements) divided by the
estimated population of the Water Utility’s service area. This number is multiplied by population projections
developed by the City’s Planning Department to calculate future water demands.
ATTACHMENT 3
5
2.1.3 Storage Reserve Factor
The City’s water supply planning criteria will include a storage reserve factor that equates to
20% of annual demand in storage through a 1-in-50 year drought7,8. This factor provides an
additional layer of protection intended to address dimensions of risk outside of the other
reliability criteria, including emergency situations (i.e. pipeline failure) and droughts that exceed
a 1-in-50 year drought.
2.2 Climate Change
Climate change could significantly impact the reliability of the City’s supplies and/or the amount
of water required to maintain existing landscapes9; however, there is a great deal of uncertainty
related to current climate change projections along the Colorado Front Range and its impact on
municipal demands and water supply systems. The City’s planning criteria and assumptions are
conservative in part to account for climate change based on the information to date. The City will
continue to monitor climate change information and, if necessary, will revise its water supply
planning criteria and assumptions to ensure future water supply reliability.
2.3 Water Supply Shortage Response Plan
The City will maintain a plan for responding to situations where there are projected water supply
shortages, either because of severe drought conditions (i.e., greater than a 1-in-50 year drought)
or because of disruptions in the raw water delivery system. When needed, the Water Supply
Shortage Response Plan will be activated based on the projected water supply shortage.
This plan will include measures to temporarily reduce water use through media campaigns,
regulations, restrictions, rate adjustments and other measures. The plan may also include
provisions to temporarily supplement the supply through interruptible water supply contracts,
leases, exchanges and operational measures. Reducing the City’s water use during supply short
situations may lessen adverse impacts to irrigated agriculture and flows in the Poudre River. The
plan will be reviewed periodically and, if necessary, updated to reflect changes in the City’s
water use and its water supply system.
2.4 Additional Supplies and Facilities
In order to meet projected growth within the Water Utility’s service area, as well as maintain
system reliability and operational flexibility, the City will need to increase the firm yield of its
7 For the Water Utility, 20% of annual demand is equivalent to around 3.7 months of average winter demand and
about 1.5 months of average July demand.
8 In meeting this factor, it is assumed that the City cannot rely on the existing Colorado-Big Thompson Project
(CBT) carryover program. This program currently allows each CBT unit holder to carry over up to 20% of its CBT
unit ownership in CBT reservoirs for use in the following year. However, this program has varied over the years and
there is no guarantee that it will be continued in the future.
9 Current research indicates that changes in precipitation in this area are uncertain but that temperatures will increase
and therefore it is likely that runoff will come earlier and in a shorter amount of time, precipitation may more often
come as rain, and higher temperatures will increase outdoor demands and change growing seasons for existing
landscapes.
ATTACHMENT 3
6
current water supply system. The following policy elements address ways of meeting these
needs.
2.4.1 Raw Water Requirements for New Development
The City shall require developers to turn over water rights as approved by the City, or cash in-
lieu-of water rights, such that supplies can be made available to meet or exceed the demands of
the Water Utility’s treated water customers during a l-in-50 year drought.
Cash collected shall be used to increase the firm yield and long-term reliability of the City’s
supply system. Potential uses of cash include acquiring additional water rights, entering into
water sharing arrangements with agricultural entities, purchasing or developing storage facilities
and pursuing other actions toward developing a reliable water supply system. Consideration will
be given to providing a diversified system that can withstand the annual variability inherent in
both water demands and supplies. The balance between water rights being turned over and cash
received by developers should be monitored and adjusted as needed to develop a reliable and
effective system.
2.4.2 Acquisition and/or Sharing of Agricultural Water Supplies
The City currently owns and will acquire additional water rights that are decreed only for
agricultural use. The City will periodically need to change these water rights from agricultural
use to municipal use to meet its water supply needs. The City will change those rights that come
from areas upon which the City is growing, or from areas where the irrigation has ceased, when
needed. For water rights that were derived from irrigated agricultural lands that remain in viable
agricultural areas, the City will refrain from converting agricultural decrees to municipal use as
long as other water supply options are available or other factors make it prudent to do so. The
City will also work towards water sharing arrangements that provide water for municipal uses
when critically needed and that allow for continued agricultural use of water at other times, in a
manner that preserves irrigated agricultural lands over the long-term.
2.4.3 Facilities
The City will pursue the acquisition or development of facilities that are needed to manage the
City’s water rights in an efficient and effective manner and enhance the City’s ability to meet
demands through at least a 1-in-50 year drought. These facilities may include storage capacity,
diversion structures, pipelines or other conveyances, pumping equipment, or other facilities that
increase the firm yield of the City’s supply system.
Additional storage will be acquired or constructed considering 1) the City’s return flow
obligations incurred from changes of water rights, 2) the City’s need to carryover water from wet
years to dry years in order to meet its drought criteria, 3) operational flexibility, redundancy and
reliability of the City’s water supply system, and 4) potential multiple-use benefits (i.e.,
environmental flows, recreational uses, etc.). The City will analyze the potential environmental
impacts of developing storage along with other associated costs and benefits, and will develop
that storage in a manner that avoids, minimizes or offsets the effects to the environment. Storage
capacity options include the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, the development of local gravel
ATTACHMENT 3
7
pits into storage ponds, the acquisition of storage capacity in new or existing reservoirs, the
development of aquifer storage, or some combination of the above.
