No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.b. Water Supply Plan UpdateI:\City Clerk\Agenda Items\Approved Items\9.b. Water Supply Plan Update.docx EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City Council Regular Meeting: December 20, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: Water Supply Plan Update AGENDA SECTION: New Business PREPARED BY: John Morast, PE, Director of Public Works/City Engineer AGENDA NO. 9.b. ATTACHMENTS: Final Draft Water Supply Plan, Appendices and Checklist APPROVED BY: ddj RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept Final Draft Water Supply Plan Update and Direct Staff to Submit to MNDNR by December 31, 2016 Deadline ISSUE The City of Rosemount is a public water system serving more than 1,000 people. Minnesota State Statute 103G.291 requires all public water supply systems serving more than 1,000 people and/or all cities in the seven-county metropolitan area, must have a water supply plan approved by the DNR. The City of Rosemount’s current Water Emergency and Conservation Plan was prepared in September 2007 and is required to be updated as the Water Supply Plan in 2016. BACKGROUND Water Supply Plans must be updated and submitted to the DNR for approval every ten years. This requirement, in place since the 1990s, is designed to encourage communities to deal proactively with providing sustainable drinking water for citizens, businesses, and industry. The City last updated our Water Emergency and Conservation Plan (now known as the Water Supply Plan) in September 2007. To meet these update requirements, the DNR is requiring that a draft Water Supply Plan for the City of Rosemount be submitted to MnDNR by December 31, 2016. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) has developed a template to be used to standardize the updates and submittals for the Water Supply Plans. The information to complete the update includes three parts for all water systems. In addition, the MnDNR requires Metro Area Water Suppliers (which Rosemount is considered) to complete an added task to help determine consistency with the Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act. The City of Rosemount Water Supply Plan update will consist of four parts: • Part 1 – Water Supply System Description and Evaluation • Part 2 – Emergency Planning and Response Procedures • Part 3 – Water Conservation Plan • Part 4 – Metro Area Water Suppliers The Water Supply Plan update is a separate process from the 2040 Comprehensive Plan update process, which will be undertaken over the next year. However, much of the information collected and compiled with the Water Supply Plan update is required data that will be used in the Comprehensive Plan update. 2 SUMMARY At their September 20, 2016 regular Meeting, the City Council awarded Bolton & Menk, Inc. (BMI) the contract to prepare the Water System Supply Updates. The Update was presented to Utility Commission at their November 14, 2016 meeting and discussed. The Update was also reviewed by the Rosemount Environmental & Sustainability Task Force (REST) at the December 6, 2016 meeting. We received comments regarding long term strategies for conservation and demand reduction which are being incorporated. The Council reviewed the draft Plan Update at the December 12, 2016 Work Session and we have incorporated comments from that meeting. This is the final draft of the update which needs to be submitted to the MnDNR by the December 31, 2016 deadline. Following MnDNR notice of approval, Council will also have to approval the final, MnDNR approved version to complete the Water Supply Plan update process. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 1 Local Water Supply Plan Template Third Generation for 2016 -2018 Formerly called Water Emergency & Water Conservation Plan Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 2 Cover photo by Molly Shodeen For more information on this Water Supply Plan Template, please contact the DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources at (651) 259-5034 or (651) 259-5100. Copyright 2015 State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources This information is available in an alternative format upon request. Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is available to all individuals regardless of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, public assistance status, age, sexual orientation, disability or activity on behalf of a local human rights commission. Discrimination inquiries should be sent to Minnesota DNR, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4049; or the Equal Opportunity Office, Department of the Interior, Washington, DC 20240. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 3 Table of contents INTRODUCTION TO WATER SUPPLY PLANS (WSP) ............................................................. 6 Who needs to complete a Water Supply Plan .......................................................................................... 6 Groundwater Management Areas (GWMA) ............................................................................................. 6 Benefits of completing a WSP ................................................................................................................... 6 WSP Approval Process .............................................................................................................................. 7 PART 1. WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION ................................ 9 A. Analysis of Water Demand................................................................................................................ 9 B. Treatment and Storage Capacity .................................................................................................... 11 Treatment and storage capacity versus demand ................................................................12 C. Water Sources ................................................................................................................................. 12 Limits on Emergency Interconnections ...............................................................................13 D. Future Demand Projections – Key Metropolitan Council Benchmark ............................................ 13 Water Use Trends ..............................................................................................................13 Projection Method ..............................................................................................................15 E. Resource Sustainability ................................................................................................................... 15 Monitoring – Key DNR Benchmark ....................................................................................15 Water Level Data ...............................................................................................................18 Potential Water Supply Issues & Natural Resource Impacts – Key DNR & Metropolitan Council Benchmark ............................................................................................................19 Wellhead Protection (WHP) and Source W ater Protection (SWP) Plans ............................23 F. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) ...................................................................................................... 24 Adequacy of Water Supply System ....................................................................................24 Proposed Future Water Sources ........................................................................................25 Part 2. Emergency Preparedness Procedures ..........................................................................27 A. Federal Emergency Response Plan ................................................................................................. 27 B. Operational Contingency Plan ........................................................................................................ 27 C. Emergency Response Procedures ................................................................................................... 27 Emergency Telephone List ................................................................................................28 Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 4 Current Water Sources and Service Area ..........................................................................28 Procedure for Augmenting Water Supplies ........................................................................28 Allocation and Demand Reduction Procedures ..................................................................29 Notification Procedures ......................................................................................................31 Enforcement ......................................................................................................................32 PART 3. WATER CONSERVATION PLAN ...............................................................................34 Progress since 2006 ................................................................................................................................ 