3.0 TREATED AND RAW WATER QUALITY
Policy ENV 21.1 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Develop and adhere to drinking water quality
standards, treatment practices, and procedures that provide the highest level of health protection
that can be realistically achieved.” In addition, the City will take an active role in protecting the
quality of water in the various watersheds from which the City’s raw water is derived and
maintaining the taste and quality of the City’s treated water. This may include mixing of the
City’s source waters to maintain high water quality and require collaboration with private,
county, state and federal land owners and managers. The acquisition, development, and
management of the City’s raw and treated water will be consistent with the City’s Drinking
Water Quality Policy and other applicable policies related to watershed protection and water
treatment.
4.0 USE OF SURPLUS RAW WATER
The City will use its existing supplies to meet municipal obligations with the following priorities:
1) to meet water demands by the City’s treated water customers, and 2) to meet the City’s raw
water needs as well as other City raw water obligations. Raw water needs include use for such
purposes as irrigation of City parks, golf courses, cemeteries and other greenbelt areas.
Additional raw water obligations include primarily water transfers to other entities because of
agreements or exchanges made to manage the water supply system more effectively.
Water not needed for the above purposes is referred to as surplus water and may be made
available to others in accordance with decrees and other applicable policies. Since the City plans
its water supply system using a 1-in-50 year drought criterion, it typically has significant
quantities of surplus raw water in many years. This surplus water may be available on a year-to-
year basis or through multi-year arrangements that do not significantly impair the City’s ability
to meet municipal demands. The City will continue to rent its surplus supplies at a fair market
price that helps offset the cost of owning such supplies and benefits the Water Utility ratepayers.
4.1 Commitment to Other Beneficial Purposes
Acknowledging that the City’s use of its valuable water resources has impacts to the
environment and the region, the City will commit to using its surplus supplies for other
beneficial purposes such as supporting irrigated agriculture, supplementing flows in the Poudre
River or providing other regional benefits. The City’s surplus supplies come from a variety of
sources, each of which has unique characteristics. These sources include CBT water and shares
in several irrigation companies. Some sources are more suitable and available than others to meet
beneficial purposes. Whether the surplus raw water can be used for these other purposes is
dependent upon a number of factors, including the type of water, place of use and other decree
limitations. Any potential use of these supplies should consider, and will likely require
coordination with, other water users, state agencies and other groups. Some uses of the surplus
supplies, such as maintaining an instream flow according to the State’s Instream Flow Program,
ATTACHMENT 3
8
may require a change of water rights through the water court process. The City will engage in a
thorough evaluation of these issues as part of assessing the use of its surplus supplies for these
beneficial purposes.
Utilities will evaluate implementing a program to allow voluntary contributions from its
ratepayers (i.e., Utility bill “check-off box”) for programs that are designed to support the
following purposes: preserving local agriculture, supplementing flows in the Poudre River, or
meeting other beneficial purposes that our community may desire.
4.1.1 Agriculture and Open Space
Policy SW 3.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Participate in and follow the Northern Colorado
Regional Food System Assessment project and other Larimer County agricultural efforts, and
implement their recommendations at a local level, if appropriate.” In addition, Policy LIV 44.1
of Plan Fort Collins states, “Maintain a system of publicly-owned open lands to protect the
integrity of wildlife habitat and conservation sites, protect corridors between natural areas,
conserve outstanding examples of Fort Collins' diverse natural heritage, and provide a broad
range of opportunities for educational, interpretive, and recreational programs to meet
community needs.” To the extent that surplus water is available, the City will continue to support
the local agricultural economy and help preserve the associated open spaces by renting surplus
agricultural water back to irrigators under the respective irrigation companies.
The City will explore long-term rental and sharing arrangements with irrigators10 in order to
support the regional food system, encourage agricultural open space and other benefits provided
by irrigated agriculture, as well as benefit the Water Utility ratepayers.
4.1.2 Instream Flows
Policy ENV 24.5 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Work to quantify and provide adequate instream
flows to maintain the ecological functionality, and recreational and scenic values of the Cache la
Poudre River through Fort Collins.” Recognizing that its water use depletes natural streamflows,
the City will seek opportunities to improve, beyond any associated minimum regulatory
requirements, the ecological function of the streams and rivers affected by its diversions. The
Water Utility will take a leadership role in working with other City departments, local and
regional groups and agencies towards the following objectives in accordance with Colorado
water law and the administration of water rights in Colorado: 1) encourage flows in local streams
to protect the ecosystem, 2) pursue the operation of its water supplies and facilities in a manner
that avoids, minimizes or offsets the effects to the environment while meeting customer
demands, and 3) explore projects or measures that would provide flows in streams and water in
reservoirs for recreational and aesthetic purposes.
10 The City’s largest irrigation company ownership interest is in the North Poudre Irrigation Company, which still
has substantial lands in irrigated agricultural production and has a unique mix of native water and CBT water that
lends itself to these types of partnership arrangements.
ATTACHMENT 3
9
4.1.3 Other Arrangements
The City will consider and participate in other surplus water supply arrangements with other
entities that provide mutual benefits and support the region. These may include other rental
agreements, augmentation plans and other cooperative arrangements with regional partners.
These types of arrangements should be limited to unique opportunities that are mutually
beneficial to the parties and provide significant social, economic or environmental benefits to the
region.
5.0 REGIONAL COOPERATION
The City recognizes the importance in maintaining good relationships with regional entities and
coordinating efforts to achieve mutual goals. The City also recognizes that growing Colorado
municipalities are currently struggling to define a way to meet future water supply needs in a
manner that minimizes negative impacts to agricultural economies and river ecosystems. The
Water Utility will endeavor to be a leader in demonstrating how water supply can be provided in
a manner that respects other interests.
5.1 Working with Other Municipal Providers
The City will continue to work with the water suppliers throughout the northern Colorado Front
Range to assure that adequate supplies are maintained in the region. When benefits are identified,
the City will cooperate with area entities in studying, building, sharing capacity and operating
water transmission lines, distribution systems and storage reservoirs for greater mutual benefit.
The City has common interests and the potential to cooperate with regional entities including the
water districts around Fort Collins, the City of Greeley and the Northern Colorado Water
Conservancy District, as well as other Colorado water providers. In particular, the City should
work closely with water districts that serve Fort Collins residents to encourage similar policies
regarding drought protection, conservation and to provide mutual assistance during emergencies.
5.2 Working with Local Irrigation Companies
The City will continue to cooperate with local irrigation companies regarding the use, exchange
and transfer of water in the Cache la Poudre River Basin. As a major shareholder in many of the
local irrigation companies, it is necessary and desirable that the City work closely with these
companies. Much of the water supply available to the City is through the ownership of shares in
local irrigation companies.
5.3 Working with Others
City Departments will work together and also cooperate with local, state and federal agencies,
civic organizations, environmental groups and other non-governmental organizations when
common goals would benefit City residents and the surrounding community. Examples of goals
that may involve City water supplies and be worthy of collaborative efforts include support for
existing and development of new local food sources, promoting open space, improving river
flows and supporting the local economy. Such efforts should identify appropriate entities and
sources of revenue for specific goals or projects.
ATTACHMENT 3
Utilities — Water Board
Cityof 1(11) Wood St.
I ‘C) Box dl()
Fort
CoLLins
Fort Coflins CO 80522
tcyov.o,n
fax
MEMORANDUM
DATI: August 16, 2012
TO: Mayor Karen Weitkunat and City Councilmembers
FROM: Water Board SëBalderson, Chairperson, and Steve Malcrs, Vice Chairperson)
CC: Brian Janonis, Utilities Executive I)irector
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
SUBJECT: Water Board Recommendations for the Water Supply and Demand Management
Policy Update
The Water Board is writing to inform City Council Members about the update to the Water
Supply and Demand Management Policy (Policy).
Executive Summary
The Water Board reviewed the Policy at its July 19, 2012 meeting and after discussion
unanimously approved the Policy, which includes the following criteria:
• Drought criterion of 1 -in-50 year drought — This value has been used previously and is
reasonable given experience and a review of guidelines of other municipalities.
• Planning demand level of 150 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) — This level of use
represents approximate Fort Collins demand subsequent to the drought of 2002 and
therefore is a logical planning level. The previous updated Policy recommended 162
GPCD.
• Storage Reserve Factor (SRF) of 20% of annual demand through a 1 -in-50 drought — This
is an increase over the 15% SRF that was previously recommended, due primarily to
uncertainty in potential extreme scenarios, and represents approximately 1.5 months of
summer water usage and 3.7 months of winter water usage.
Although the Water Board approved the updated Policy, it wishes to emphasize the importance
of interrelated studies, plans, and City efforts, and the need to fulfill updates to these documents
(updates are referred to in the Policy). Additional comments are provided in the following
section.
Background
The update to the Policy utilized a lengthy process involving a citizens’ work group in 2011 and
several presentations to the Water Board. The Water Board subsequently approved the Policy at
ATTACHMENT 4
1
Fort Cityof CoLlins
its November 17, 2011 meeting. I[owevcr, during the meeting and prior to voting to approve the
policy, the Water Board was informed that changes to important criteria in the policy may result
iii delays and additional cost to the I lalligan permitting elThrt; consequently, the Water Board felt
that it had little choice hut tO accept the criteria used in the permitting. City Council did not feel
the Policy was ready for adoption at its January 10, 2012 work session and provided staff with
recommendations for addressing Council concerns. Council specifically questioned the use of a
planning demand level of 162 GPCD. Subsequent to the November 17, 2011 meeting, the Water
Board was informed by stall that the criteria in the Policy arc not required to agree with the
Halligan permitting process and the US Army Corps oC Engineers will revisit the design numbers
prior to the issuance of the I)rall lnvironmental Impact Statement (DEIS).
Although the Water Board approved the updated Policy, it wishes to emphasize the importance
of interrelated studies, plans, and City efforts, and the need to fulfill updates to these documents
(updates arc referred to in the Policy):
The study on which the 1-in-So year drought is based was completed in 1985. Although
this study included an analysis of paleohydrology (tree rings) to consider a wide range of
possible hydrology sceiarios, it would be beneficial to include recent droughts (including
2002 and 2012), wet years (in particuLar 2011), and consider potential climate change
impacts (such as indicated in the Front Range Climate Change Vulnerability Study, 2012,
which was partially funded by the City).