35 A. Triggers for Allocation and Demand Reduction Actions ................................................................. 35 B. Conservation Objectives and Strategies – Key benchmark for DNR ............................................... 36 Objective 1: Reduce Unaccounted (Non-Revenue) Water loss to Less than 10% ..............36 Objective 2: Achieve Less than 75 Residential Gallons per Capita Demand (GPCD) .........38 Objective 3: Achieve at least a 1.5% per year water reduction for Institutional, Industrial, Commercial, and Agricultural GPCD over the next 10 years or a 15% reduction in ten years. .................................................................................................................................39 Objective 4: Achieve a Decreasing Trend in Total Per Capita Demand ..............................40 Objective 5: Reduce Peak Day Demand so that the Ratio of Average Maximum day to the Average Day is less than 2.6..............................................................................................41 Objective 6: Implement a Conservation Water Rate Structure and/or a Uniform Rate Structure with a Water Conservation Program ...................................................................41 Objective 7: Additional strategies to Reduce Water Use and Support Wellhead Protection Planning .............................................................................................................................44 Objective 8: Tracking Success: How will you track or measure success through the next ten years? ................................................................................................................................44 A. Regulation ....................................................................................................................................... 45 B. Retrofitting Programs ..................................................................................................................... 45 Retrofitting Programs .........................................................................................................46 C. Education and Information Programs ............................................................................................. 46 Proposed Education Programs ..........................................................................................47 Part 4. ITEMS FOR METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNITIES .................................................51 A. Water Demand Projections through 2040 ...................................................................................... 51 Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 5 B. Potential Water Supply Issues ........................................................................................................ 51 C. Proposed Alternative Approaches to Meet Extended Water Demand Projections ....................... 51 D. Value-Added Water Supply Planning Efforts (Optional) ................................................................. 52 Source Water Protection Strategies ...................................................................................52 Technical assistance ..........................................................................................................52 GLOSSARY ..............................................................................................................................53 Acronyms and Initialisms ........................................................................................................................ 55 APPENDICES TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE WATER SUPPLIER ............................................57 Appendix 1: Well records and maintenance summaries – see Part 1C ................................................. 57 Appendix 2: Water level monitoring plan – see Part 1E ........................................................................ 57 Appendix 3: Water level graphs for each water supply well - see Part 1E ............................................. 57 Appendix 4: Capital Improvement Plan - see Part 1E ............................................................................. 57 Appendix 5: Emergency Telephone List – see Part 2C ........................................................................... 57 Appendix 6: Cooperative Agreements for Emergency Services – see Part 2C ....................................... 57 Appendix 7: Municipal Critical Water Deficiency Ordinance – see Part 2C ............................................ 57 Appendix 8: Graph showing annual per capita water demand for each customer category during the last ten-years – see Part 3 Objective 4.................................................................................................... 57 Appendix 9: Water Rate Structure – see Part 3 Objective 6 .................................................................. 57 Appendix 10: Adopted or proposed regulations to reduce demand or improve water efficiency – see Part 3 Objective 7 .................................................................................................................................... 57 Appendix 11: Implementation Checklist – summary of all the actions that a community is doing, or proposes to do, including estimated implementation dates – see www.mndnr.gov/watersupplyplans ................................................................................................................................................................ 57 Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 6 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES – DIVISION OF ECOLOGICAL AND WATER RESOURCES AND METROPOLITAN COUNCIL INTRODUCTION TO WATER SUPPLY PLANS (WSP) Who needs to complete a Water Supply Plan Public water suppliers serving more than 1,000 people, large private water suppliers in designated Groundwater Management Areas, and all water suppliers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area are required to prepare and submit a water supply plan. The goal of the WSP is to help water suppliers: 1) implement long term water sustainability and conservation measures; and 2) develop critical emergency preparedness measures. Your community needs to know what measures will be implemented in case of a water crisis. A lot of emergencies can be avoided or mitigated if long term sustainability measures are implemented. Groundwater Management Areas (GWMA) The DNR has designated three areas of the state as Groundwater Management Areas (GWMAs) to focus groundwater management efforts in specific geographies where there is an added risk of overuse or water quality degradation. A plan directing the DNRs actions within each GWMA has been prepared. Although there are no specific additional requirements with respect to the water supply planning for communities within designated GWMAs, communities should be aware of the issues and actions planned if they are within the boundary of one of the GWMAs. The three GWMAs are the North and East Metro GWMA (Twin Cities Metro), the Bonanza Valley GWMA and the Straight River GWMA (near Park Rapids). Additional information and maps are included in the DNR webpage at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/gwmp/areas.html Benefits of completing a WSP Completing a WSP using this template, fulfills a water supplier’s statutory obligations under M.S. M.S.103G.291 to complete a water supply plan. For water suppliers in the metropolitan area, the WSP will help local governmental units to fulfill their requirements under M.S. 473.859 to complete a local comprehensive plan. Additional benefits of completing WSP template:  The standardized format allows for quicker and easier review and approval.  Help water suppliers prepare for droughts and water emergencies.  Create eligibility for funding requests to the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) for the Drinking Water Revolving Fund.  Allow water suppliers to submit requests for new wells or expanded capacity of existing wells.  Simplify the development of county comprehensive water plans and watershed plans.  Fulfill the contingency plan provisions required in the MDH wellhead protection and surface water protection plans.  Fulfill the demand reduction requirements of Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.291 subd 3 and 4. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 7  Upon implementation, contribute to maintaining aquifer levels, reducing potential well interference and water use conflicts, and reducing the need to drill new wells or expand system capacity.  Enable DNR to compile and analyze water use and conservation data to help guide decisions.  Conserve Minnesota’s water resources If your community needs assistance completing the Water Supply Plan, assistance is available from your area hydrologist or groundwater specialist, the MN Rural Waters Association circuit rider program, or in the metropolitan area from Metropolitan Council staff. Many private consultants are also available. WSP Approval Process 10 Basic Steps for completing a 10-Year Water Supply Plan 1. Download the DNR/Metropolitan Council Water Supply Plan Template www.mndnr.gov/watersupplyplans 2. Save the document with a file name with this naming convention: WSP_cityname_permitnumber_date.doc. 3. The template is a form that should be completed electronically. 4. Compile the required water use data (Part 1) and emergency procedures information (Part 2) 5. The Water Conservation section (Part 3) may need discussion with the water department, council, or planning commission, if your community does not already have an active water conservation program. 6. Communities in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area should complete all the information discussed in Part 4. The Metropolitan Council has additional guidance information on their webpage http://www.metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Plan-Elements/Water- Resources/Water-Supply.aspx. All out-state water suppliers do not need to complete the content addressed in Part 4. 7. Use the Plan instructions and Checklist document to insure all data is complete and attachments are included. This will allow for a quicker approval process. www.mndnr.gov/watersupplyplans 8. Plans should be submitted electronically – no paper documents are required. https://webapps11.dnr.state.mn.us/mpars/public/authentication/login 9. DNR hydrologist will review plans (in cooperation with Metropolitan Council in Metro area) and approve the plan or make recommendations. 10. Once approved, communities should complete a Certification of Adoption form, and send a copy to the DNR. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 8 Complete Table 1 with information about the public water supply system covered by this WSP. Table 1. General information regarding this WSP Requested Information Description DNR Water Appropriation Permit Number(s) 76-6069 Ownership ☒ Public or ☐ Private Metropolitan Council Area ☒ Yes or ☐ No (Dakota County) Street Address 2875 145th Street West City, State, Zip Rosemount, MN 55068 Contact Person Name Jim Koslowski Title Public Works Supervisor Phone Number 651-322-2022 MDH Supplier Classification Municipal Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 9 PART 1. WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION The first step in any water supply analysis is to assess the current status of demand and availability. Information summarized in Part 1 can be used to develop Emergency Preparedness Procedures (Part 2) and the Water Conservation Plan (Part 3). This data is also needed to track progress for water efficiency measures. A. Analysis of Water Demand Complete Table 2 showing the past 10 years of water demand data.  Some of this information may be in your Wellhead Protection Plan.  If you do not have this information, do your best, call your engineer for assistance or if necessary leave blank. If your customer categories are different than the ones listed in Table 2, please describe the differences below: Water used for non-essential purposes includes irrigation water used for city parks and lawns etc. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 10 Table 2. Historic water demand (see definitions in the glossary after Part 4 of this template) Year Pop. Served Total Connections Residential Water Delivered (MG) C/I/I Water Delivered (MG) Water used for Non- essential Wholesale Deliveries (MG) Total Water Delivered (MG) Total Water Pumped (MG) Water Supplier Services Percent Unmetered/ Unaccounted Average Daily Demand (MGD) Max. Daily Demand (MGD) Date of Max. Demand Residential Per Capita Demand (GPCD) Total per capita Demand (GPCD) 2005 17600 5,989 569 128.4 0 697.0 761.6 8.5% 2.09 6.05 88.5 118.6 2006 20,700 6,212 721 97.7 0 818.8 944.1 13.3% 2.59 5.47 7/5/2006 95.4 125.0 2007 18,100 6,304 756 103.6 0 859.5 937.5 8.3% 2.57 5.08 7/8/2007 114.4 141.9 2008 18,400 6,425 771 125.3 0 906.1 910.4 9.4 0.5% 2.49 6.65 7/3/2008 114.9 135.6 2009 19,100 6,525 786 126.9 0 923.4 937.9 10.6 1.5% 2.57 6.47 6/5/2009 112.7 134.5 2010 19,400 6,615 573 101.1 142.6 0 825.6 825.6 9.1 0.0% 2.26 5.24 5/30/2010 80.9 116.6 2011 19,600 6,681 623 88.9 154.7 0 878.0 855.8 11.0 -2.6% 2.34 6.26 6/8/2011 87.1 119.6 2012 20,600 6,755 693 94.5 173.7 0 971.7 973.1 10.0 0.1% 2.67 6.88 7/3/2012 92.2 129.4 2013 20,900 6,847 635 113.4 130.9 0 889.4 880.6 9.8 -1.0% 2.41 6.37 8/27/2013 83.3 115.4 2014 21,200 6,939 570 102.0 121.4 0 809.0 815.3 15.4 0.8% 2.23 6.40 8/16/2014 73.7 105.4 2015 21,400 7,024 547 119.4 107.2 0 794.6 813.1 20.7 2.3% 2.23 6.05 10/5/2015 70.1 104.1 Avg. 2010- 2015 20517 6810 607 103 138 0 861.4 861 12.7 -0.1% 2.36 6.20 N/A 81.2 115.1 MG – Million Gallons MGD – Million Gallons per Day GPCD – Gallons per Capita per Day See Glossary for definitions Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 11 Complete Table 3 by listing the top 10 water users by volume, from largest to smallest. For each user, include information about the category of use (residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or wholesale), the amount of water used in gallons per year, the percent of total water delivered, and the status of water conservation measures. Table 3. Large volume users Customer Use Category (Residential, Industrial, Commercial, Institutional, Wholesale) Amount Used (Gallons per Year) Percent of Total Annual Water Delivered Implementing Water Conservation Measures? (Yes/No/Unknown) Flint Hills Resources Industrial 41,024,000 5.2% Unknown City of Rosemount Commercial 31,455,830 4.0% Yes Hawkins, Inc. Industrial 18,099,000 2.3% Unknown Rosemount Woods Residential 11,337,000 1.4% Unknown Rosemount High School Institutional 9,120,000 1.1% Unknown Dakota Count Technical College Institutional 7,403,000 0.9% Unknown Waterford Commons Residential 3,796,000 0.5% Unknown The Spa Car Wash Commercial 3,757,000 0.5% Unknown Connemara Crossing HOA (Irrigation) Residential 3,233,000 0.4% Unknown El Dorado Shipping Commercial 2,703,000 0.3% Unknown B. Treatment and Storage Capacity Complete Table 4 with a description of where water is treated, the year treatment facilities were constructed, water treatment capacity, the treatment methods (i.e. chemical addition, reverse osmosis, coagulation, sedimentation, etc.) and treatment types used (i.e. fluoridation, softening, chlorination, Fe/MN removal, coagulation, etc.). Also describe the annual amount and method of disposal of treatment residuals. Add rows to the table as needed. Table 4. Water treatment capacity and treatment processes Treatment Site ID (Plant Name or Well ID) Year Constructed Treatment Capacity (GPD) Treatment Method Treatment Type Annual Amount of Residuals Disposal Process for Residuals Do You Reclaim Filter Backwash Water? Rosemount does not currently have a water treatment plant. Because Rosemount water quality meets all primary drinking water standards, treatment is not mandated. Disinfection is accomplished by chlorination at the source wells. Additional treatment includes fluoridation and polyphosphate at the source wells. Complete Table 5 with information about storage structures. Describe the type (i.e. elevated, ground, etc.), the storage capacity of each type of structure, the year each structure was constructed, and the primary material for each structure. Add rows to the table as needed. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 12 Table 5. Storage capacity, as of the end of the last calendar year Structure Name Type of Storage Structure Year Constructed Primary Material Storage Capacity (Gallons) Chippendale Tower Elevated storage 1972 Steel 500,000 Connemara Tower Elevated storage 1988 Steel 1,000,000 Bacardi Tower Elevated storage 2007 Steel 1,500,000 East Side Tower Elevated storage 1998 Steel 500,000 Total NA NA NA 3,500,000 Treatment and storage capacity versus demand It is recommended that total storage equal or exceed the average daily demand. Discuss the difference between current storage and treatment capacity versus the water supplier’s projected average water demand over the next 10 years (see Table 7 for projected water demand): The City of Rosemount currently has 3,500,000 gallons of elevated storage between four steel elevated storage tanks. Typically, it is desired to maintain a storage capacity greater than the average day demand (based on Ten States Standards). In 2016, the average day demand is projected to be 2.27 MGD. Using the Ten States Standards and comparing the average day demand to total storage capacity, there is a surplus of 1.23 MG in 2016. Future projections over the next 10 y ears indicate the City of Rosemount will maintain a storage capacity greater than the average day demand. In 2025, the City will have a projected average day demand of 2.99 MGD, yielding a storage surplus of 512,634 gallons. However, by 2040, a deficit in storage volume of 922,016 gallons is projected. Therefore, additional storage is needed between 2030 and 2040. The City of Rosemount does not operate any water treatment plants since the water quality meets all primary drinking water standards. The City currently has a total well capacity of 10.1 MGD with a firm capacity (largest well out of service) of 8.28 MGD. These well capacities are based on running the wells for 20 hours per day. It is common practice to run the wells for only 20 hours per day maximum. Comparing future demands to current and future water supplies is common for determining when and how many new sources of water are needed. Typically, the water sources should have a firm capacity greater than the maximum day demand. From the future projections in Table 7, it can be seen that in 2016 a maximum day demand of 6.59 MGD is predicted. This leads to a surplus of 1.69 MGD of well water capacity using current firm well capacity. However, future projections indicate that by 2024 a deficit in firm well capacity of 0.11 MGD (74 gpm) will occur, and additional wells will be required to meet the maximum day demand of 8.39 MGD. There is not enough well capacity to supply the City of Rosemount for the next 10 years unless a new well is added. However, the City has a new well, Well No. 16, that will be operational soon which will supplement the current water supply. The City also plans to drill another well by 2019, which will supplement the current well supply and provide enough water to meet projected demands. C. Water Sources Complete Table 6 by listing all types of water sources that supply water to the system, including groundwater, surface water, interconnections with other water suppliers, or others. Provide the name of each source (aquifer name, river or lake name, name of interconnecting water supplier) and the Minnesota unique well number or intake ID, as appropriate. Report the year the source was installed or established and the current capacity. Provide information about the depth of all wells. Describe the Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 13 status of the source (active, inactive, emergency only, retail/wholesale interconnection) and if the source facilities have a dedicated emergency power source. Add rows to the table as needed for each installation. Include copies of well records and maintenance summary for each well that has occurred since your last approved plan in Appendix 1. Table 6. Water sources and status Resource Type (Groundwater, Surface water, Interconnection) Resource Name MN Unique Well # or Intake ID Year Installed Capacity (Gallons per Minute) Well Depth (Feet) Status of Normal and Emergency Operations (active, inactive, emergency only, retail/wholesale interconnection)) Does this Source have a Dedicated Emergency Power Source? (Yes or No) Groundwater RR #1 457167 1989 500 400 Active Yes Groundwater RR #2 474335 1990 500 400 Active Yes Groundwater Well No. 7 112212 1976 1000 490 Active Yes Groundwater Well No. 8 509060 1990 1100 498 Active Yes Groundwater Well No. 9 554248 1996 1200 481 Active Yes Groundwater Well No. 12 706804 2004 1500 475 Active Yes Groundwater Well No. 14 722623 2005 1300 485 Active Yes Groundwater Well No. 15 753663 2009 1300 487 Active Yes Groundwater Well No. 16 805374 2015 2000 507 Inactive Yes Groundwater Monitoring Well 141 798068 2013 NA 51.5 Inactive No Groundwater Test Well 16 802726 2014 50 506 Active No Groundwater Monitor Umore Well 767876 2012 NA 439 Inactive No Groundwater Monitoring Well 14 East 702834 2004 NA 518 Inactive No Groundwater Monitoring Well 14 West 783280 2011 NA 194 Inactive No Groundwater Irrigation Well 767870 2012 250 280 Active No Limits on Emergency Interconnections Discuss any limitations on the use of the water sources (e.g. not to be operated simultaneously, limitations due to blending, aquifer recovery issues etc.) and the use of interconnections, including capacity limits or timing constraints (i.e. only 200 gallons per minute are available from the City of Prior Lake, and it is estimated to take 6 hours to establish the emergency connection). If there are no limitations, list none. Interconnect available with the City of Apple Valley. The capacity o f the interconnect is 23,000 GPM. D. Future Demand Projections – Key Metropolitan Council Benchmark Water Use Trends Use the data in Table 2 to describe trends in 1) population served; 2) total per capita water demand; 3) average daily demand; 4) maximum daily demand. Then explain the causes for upward or downward trends. For example, over the ten years has the average daily demand trended up or down? Why is this occurring? Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 14 The historic trend in population served shows a consistent increase in the population served within the City of Rosemount. Over the last ten years, the City saw an increase in the service population of 21.5%. The population served over the last 10 years follows the expected trend. As the population served increased, the total number of connections also increased. The rate of population increase remained constant each year. Overall, the average total per capita water demand averaged 122 gallons per capita per day (gpcd). From Table 2, it can be observed that the trend in total per capita demand has decreased over the last 10 ye ars to 104 gpcd. There are years with higher demands: such as 2007 where the demand was 142 gpcd and 2008 where the demand was 136 gpcd. The overall trend is a decreasing total per capita demand. This could be contributed to an increasing population served with a decrease in total water pumped from wells. It appears that during wet years (years with higher amounts of rain) the per capita demand decreases while dry years see an increase in total demand. The average daily demand has averaged 2.41 over the last 10 years. This has remained consistent during the last 10 years of historical monitoring. There is no significant change in the average day demand. However, the City saw a lower average demand during the last 5 years. This is due to less water being pumped from the wells and more water conservation measures. The maximum day demand has also remained constant over the last 10 years. The historical data shows that the maximum day demand averaged 6.1 MGD. There is no increasing or decreasing trend in the maximum day demand. It is important to note that 2011 and 2013 saw an unusual occurrence in unaccounted for water. From Table 2 it can be seen that there was 2.6% and 1% of all water was unaccounted for during these two years, respectively. This is not typical as it means that there was more water sold than water pumped. Most likely, the total water pumped was under estimated in these two years due to a malfunctioning data logger. Use the water use trend information discussed above to complete Table 7 with projected annual demand for the next ten years. Communities in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area must also include projections for 2030 and 2040 as part of their local comprehensive planning. Projected demand should be consistent with trends evident in the historical data in Table 2, as discussed above. Projected demand should also reflect state demographer population projections and/or other planning projections. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 15 Table 7. Projected annual water demand Year Projected Total Population(1) Projected Population Served Projected Total Per Capita Water Demand (GPCD) Projected Average Daily Demand (MGD) Projected Maximum Daily Demand (MGD) 2016 23,544 21,425 106 2.27 6.59 2017 23,857 21,710 106 2.30 6.67 2018 24,210 22,031 106 2.34 6.77 2019 25,011 22,760 106 2.41 7.00 2020 26,026 23,684 106 2.51 7.28 2021 27,012 24,581 106 2.61 7.56 2022 28,003 25,483 106 2.70 7.83 2023 28,994 26,385 106 2.80 8.11 2024 29,985 27,286 106 2.89 8.39 2025 30,970 28,183 106 2.99 8.66 2030 35,921 32,688 106 3.46 10.05 2040 45,843 41,717 106 4.42 12.82 (1) Total population includes MetCouncil projections (38,100) plus Umore phases 1-5 when fully developed. GPCD – Gallons per Capita per Day MGD – Million Gallons per Day Projection Method Describe the method used to project water demand, including assumptions for population and business growth and how water conservation and efficiency programs affect projected water demand: The 2016 Peer Review Report for the City of Rosemount contains population estimates that were used for future City population. The estimates for the ultimate total City 2040 population include MetCoucil projections (38,100) plus Umore phases 1-5 projections when fully developed. Historically, the service area population average is 91% of the total population. This ratio was applied to future population proj ections to calculate future service population. It was assumed that the projected average per capita water demand would remain constant at 106 gallons per capita per day through 2040. The peak per capita demand was assumed to be 307 gallons per capita per day, yielding a peaking factor (peak day to average day ratio) of 2.90. It was assumed that the peaking factor would remain constant through 2040. E. Resource Sustainability Monitoring – Key DNR Benchmark Complete Table 8 by inserting information about source water quality and quantity monitoring efforts. List should include all production wells, observation wells, and source water intakes or reservoirs. Add rows to the table as needed. Find information on groundwater level monitoring program at: http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/groundwater_section/obwell/index.html Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 16 Table 8. Information about source water quality and quantity monitoring MN Unique Well # or Surface Water ID Type of monitoring point Monitoring program Frequency of monitoring Monitoring Method 457167 (Rural Well No. 1) ☒ production well ☐ observation well ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 474335 (Rural Well No. 2) ☒ production well ☐ observation well ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 112212 (Well No. 7) ☒ production well ☐ observation well ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 509060 (Well No. 8) ☒ production well ☐ observation well ☐ source water intake ☒ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 554248 (Well No. 9) ☒ production well ☐ observation well ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 706804 (Well No. 12) ☒ production well ☐ observation well ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 722623 (Well No. 14) ☒ production well ☐ observation well ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 753663 (Well No. 15) ☒ production well ☐ observation well ☐ source water intake ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 17 MN Unique Well # or Surface Water ID Type of monitoring point Monitoring program Frequency of monitoring Monitoring Method ☐ source water reservoir ☐ other ☐ quarterly ☐ annually 805374 (Well No. 16, Not Active) ☒ production well ☐ observation well ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 702837 (Monitoring Well 14 East) ☐ production well ☒ Test well (monitoring well) ☐ source water intake ☐ source water ☐ routine MDH sampling ☐ routine water utility sampling ☒ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 783280 (Monitoring Well 14 West) ☐ production well ☒ Test well (Monitoring well) ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☐ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☐ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 767876 (Monitoring Well Umore) ☐ production well ☒ Test well (Monitoring Well) ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 798068 (Monitoring Well 141) ☐ production well ☒ Test well (Monitoring Well) ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 802726 (Test Well No. 16) ☐ production well ☒ Test well ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☒ routine water utility sampling ☐ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge 767870 (Irrigation Well) ☐ production well ☒ Test well (Irrigation Well) ☐ source water intake ☐ source water reservoir ☐ routine MDH sampling ☐ routine water utility sampling ☒ other ☒ continuous ☐ hourly ☐ daily ☐ monthly ☐ quarterly ☐ annually ☒ SCADA ☐ grab sampling ☐ steel tape ☐ stream gauge Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 18 Water Level Data A water level monitoring plan that includes monitoring locations and a schedule for water level readings must be submitted as Appendix 2. If one does not already exist, it needs to be prepared and submitted with the WSP. Ideally, all production and observation wells are monitored at least monthly. Complete Table 9 to summarize water level data for each well being monitored. Provide the name of the aquifer and a brief description of how much water levels vary over the season (the difference between the highest and lowest water levels measured during the year) and the long-term trends for each well. If water levels are not measured and recorded on a routine basis, then provide the static water level when each well was constructed and the most recent water level measured during the same season the well was constructed. Also include all water level data taken during any well and pump maintenance. Add rows to the table as needed. Provide water level data graphs for each well in Appendix 3 for the life of the well, or for as many years as water levels have been measured. See DNR website for Date Time Water Level http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/groundwater_section/obwell/waterleveldata.html Table 9. Water level data Unique Well Number or Well ID Aquifer Name Seasonal Variation (Feet) Long-term Trend in water level data Water level measured during well/pumping maintenance 112212 (Well No. 7) Jordan 96 feet ☒ Falling ☐ Stable ☐ Rising Daily 509060 (Well No. 8) Jordan 95 feet ☐ Falling ☒ Stable ☐ Rising Daily 554248 (Well No. 9) Jordan 70 feet ☐ Falling ☒ Stable ☐ Rising Daily 706804 (Well No. 12) Jordan 85 feet ☐ Falling ☒ Stable ☐ Rising Daily 722623 (Well No. 14) Jordan 50 feet ☒ Falling ☐ Stable ☐ Rising Daily 753663 (Well No. 15) Jordan 87 feet ☒ Falling ☐ Stable ☐ Rising Daily 457167 (Rural Well No. 1) Jordan 119 feet ☒ Falling ☐ Stable ☐ Rising Daily Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 19 Potential Water Supply Issues & Natural Resource Impacts – Key DNR & Metropolitan Council Benchmark Complete Table 10 by listing the types of natural resources that are or could be impacted by permitted water withdrawals. If known, provide the name of specific resources that may be impacted. Identify what the greatest risks to the resource are and how the risks are being assessed. Identify any resource protection thresholds – formal or informal – that have been established to identify when actions should be taken to mitigate impacts. Provide information about the potential mitigation actions that may be taken, if a resource protection threshold is crossed. Add additional rows to the table as needed. See glossary at the end of the template for definitions. Some of this baseline data should have been in your earlier water supply plans or county comprehensive water plans. When filling out this table, think of what are the water supply risks, identify the resources, determine the threshold and then determine what your community will do to mitigate the impacts. Your DNR area hydrologist is available to assist with this table. For communities in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area, the Master Water Supply Plan Appendix 1 (Water Supply Profiles, provides information about potential water supply issues and natural resource impacts for your community. Table 10. Natural resource impacts Resource Type Resource Name Risk Risk Assessed Through Describe Resource Protection Threshold* Mitigation Measure or Management Plan Describe How Changes to Thresholds are Monitored ☐ River or stream N/A ☐ Flow/water level decline ☐ Degrading water quality trends and/or MCLs exceeded ☐ Impacts on endangered, threatened, or special concern species habitat or other natural resource impacts ☐ Other: _____ ☐ GIS analysis ☐ Modeling ☐ Mapping ☐ Monitoring ☐ Aquifer testing ☐ Other: ___ ☐ Revise permit ☐ Change groundwater pumping ☐ Increase conservation ☐ Other Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 20 Resource Type Resource Name Risk Risk Assessed Through Describe Resource Protection Threshold* Mitigation Measure or Management Plan Describe How Changes to Thresholds are Monitored ☒ Calcareous fen (mapped in nearby area) N/A ☐ Flow/water level decline ☒ Degrading water quality trends and/or MCLs exceeded ☒ Impacts on endangered, threatened, or special concern species habitat or other natural resource