• Water Conservation Plan, February 12, 2009. This plan is required by the State of
Colorado and is updated every seven years. The conservation goal presented in the Plan
is 140 GPCD. It is important to recognize that conservation goals typically are more
aggressive than planning demand levels such as the 150 GPCD level in the updated
Policy. Although Water Board members generally agree that supporting a conservation
ethic is important, several members expressed concern that increased water use efficiency
ultimately will limit the “slack” in the system, which may result in challenges to further
reducing water use during a drought. In particular, residential outdoor water use has been
reduced by approximately 50% since the 2002 drought and additional evaluation may be
required to understand impacts of additional savings on City and customer landscapes.
The Water Conservation Plan will be updated in the next few years and will benefit from
data collected up to that point.
• Water Supply Shortage Response Plan, March 20, 2003. This plan does not take into
account the updated Policy. Measured lower water use levels also shift the starting
conditions from which a response plan can be based. The Colorado Water Conservation
Board has recently published a number of guidelines and tools that can be used when
planning for drought response.
• City implementation of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). AMI is being phased
in and will soon allow Utilities to collect water and electric use data on hourly or more
frequent basis. This infonuation will be helpful in evaluating water use efficiency and
ultimately serve as a mechanism to monitor conservation measures and customer
response to weather, drought, and other factors.
Although the Water Board approved changes to the WSDM Policy, there is some concern about
the uncertainty in future scenarios. For example, Fort Collins receives its water from two
ATTACHMENT 4
2
Ft°oL[jns
sources (the Poudre River and the Colorado-Big Thompson Project) and a prolonged outage
from either source, in particular during a severe drought, may exceed the criteria in the updated
Policy. I lixtorical events such as the 1976 Big Thompson flood, landslides that (liSrUpt water
supply, and the recent fires and subsequent disruption of Poudre river supply demonstrate that
providing certainty in water supply requires using planning criteria that recognize uncertainty
and provide redundancy in water supplies. Although the Policy has served the City well and the
recent updates reflect new information, it is important to consider the relatioHship of the Policy
to the above plans and efforts.
The Water Board hopes that this summary information helps City Council understand the
updated Policy as well as the need to remain vigilant in its effort to update other water-related
plans. Again, such updates are anticipated by the Policy and should be addressed by staff as
resources allow.
ATTACHMENT 4
3
1
Excerpt from Approved Water Board Minutes, July 19, 2012
Water Supply and Demand Management Policy Update
(Presentation available on request)
Mr. Dustin presented an update on the Water Supply and Demand Management Policy
(WSDMP). Staff is seeking the board’s recommendation on appropriate water supply planning
criteria. This item goes to Council at an August 28th Work Session and October 2nd Regular
Meeting.
Mr. Dustin reviewed the updated policy elements:
- A community working group was convened; they agree with the majority of the updated
Elements; but had divergent views on the water supply planning criteria.
- Council did not feel the Policy was ready for adoption as first presented and requested
additional information from staff.
- The Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) will relook at the water demand changes related to the
permitting of Halligan Reservoir prior to issuance of the DEIS.
- The 1-in-50-year drought criterion has been used for many years and provided a reliable supply
of water.
- The Storage Reserve Factor (SRF) will provide an emergency supply and lessen our
dependency on CBT water.
- The Planning Demand Level is the level of demand to plan our future water supply system to
meet and can be higher than a water conservation goal to account for planning uncertainties.
Staff advocated for maintaining the 1-in-50-year drought criterion. At their April meeting, the
Water Supply Committee recommended a planning demand level of 150 gallons per capital per
day (gpcd) and a 20 percent Storage Reserve Factor.
Board discussion:
Would fracking, energy extraction, and the water use involved in those processes ever affect our
water rights? A board member would like to see this addressed in the Policy. The issue of
fracking is not addressed in the Policy at this time and has not been discussed with the
community working group, the Board, or Council. The City has not given any water knowingly
to support fracking activities and has received the directive not to furnish water for these
activities. A committee of Council is studying this issue. Mr. Dustin added that the Policy
focuses the City’s surplus raw water use mainly for agricultural and instream flow purposes.
The Water Board was asked to have two board members participate on the new Oil and Gas
Committee. Board Members Bovee and Brown Brian volunteered to serve. The board discussed
submitting additional names.
1-in-50-year drought criterion:
Board members are concerned that the criterion is based on a 1985 study. With climate change
and other influencing factors, when will the criteria be addressed based on more current
conditions? All the facts on climate change are not in yet, but Mr. Dustin did not think that
adding additional years to the 1985 drought study would change the drought criterion
significantly. The study looked at tree-ring and other types of data designed to capture many
types of drought indicators. In the next iteration of the Policy (in about ten years), staff will look
further into climate change impacts on water supply planning.
ATTACHMENT 5
2
Planning Demand Level (PDL):
A board member feels 150 gpcd is a good target.
150 gpcd versus 140 gpcd as stated in the Water Conservation Plan: Belief in the ability to
achieve 140 gpcd, which is a goal, was based on natural attrition of water use through fixture
changes and a comprehensive list of ideas. It will come back to the Water Board in the next few
years, as a new plan must be submitted to the State every 7 years.
Storage Reserve Factor (SRF):
A board member feels there is more value in a higher SRF to provide a margin of water during
times of drought. Whether the SRF is set at 15 percent or 20 percent, it feels like an arbitrary
number. The board would rather know how the factor fits into the calculations.
Does the fire impact our sense of how much reserve we need? Senior water rights provide a base
amount of water.
Is it better to have a work session with Council to talk through some of these factors than submit
recommendations? The Board can proceed as they see fit. It takes a long time to schedule an
item on Council’s agenda and could account for a six month delay. Staff is satisfied with the
new data and the collaborative process that was used to collect it from various stakeholders.
Mr. Dustin noted this is a complex system and difficult to explain. The next planned update will
take place in 2020 or as directed by the Utilities Executive Director (as stated in the Policy).
Discussion on the motion:
A board member is not good with the 20 percent SRF and doesn’t know how to get to the right
number, but recommends future discussion on this. Circumstances such as the fire can introduce
new data points. He might suggest adding language, “understanding uncertainty with this
number and additional study will occur”.
Another board member is okay with the number now that it’s been raised and noted that a memo
to Council gives the board the flexibility to speak to all considerations.
The board does not have a lot of influence over the proper sizing of Halligan Reservoir, but can
advocate for additional study of the right Storage Reserve Factor.
Vice Chairperson Malers suggested a friendly amendment, “It is recommended that recent events
be considered, such as the fire, and the 2002 and 2012 droughts be used to further evaluate these
numbers.” The future study should be included in the memo to Council. The memo will be due
to Mr. Dustin no later than August 17th to include in the City Council work session materials.
Motion: Board Member Garner moved that the Water Board revise the draft Policy to
use a planning demand level of 150 gpcd, a 1-in-50-year drought criterion, and a 20
percent Storage Reserve Factor, and prepare a letter of support to City Council for the
draft Policy, with assistance as needed from staff, and consider it for approval by the
Board at its August meeting. Board Member Eccleston seconded the motion.
ATTACHMENT 5
3
Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously.
Amended Motion: Board Member Garner moved that the Water Board revise the draft
Policy to use a planning demand level of 150 gpcd, a 1-in-50-year drought criteria, and a
20 percent Storage Reserve Factor, and prepare a letter of support to City Council for
the draft Policy, with assistance as needed from staff, and consider it for approval by the
Board at its August meeting. It is recommended that recent events, such as the fire, and
the 2002 and 2012 droughts be used to further evaluate these numbers. Board Member
Eccleston seconded the motion.
ATTACHMENT 5
1
1
Water Supply & Demand
Management Policy Update
City Council Work Session
August 28, 2012
2
Current Water Supply & Demand
Management Policy
• Adopted in 2003 (Resolution 2003-104)
• Guides the Utilities in balancing water supplies
and demands
• Policy Objective
– Ensure an adequate, safe and reliable supply
of water for the beneficial use by customers
and the community
– Manage the level of demand and the efficient
use of a scarce and valuable resource
ATTACHMENT 2
2
3
Why Update the Policy?
Reliable supplies 0
50
100
150
200
250
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Use (gallons per capita per day - GPCD)
Year
Fort Collins Utilities - Per Capita Water Use
Actual Use Normalized Use
GPCD values do not include
large contractual use.
Use reductions
Climate change
Surplus supplies
Storage
4
Policy Update Process (2011)
• Community Working Group (CWG)
– 19 representatives with various
and diverse backgrounds and
opinions on water issues
– Helped develop updated policy
• Outreach to boards and other groups
• Landscape preference survey
• Water Board (Nov. 2011)
• Council Work Session (Jan. 2012)
3
5
Updated Policy Elements
• Introduction: Plan Fort Collins and
sustainability alignment
• Demand Management
– 140 gpcd conservation goal
(2009 Water Conservation Plan)
• Current use level of 150 gpcd
• Link to WCP for measures
and future goals
6
Updated Policy Elements
• Water Supply Reliability
– Continue 1-in-50 year drought criterion and
Water Supply Shortage Response Plan
– Include other criteria used by Utility for greater
transparency
• Planning demand level (gpcd)
• Storage reserve factor (% annual demand)
– Consider potential effects of climate change
4
7
Updated Policy Elements
• Additional Supplies and Facilities
– Alternatives that best fit supply system
– Explore agricultural rental/sharing arrangements
– Not specific about storage amounts needed
• Water Quality
– Protect watershed and maintain treated taste
and quality
8
Updated Policy Elements
• Surplus Raw Water
– Stronger commitment to use surplus
supplies for other beneficial purposes
• Support local agriculture
• Enhance river flows
• Regional Cooperation
– Maintain good relationships with
others
5
9
Water Supply Planning Criteria
• Initially used values from Halligan Reservoir
enlargement permitting process
– 1-in-50 year drought criterion
– 162 gpcd planning demand level
– 15% storage reserve factor
• Concern that changing criteria would delay
permitting process
10
CWB and Water Board Input
• Community Working Group (CWG)
– Agreement on most policy elements
– Divergent views on planning criteria (most OK)
– Setting numbers aside, full support on policy
update (except one with some reservations)
• Water Board
– Supportive of revised policy
– Considered criteria changes, but maintained
Halligan values to avoid permit delays
6
11
January 10, 2012 Work Session
• Halligan update followed by Policy review
– Council continues to support the Halligan
project as long as sized correctly
• Updated Policy not ready for adoption
– Need clearer explanation of planning criteria
– Main issue was using planning demand level
higher than current use level
12
Halligan Reservoir Permitting
• Asked Corps how Policy changes
would effect permitting?