impacts ☐ Other: _____ ☐ GIS analysis ☐ Modeling ☒ Mapping ☒ Monitoring ☐ Aquifer testing ☐ Other: ___ Lower limit on acceptable changes to the state- protected calcareous fen. ☐ Revise permit ☐ Change groundwater pumping ☒ Increase conservation ☐ Other Evaluate maps of known fens to determine stability of the fen. Monitor historic data and compare to current habitat to determine trends in habitat loss or growth. ☒ Lake Spring Lake ☒ Flow/water level decline ☒ Degrading water quality trends and/or MCLs exceeded ☐ Impacts on endangered, threatened, or special concern species habitat or other natural resource impacts ☐ Other: _____ ☐ GIS analysis ☐ Modeling ☒ Mapping ☐ Monitoring ☐ Aquifer testing ☐ Other: ___ Lower limit of acceptable water levels on lakes. Water quality out of acceptable range. ☐ Revise permit ☐ Change groundwater pumping ☒ Increase conservation ☐ Other Compare historic water level data to any new data to determine trends in water level. Compare historic water quality measurements to new measurements. ☒ Lake Kegan Lake ☒ Flow/water level decline ☒ Degrading water quality trends and/or MCLs exceeded ☐ Impacts on endangered, threatened, or ☐ GIS analysis ☐ Modeling ☒ Mapping ☒ Monitoring ☐ Aquifer testing ☐ Other: ___ Lower limit of acceptable water levels on lakes. Water quality out of acceptable range. ☐ Revise permit ☐ Change groundwater pumping ☒ Increase conservation ☐ Other Compare historic water level data to any new data to determine trends in water level. Compare historic water quality measurements Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 21 Resource Type Resource Name Risk Risk Assessed Through Describe Resource Protection Threshold* Mitigation Measure or Management Plan Describe How Changes to Thresholds are Monitored special concern species habitat or other natural resource impacts ☐ Other: _____ to new measurements. Compare surface water measurements to known well pumping to determine the effect of well pumping on surface water levels. This lake being monitored is representative of other water bodies within the City of Rosemount ☒ Wetland Schwarz Park Pond ☒ Flow/water level decline ☒ Degrading water quality trends and/or MCLs exceeded ☐ Impacts on endangered, threatened, or special concern species habitat or other natural resource impacts ☐ Other: _____ ☐ GIS analysis ☐ Modeling ☒ Mapping ☒ Monitoring ☐ Aquifer testing ☐ Other: ___ Lower limit of acceptable water levels in wetland. Lower limit of acceptable water quality. ☐ Revise permit ☐ Change groundwater pumping ☒ Increase conservation ☐ Other Monitor wetland to determine water level trends. This wetland being monitored is representative of other water bodies within the City of Rosemount. ☒ Wetland Wetland at Innisfree Park ☒ Flow/water level decline ☒ Degrading water quality trends and/or MCLs exceeded ☐ Impacts on endangered, threatened, or ☐ GIS analysis ☐ Modeling ☒ Mapping ☒ Monitoring ☐ Aquifer testing ☐ Other: ___ Lower limit of acceptable water levels in wetland. Lower limit of acceptable water quality. ☐ Revise permit ☐ Change groundwater pumping ☒ Increase conservation ☐ Other Monitor wetland to determine water level trends. Compare historic water quality reports to current reports to Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 22 Resource Type Resource Name Risk Risk Assessed Through Describe Resource Protection Threshold* Mitigation Measure or Management Plan Describe How Changes to Thresholds are Monitored special concern species habitat or other natural resource impacts ☐ Other: _____ determine trends in wetland water quality. This wetland being monitored is representative of other water bodies within the City of Rosemount. ☒ Trout stream (mapped in nearby area) Vermillion River ☒ Flow/water level decline ☒ Degrading water quality trends and/or MCLs exceeded ☐ Impacts on endangered, threatened, or special concern species habitat or other natural resource impacts ☐ Other: _____ ☒ GIS analysis ☐ Modeling ☒ Mapping ☒ Monitoring ☐ Aquifer testing ☐ Other: ___ Lower limit on acceptable flow in river. Water quality outside of acceptable trout stream limits. ☐ Revise permit ☒ Change groundwater pumping ☒ Increase conservation ☐ Other Monitor water levels and compare to historic values to determine long-term trends in river data. Compare current water quality testing to historic water quality testing to determine water quality trends of the river. ☒ Aquifer Prairie du Chien- Jordan ☒ Flow/water level decline ☒ Degrading water quality trends and/or MCLs exceeded ☐ Impacts on endangered, threatened, or special concern species habitat or other natural resource impacts ☐ GIS analysis ☐ Modeling ☐ Mapping ☒ Monitoring ☒ Aquifer testing ☐ Other: ___ Lower limit on acceptable water level in aquifer. Declining water levels in monitoring wells. Withdrawals that exceed the permitted amount. ☐ Revise permit ☒ Change groundwater pumping ☒ Increase conservation ☐ Other Seven City wells are connected to the Jordan aquifer and draw water yearly from it. Surface waters in this area may be directly connected to groundwater. Continue to monitor water levels in monitoring wells. Compare Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 23 Resource Type Resource Name Risk Risk Assessed Through Describe Resource Protection Threshold* Mitigation Measure or Management Plan Describe How Changes to Thresholds are Monitored ☐ Other: _____ water level monitoring data to historic monitoring data to determine trends in aquifer water level. ☐ Endangered, threatened, or special concern species habitat, other natural resource impacts N/A ☐ Flow/water level decline ☐ Degrading water quality trends and/or MCLs exceeded ☐ Impacts on endangered, threatened, or special concern species habitat or other natural resource impacts ☐ Other: _____ ☐ GIS analysis ☐ Modeling ☐ Mapping ☐ Monitoring ☐ Aquifer testing ☐ Other: ___ N/A ☐ Revise permit ☐ Change groundwater pumping ☐ Increase conservation ☐ Other N/A * Examples of thresholds: a lower limit on acceptable flow in a river or stream; water quality outside of an accepted range; a lower limit on acceptable aquifer level decline at one or more monitoring wells; withdrawals that exceed some percent of the total amount available from a source; or a lower limit on acceptable changes to a protected habitat. Wellhead Protection (WHP) and Surface Water Protection (SWP) Plans Complete Table 11 to provide status information about WHP and SWP plans. The emergency procedures in this plan are intended to comply with the contingency plan provisions required in the Minnesota Department of Health’s (MDH) Wellhead Protection (WHP) Plan and Surface Water Protection (SWP) Plan. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 24 Table 11. Status of Wellhead Protection and Surface Water Protection Plans Plan Type Status Date Adopted Date for Update WHP ☐ In Process ☒ Completed ☐ Not Applicable Part I: 2010 Part II: 2012 Part I: 2020 Part II: 2022 SWP ☐ In Process ☒ Completed ☐ Not Applicable NA NA F. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Please note that any wells that received approval under a ten-year permit, but that were not built, are now expired and must submit a water appropriations permit. Adequacy of Water Supply System Complete Table 12 with information about the adequacy of wells and/or intakes, storage facilities, treatment facilities, and distribution systems to sustain current and projected demands. List planned capital improvements for any system components, in chronological order. Communities in the seven- county Twin Cities metropolitan area should also include information about plans through 2040. The assessment can be the general status by category; it is not necessary to identify every single well, storage facility, treatment facility, lift station, and mile of pipe. Please attach your latest Capital Improvement Plan as Appendix 4. Table 12. Adequacy of Water Supply System System Component Planned action Anticipated Construction Year Notes Wells/Intakes ☐ No action planned - adequate ☒ Repair/replacement ☒ Expansion/addition Well 17: 2018 Add one new well within 10 years. Maintain existing wells. Water Storage Facilities ☐ No action planned - adequate ☒ Repair/replacement ☒ Expansion/addition 2016 - 2020 Add an additional 1.5 MG water storage tank near the Bacardi Tower (ground storage) Water Treatment Facilities ☐ No action planned - adequate ☐ Repair/replacement ☒ Expansion/addition 2019 Construct new WTP in 2019 to treat City water. Distribution Systems (pipes, valves, etc.) ☐ No action planned - adequate ☒ Repair/replacement ☒ Expansion/addition 2016 – 2040 Water main replacement during street reconstruction projects. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 25 System Component Planned action Anticipated Construction Year Notes Extension of 16” water main for fire flow protection. Pressure Zones ☒ No action planned - adequate ☐ Repair/replacement ☐ Expansion/addition NA Pressure zones are adequate. Other: ☒ No action planned - adequate ☐ Repair/replacement ☐ Expansion/addition Proposed Future Water Sources Complete Table 13 to identify new water source installation planned over the next ten years. Add rows to the table as needed. Table 13. Proposed future installations/sources Source Installation Location (approximate) Resource Name Proposed Pumping Capacity (gpm) Planned Installation Year Planned Partnerships Groundwater Rosemount, MN Well No. 17 500 – 1000 2018 N/A Surface Water None None None None None Interconnection to another supplier None None None None None Water Source Alternatives - Key Metropolitan Council Benchmark Do you anticipate the need for alternative water sources in the next 10 years? Yes ☐ No ☒ For metro communities, will you need alternative water sources by the year 2040? Yes ☒ No ☐ If you answered yes for either question, then complete table 14. If no, insert NA. Complete Table 14 by checking the box next to alternative approaches that your community is considering, including approximate locations (if known), the estimated amount of future demand that could be met through the approach, the estimated timeframe to implement the approach, potential partnerships, and the major benefits and challenges of the approach. Add rows to the table as needed. For communities in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area, these alternatives should include approaches the community is considering to meet projected 2040 water demand. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 26 Table 14. Alternative water sources Alternative Source Considered Source and/or Installation Location (approximate) Estimated Amount of Future Demand (%) Timeframe to Implement (YYYY) Potential Partners Benefits Challenges ☐ Groundwater ☐ Surface Water ☐ Reclaimed stormwater ☒ Reclaimed wastewater Met Council 10% N/A MCES Potential to reuse Empire wastewater and reduce aquifer use. Plumbing code change required. ☐ Interconnection to another supplier Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 27 Part 2. Emergency Preparedness Procedures The emergency preparedness procedures outlined in this plan are intended to comply with the contingency plan provisions required by MDH in the WHP and SWP. Water emergencies can occur as a result of vandalism, sabotage, accidental contamination, mechanical problems, power failings, drought, flooding, and other natural disasters. The purpose of emergency planning is to develop emergency response procedures and to identify actions needed to improve emergency preparedness. In the case of a municipality, these procedures should be in support of, and part of, an all-hazard emergency operations plan. Municipalities that already have written procedures dealing with water emergencies should review the following information and update existing procedures to address these water supply protection measures. A. Federal Emergency Response Plan Section 1433(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, (Public Law 107-188, Title IV- Drinking Water Security and Safety) requires community water suppliers serving over 3,300 people to prepare an Emergency Response Plan. Do you have a federal emergency response plan? Yes ☒ No ☐ If yes, what was the date it was certified? ___2007________ Complete Table 15 by inserting the noted information regarding your completed Federal Emergency Response Plan. Table 15. Emergency Preparedness Plan contact information Emergency Response Plan Role Contact Person Contact Phone Number Contact Email Emergency Response Lead JIM KOSLOWSKI 612-322-2022 JIM.KOSLOWSKI@CI.ROSEMOUNT.MN.US Alternate Emergency Response Lead CHRISTINE WATSON 651-322-2091 CHRISTINE.WATSON@CI.ROSEMOUNT.MN.US B. Operational Contingency Plan All utilities should have a written operational contingency plan that describes measures to be taken for water supply mainline breaks and other common system failures as well as routine maintenance. Do you have a written operational contingency plan? Yes ☒ No ☐ At a minimum, a water supplier should prepare and maintain an emergency contact list of contractors and suppliers. C. Emergency Response Procedures Water suppliers must meet the requirements of MN Rules 4720.5280 . Accordingly, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) requires public water suppliers serving more than 1,000 people to submit Emergency and Conservation Plans. Water emergency and conservation plans that have been Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 28 approved by the DNR, under provisions of Minnesota Statute 186 and Minnesota Rules, part 6115.0770, will be considered equivalent to an approved WHP contingency plan. Emergency Telephone List Prepare and attach a list of emergency contacts, including the MN Duty Officer (1-800-422-0798), as Appendix 5. A template is available at www.mndnr.gov/watersupplyplans The list should include key utility and community personnel, contacts in adjacent water suppliers, and appropriate local, state and federal emergency contacts. Please be sure to verify and update the contacts on the emergency telephone list and date it. Thereafter, update on a regular basis (once a year is recommended). In the case of a municipality, this information should be contained in a notification and warning standard operating procedure maintained by the Emergency Manager for that community. Responsibilities and services for each contact should be defined. Current Water Sources and Service Area Quick access to concise and detailed information on water sources, water treatment, and the distribution system may be needed in an emergency. System operation and maintenance records should be maintained in secured central and back-up locations so that the records are accessible for emergency purposes. A detailed map of the system showing the treatment plants, water sources, storage facilities, supply lines, interconnections, and other information that would be useful in an emergency should also be readily available. It is critical that public water supplier representatives and emergency response personnel communicate about the response procedures and be able to easily obtain this kind of information both in electronic and hard copy formats (in case of a power outage). Do records and maps exist? Yes ☒ No ☐ Can staff access records and maps from a central secured location in the event of an emergency? Yes ☒ No ☐ Does the appropriate staff know where the materials are located? Yes ☒ No ☐ Procedure for Augmenting Water Supplies Complete Tables 16 – 17 by listing all available sources of water that can be used to augment or replace existing sources in an emergency. Add rows to the tables as needed. In the case of a municipality, this information should be contained in a notification and warning standard operating procedure maintained by the warning point for that community. Municipalities are encouraged to execute cooperative agreements for potential emergency water services and copies should be included in Appendix 6. Outstate Communities may consider using nearby high capacity wells (industry, golf course) as emergency water sources. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 29 WSP should include information on any physical or chemical problems that may limit interconnections to other sources of water. Approvals from the MDH are required for interconnections or the reuse of water. Table 16. Interconnections with other water supply systems to supply water in an emergency Other Water Supply System Owner Capacity (GPM & MGD) Note Any Limitations On Use List of services, equipment, supplies available to respond CITY OF APPLE VALLEY 23,000 GPM EMERGENCY INTERCONNECTION GPM – Gallons per minute MGD – million gallons per day Table 17. Utilizing surface water as an alternative source Surface Water Source Name Capacity (GPM) Capacity (MGD) Treatment Needs Note Any Limitations On Use NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE If not covered above, describe additional emergency measures for providing water (obtaining bottled water, or steps to obtain National Guard services, etc.) N/A Allocation and Demand Reduction Procedures Complete Table 18 by adding information about how decisions will be made to allocate water and reduce demand during an emergency. Provide information for each customer category, including its priority ranking, average day demand, and demand reduction potential for each customer category. Modify the customer categories as needed, and add additional lines if necessary. Water use categories should be prioritized in a way that is consistent with Minnesota Statutes 103G.261 (#1 is highest priority) as follows: 1. Water use for human needs such as cooking, cleaning, drinking, washing and waste disposal; use for on-farm livestock watering; and use for power production that meets contingency requirements. 