• Corps independently studies needs
– Reasonable planning values
– Revisit prior to issuing permit
• Flexibility to change Policy criteria
US Army Corps
of Engineers
7
13
Current Water Demand (Use)
• Deliver about 26,000 acre-feet/year treated and
4,000 acre-feet/year of raw water
• Demand levels have declined significantly
– ~230 gpcd early 1990s
– ~200 gpcd before 2002
– ~150 gpcd last several years
14
0
50
100
150
200
250
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Use (gallons per capita per day - GPCD)
Year
Fort Collins Utilities - Per Capita Water Use
Actual Use Normalized Use
GPCD values do not include
large contractual use.
8
15
Water Use Reductions per Account
by Customer Category
• Reductions are calculated for the period averages
of 1998-2001 and 2004-2010
Customer % Reduction % Reduction % Reduction
Category in Indoor Use in Outdoor Use in Total Use
Single Family 22% 49% 37%
Duplex 25% 59% 38%
Multi-Family 18% 42% 24%
Commercial 19% 17% 18%
16
Water Conservation
• Measures to reduce demands long-term
– Restrictions used for short-term reductions
• Water Supply Shortage Response Plan
• On-going conservation efforts
– All customers metered in 2003
– Tiered & seasonal rate structures
– Educational programs
– Rebates, sprinkler audits, etc.
• Revised conservation goal of 140 gpcd by 2020
9
17
Landscape Preference Survey
• General satisfaction with current
landscapes (especially trees)
– Support for more xeriscape
• No strong opinion regarding additional
water conservation
– Similar results in recent Utility survey
• Gage customers desire to
change landscapes
18
City of Fort Collins
Water Supply - Sources
Poudre River
CBT Project
10
19
Water Supplies
• On average, about 50/50 split between Poudre
River and CBT supplies used
• Poudre River
– Senior direct flow rights
– Converted agricultural rights
– Michigan Ditch/Joe Wright Reservoir
20
Water Supplies
• Colorado-Big Thompson Project (CBT)
– Delivers Colorado River water east
– Administered by the Northern Colorado
Water Conservancy District
– Annual quota dictates amount received
– Delivery of units from Horsetooth
Reservoir
• City does not own/operate
Horsetooth
– Policies limit carryover storage
11
Highly variable flows affect
City water right yields
21
2/3rds
of runoff
occurs in 2 months
22
12
23
CBT project yields also
subject to variability
24
Current Water Supplies
• Adequate supplies in most years
• Based on 1-in-50 year drought criterion
• Existing firm yield about 31,000 acre-feet/year
through 1-in-50 year drought
13
25
Future Water Demands/Supplies
• Depends on population and
commercial growth
• Estimated Utility population ~165,100
by 2050 (~129,900 in 2010)
• Large contractual use increase of
~3,000 acre-feet/year by 2050
• Supplies needed depends on future
demands (planning demand level)
26
Fort Collins Area
Water Districts Map
14
27
Future Supply Plans
• Acquire additional water rights and/or cash
through Raw Water Requirements
• Acquire/develop storage capacity to help manage
current and future water rights
– Operational storage (gravel pits or similar)
– Carryover and vulnerability protection storage
(Halligan Res. or similar)
28
Surplus Raw Water
• City has surplus supplies in many years
– Result of planning for 1-in-50 year drought
• Most is typically rented to agricultural users
– Reduces customer rates
– Currently on year-to-year basis
– Recognize interest in long-term arrangements
15
29
Surplus Raw Water
• Unused or unrented surplus water left in river
– Diverted by next senior water right
• Surplus supplies difficult to use for instream flows
under current Colorado water law
• Utilities staff working with other City departments
on initiatives to improve Poudre River flows
30
Environmental Considerations
• Fort Collins water use reduces flows in the
Poudre River and other watersheds (Colorado
and Michigan River basins)
• Poudre River flows are reduced mostly by local
irrigation diversions
16
31
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Date
Flow (cfs)
Direct Flow Rights Water from Storage 2008 Actual Demands
130% of Average Poudre
River Flows (1986)
Water Supplies and Demands for Fort Collins Utilities
Direct flow
rights in excess
of demands.
Storage required to
meet demands.
32
17
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Date
Flow (cfs)
Direct Flow Rights Water from Storage 2008 Actual Demands
30% of Average Poudre
River Flows (2002)
Water Supplies and Demands for Fort Collins Utilities
Significant variation
in water right yields.
Some excess
even in dry year.
Much more
storage required.
33
34
Water Supply Planning Criteria
• Determines water supply and/or facility needs
– (e.g., amount of storage)
• Should be conservative to account for planning
uncertainties (e.g., population projections)
• Critical for long-term planning (especially storage)
18
35
Drought Criterion
• Defines level of reliability for supply system
• Supplies yield less in more severe droughts
• Currently using 1-in-50 year drought
– Used since 1988 Water Supply Policy
– Provided reliable supply system to date
36
Storage Reserve Factor
• Percent of annual demand in
storage (through 1-in-50)
• Short-term emergency supply
(i.e., pipeline or CBT shutdown)
• Diversifies water supply system
– Minimizes reliance on CBT
19
37
Storage per Capita Comparison
38
Storage Reserve Factor
# of # of
Storage Winter Summer
Reserve Month (July) Month
Factor Demands Demands
0% 0.0 0.0
5% 0.9 0.4
10% 1.8 0.7
15% 2.8 1.1
20% 3.7 1.5
25% 4.6 1.8
20
39
Planning Demand Level
• Sets the amount of demand the water supply
system should be developed to meet
• Lower demand level, less supplies to acquire
• Recognizes that water supply projects take many
years to develop
• Can be higher than conservation goal
– Accounts for future uncertainties
40
Potential Uncertainties???
• Modeling does not include:
– Climate change
– CBT curtailment
– Reuse Plan issues
– Water quality blending
• Supplies could be reduced by:
– River administration changes
– Competing water rights
21
41
Potential Future Water Demands
(for Developing Water Supply)
• Values include 2050 population of 165,100, large
contractual use of 8,510 acre-feet and 3% losses
• Existing firm yield about 31,000 acre-feet/year
Demand
GPCD (acre-feet)
162 39,659
160 39,278
150 37,372
140 35,465
42
Planning Criteria Key Points
• Long-term process with many uncertainties
• Balance the benefits and risks of developing
reliable supply with costs and impacts of doing so
• Criteria determines supply and facility needs
– Water use determines impacts to river system
(except for construction/inundation impacts)
22
43
Potential Planning Criteria Changes
• Maintain the 1-in-50 year drought criterion
• Change other criteria
– Planning demand level, storage reserve factor
• Options presented to Water Board:
– 162 gpcd, 15% storage reserve (Halligan)
– 150 gpcd, 15% storage reserve
– 140 gpcd, 20% storage reserve
• Any of these variations should provide an
adequate and reliable water supply
‐
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
22,000
24,000
200 180 160 140 120 100
Halligan Size Required (acre‐feet)
GPCD
GPCD and Storage Reserve Factor to
Halligan Size Relationship (Fort Collins Only)
20% Storage Reserve
15% Storage Reserve
10% Storage Reserve
Corps preliminary modeling indicates
Utility will need around 8,000-8,200
acre-feet of additional storage.
These values subject to change.
23
45
Water Board Recommendation
• July 19, 2012 meeting (April committee meeting)
• Unanimously approved the following criteria
– 1-in-50 year drought criterion
– 150 gpcd planning demand level
– 20% storage reserve factor
• Concerned with climate change impacts
• Discussions described in letter of support
46
Range of Planning Criteria Levels
• Less conservative criteria
– If supplies reduced by uncertainties, then
higher chance of frequent/intense shortages
• More conservative criteria
– If supplies minimally reduced by uncertainties,
then more reliable and flexible supplies
– Other benefits: support local agriculture and
stream flows
24
47
Policy Update Summary
• Policy update provides additional guidance for
water supply and demand planning
• Community Working Group input helped update
policy to address many issues
• Key changes:
– 140 gpcd conservation goal
– Acknowledge water supply planning criteria
• Consider potential effects of climate change
– Stronger commitment to using surplus supplies
– Plan Fort Collins and sustainability alignment
48
Questions
• What feedback does Council have regarding the
update of this policy?
• Is this policy ready for formal Council
consideration?
ATTACHMENT 7
1
City of Fort Collins Utilities
City Council Work Session
Water Supply & Demand Management Policy
August 28, 2012
Glossary of Water Resources Terms
1-in-50 Year Drought Criterion - criterion adopted in the current Water Supply and
Demand Management Policy that defines the level of risk for the City’s water supply
system; a drought is a period of below average runoff that can last one or more years and
is often measured by its duration, average annual shortage and cumulative deficit below
the average; a 1-in-50 drought corresponds to a dry period that is likely to occur, on
average, once every 50 years; although the Poudre River Basin has several drought
periods in its recorded history, it is difficult to assess whether any of these droughts were
equal in magnitude to a 1-in-50 drought; the 1985 Drought Study developed the 1-in-50
drought used in assessing the Utilities water supply system; this drought period is six
years long and has a cumulative deficit of 550,000 acre-feet, which represents annual
river volumes that are about 70% of the long-term average for the Poudre River; see also
“Statistically Based Drought Analysis”
Acceptable Planned Project - refers to a term used in a 2011 report by Western Resource
Advocates “Filling the Gap: Commonsense Solutions for Meeting Front Range Water
Needs” where it is mentioned that the Halligan and Seaman enlargements have the
potential to be Acceptable Planned Projects if urban efficiency measures are implemented
first and Poudre River (particularly the North Fork) flows and water quality are protected
and/or restored
Acre-Foot or Acre-Feet (AF) - volume of water equal to about 326,000 gallons; one acre-
foot can supply around three single family homes in Fort Collins per year; for storage
comparison the maximum volume of Horsetooth Reservoir is about 150,000 acre-feet
Active Capacity - the usable capacity of a reservoir for storage and regulation of inflows
and releases that does not include any capacity below the reservoir’s lowest outlet (which
is known as dead capacity)
Carryover - used in reference to storage; it is the ability to save water in storage for use at
a later time, most notably in following years
Change in Water Right - used to refer to changing water rights under Colorado water law
from agricultural to municipal water use; see also “Legal Return Flows or Return Flow
Obligations”
Colorado-Big Thompson (CBT) Project - a Bureau of Reclamation project that brings
water from the Colorado River basin to the east side of the continental divide via a tunnel
and the Big Thompson River to several locations including Horsetooth Reservoir;
ATTACHMENT 7
2
operated by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District; Fort Collins Utilities
currently owns 18,855 units of the 310,000 total units in the CBT project
Cubic Feet per Second (cfs) - volumetric flow rate equal to one cubic foot flowing every
second; for comparison, an average peak flow rate on the Poudre River at the Lincoln
Street gage (downtown) is around 1,900 cfs and a median winter-time low flow rate in
December at the same location is around 7 cfs
CWG - short for Community Working Group; an advisory panel convened by Utilities in
2011 to gather input regarding an update to the Water Supply & Demand Management
Policy
Direct Flow Rights - water rights that can be taken for direct use, as opposed to storage
rights that can be taken for later use; see also “Senior Water Rights”
DEIS - short for Draft Environmental Impact Statement; a report detailing the findings of
the NEPA permitting process; report can be reviewed by public for their comments
which are typically addressed in a Final Environment Impact Statement; see also
“NEPA”
ELCO - short for East Larimer County Water District; see also “Tri-Districts”
FCLWD - short for Fort Collins-Loveland Water District; see also “Tri-Districts”
Firm Yield - a measure of the ability of a water supply system to meet water demands
through a series of drought years; for the Fort Collins Utilities, this means being able to
meet the planning demand level and storage reserve factor through the 1-in-50 year
drought criterion; see also “1-in-50 Year Drought Criterion”, “planning demand level”
and “storage reserve factor”
gpcd - short for gallons per capita per day; a measurement of municipal water use; for the
Fort Collins Utilities, gpcd is calculated based on the total annual treated water produced
at the Water Treatment Facility for use by all Water Utility customers (minus large
contractual customers and other sales or exchange agreements) divided by the estimated
population of the Water Utility’s service area and 365 days
HSWMP - short for Halligan-Seaman Water Management Project
Legal Return Flows or Return Flow Obligations - refers to legal requirements when
changing water rights from agricultural to municipal use; this process requires obtaining a
decree from Colorado Water Court that involves detailed analysis of the historic
agricultural water use, including the water diversions, amount used by the crops, and the
return flow patterns of the water not used by the crops; terms in the decree to prevent
municipalities from taking more water than was historically taken and replacing return
flows in the right amount, location and time to prevent injury to other water rights
ATTACHMENT 7
3
NEPA - short for National Environmental Policy Act; federal legislation that established
environmental policy for the nation; it provides interdisciplinary framework for federal
agencies to prevent environmental damage and contains “action-forcing” procedures to
ensure that federal agency decision-makers take environmental factors into account
NISP - short for Northern Integrated Supply Project
Northern Water or NCWCD - short for Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
(NCWCD); Northern Water operates the Colorado-Big Thompson (CBT) Project and is
involved in several other regional water projects on behalf of their participants
NPIC - short for North Poudre Irrigation Company; a partner in the Halligan Reservoir
enlargement project that supplies water to farmers north of Fort Collins
NWCWD - short for North Weld County Water District; see also “Tri-Districts”
Planning Demand Level - level of water use (demand) in gpcd used for water supply
planning purposes that is a factor in determining the amount of water supplies and/or
facilities needed; see also “gpcd”
Storage Reserve Factor - refers to a commonly used engineering principle in designing
water supply systems to address short-term supply interruptions; for the Fort Collins
Utilities, the storage reserve factor incorporates having 15 percent of annual demands in
storage through the 1-in-50 drought which equates to about 3 months of winter (indoor)
demands or 1 month of summer demands
Senior Water Rights - refers to Colorado water law’s use of the “prior appropriation” or
priority system, which dictates that in times of short supply, earlier water rights decrees
(senior rights) will get their water before others (junior rights) can begin to use water,
often described as “first in time, first in right”
Statistically Based Drought Analysis - refers to the 1985 report “Droughts and Their
Effect on the Water Supplies for the City of Fort Collins, Colorado” (referred to as the
1985 Drought Study); the report was done primarily to study the effects of prolonged
droughts and to define them in terms of the probability of their occurrence; synthetic
hydrologic traces were produced based on statistical parameters of the historic data
available, which allowed analysis of numerous artificial drought periods and a
determination of representative droughts with calculated return frequencies; this report
was done in conjunction with water resources experts at Colorado State University
Tri-Districts - the combination of the three regional water districts ELCO, FCLWD and
NWCWD; these districts share the same water treatment plant called Soldier Canyon
Filter Plant, which is located adjacent to Fort Collins Utilities’ Water Treatment Facility
Triple Bottom Line - refers to the Utilities for the 21st Century sustainability initiative to
consider economic, social and environmental aspects in the decision making process
ATTACHMENT 7
4
Water Rights Portfolio - the mix of water rights owned by a water supplier; typically
includes water for direct use, as well as for storage for later use; for the Fort Collins
Utilities, includes City owned water rights, owned and/or converted shares in agricultural
rights, storage rights at Joe Wright Reservoir, and ownership in the CBT project
WSDMP - short for Water Supply & Demand Management Policy
Yield or Water Rights Yield - refers to the amount of water that is produced from a water
right; the yield of water rights vary from year to year depending on the amount of water
available (i.e., low or high river runoff) and the priority of the water right; see also “Firm
Yield” and “Senior Water Rights”
Water Districts
ELCO Water District
Fort Collins Loveland Water District
Fort Collins Utilities (Water)
Sunset Water District
West Fort Collins Water District
ATTACHMENT 2
4