2. Water use involving consumption of less than 10,000 gallons per day (usually from private wells or surface water intakes) 3. Water use for agricultural irrigation and processing of agricultural products involving consumption of more than 10,000 gallons per day (usually from private high-capacity wells or surface water intakes) 4. Water use for power production above the use provided for in the contingency plan. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 30 5. All other water use involving consumption of more than 10,000 gallons per day. 6. Nonessential uses – car washes, golf courses, etc. Water used for human needs at hospitals, nursing homes and similar types of facilities should be designated as a high priority to be maintained in an emergency. Lower priority uses will need to address water used for human needs at other types of facilities such as hotels, office buildings, and manufacturing plants. The volume of water and other types of water uses at these facilities must be carefully considered. After reviewing the data, common sense should dictate local allocation priorities to protect domestic requirements over certain types of economic needs. Water use for lawn sprinkling, vehicle washing, golf courses, and recreation are legislatively considered non-essential. Table 18. Water use priorities Customer Category Allocation Priority Average Daily Demand (GDP) Short-Term Emergency Demand Reduction Potential (GPD) Residential 1 1,664,000 1,465,000 C/I/I 2 283,000 213,000 Non-Essential 3 415,000 200,000 TOTAL NA 2,362,000 1,878,000 GPD – Gallons per Day Tip: Calculating Emergency Demand Reduction Potential The emergency demand reduction potential for all uses will typically equal the difference between maximum use (summer demand) and base use (winter demand). In extreme emergency situations, lower priority water uses must be restricted or eliminated to protect priority domestic water requirements. Emergency demand reduction potential should be based on average day demands for customer categories within each priority class. Use the tables in Part 3 on water conservation to help you determine strategies. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 31 Complete Table 19 by selecting the triggers and actions during water supply disruption conditions. Table 19. Emergency demand reduction conditions, triggers and actions (Select all that may apply and describe)Emergency Triggers Short-term Actions Long-term Actions ☒ Contamination ☒ Loss of production ☒ Infrastructure failure ☒ Executive order by Governor ☒ Other: storage capacity, water demand______ ☐ Supply augmentation through ____ ☒ Adopt (if not already) and enforce a critical water deficiency ordinance to penalize lawn watering, vehicle washing, golf course and park irrigation & other nonessential uses. ☐ Water allocation through____ ☐ Meet with large water users to discuss their contingency plan. ☐ Supply augmentation through ____ ☒ Adopt (if not already) and enforce a critical water deficiency ordinance to penalize lawn watering, vehicle washing, golf course and park irrigation & other nonessential uses. ☐ Water allocation through____ ☐ Meet with large water users to discuss their contingency plan. Notification Procedures Complete Table 20 by selecting trigger for informing customers regarding conservation requests, water use restrictions, and suspensions; notification frequencies; and partners that may assist in the notification process. Add rows to the table as needed. Table 20. Plan to inform customers regarding conservation requests, water use restrictions, and suspensions Notification Trigger(s) Methods (select all that apply) Update Frequency Partners ☒ Short-term demand reduction declared (< 1 year) ☒ Website ☐ Email list serve ☐ Social media (e.g. Twitter, Facebook) ☐ Direct customer mailing, ☒ Press release (TV, radio, newspaper), ☐ Meeting with large water users (> 10% of total city use) ☐ Other: ________ ☐ Daily ☐ Weekly ☒ Monthly ☐ Annually ☒ Long-term Ongoing demand reduction declared ☒ Website ☐ Email list serve ☐ Social media (e.g. Twitter, Facebook) ☐ Direct customer mailing, ☒ Press release (TV, radio, newspaper), ☐ Meeting with large water users ☐ Daily ☐ Weekly ☒ Monthly ☐ Annually Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 32 Notification Trigger(s) Methods (select all that apply) Update Frequency Partners (> 10% of total city use) ☐ Other: ________ ☒ Governor’s critical water deficiency declared ☒ Website ☐ Email list serve ☐ Social media (e.g. Twitter, Facebook) ☐ Direct customer mailing, ☒ Press release (TV, radio, newspaper), ☐ Meeting with large water users (> 10% of total city use) ☐ Other: ________ ☐ Daily ☐ Weekly ☒ Monthly ☐ Annually Enforcement Prior to a water emergency, municipal water suppliers must adopt regulations that restrict water use and outline the enforcement response plan. The enforcement response plan must outline how conditions will be monitored to know when enforcement actions are triggered, what enforcement tools will be used, who will be responsible for enforcement, and what timelines for corrective actions will be expected. Affected operations, communications, and enforcement staff must then be trained to rapidly implement those provisions during emergency conditions. Important Note: Disregard of critical water deficiency orders, even though total appropriation remains less than permitted, is adequate grounds for immediate modification of a public water supply authority’s water use permit (2013 MN Statutes 103G.291) Does the city have a critical water deficiency restriction/official control in place that includes provisions to restrict water use and enforce the restrictions? (This restriction may be an ordinance, rule, regulation, policy under a council directive, or other official control) Yes ☒ No ☐ If yes, attach the official control document to this WSP as Appendix 7. If no, the municipality must adopt such an official control within 6 months of submitting this WSP and submit it to the DNR as an amendment to this WSP. Irrespective of whether a critical water deficiency control is in place, does the public water supply utility, city manager, mayor, or emergency manager have standing authority to implement water restrictions? Yes ☒ No ☐ If yes, cite the regulatory authority reference: City Council or Utility Board, and City Administrator. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 33 If no, who has authority to implement water use restrictions in an emergency? The City of Rosemount’s Emergency Operation Plan states that the Mayor or City Administrator is responsible for providing overall direction and control of the City government resources involved in the response to a disaster. Typically, the Utilities Commission and City Council implement water restrictions. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 34 PART 3. WATER CONSERVATION PLAN Minnesotans have historically benefited from the state’s abundant water supplies, reducing the need for conservation. There are however, limits to the available supplies of water and increasing threats to the quality of our drinking water. Causes of water supply limitation may include: population increases, economic trends, uneven statewide availability of groundwater, climatic changes, and degraded water quality. Examples of threats to drinking water quality include: the presence of contaminant plumes from past land use activities, exceedances of water quality standards from natural and human sources, contaminants of emerging concern, and increasing pollutant trends from nonpoint sources. There are many incentives for conserving water; conservation:  reduces the potential for pumping-induced transfer of contaminants into the deeper aquifers, which can add treatment costs  reduces the need for capital projects to expand system capacity  reduces the likelihood of water use conflicts, like well interference, aquatic habitat loss, and declining lake levels  conserves energy, because less energy is needed to extract, treat and distribute water (and less energy production also conserves water since water is use to produce energy)  maintains water supplies that can then be available during times of drought It is therefore imperative that water suppliers implement water conservation plans. The first step in water conservation is identifying opportunities for behavioral or engineering changes that could be made to reduce water use by conducting a thorough analysis of:  Water use by customer  Extraction, treatment, distribution and irrigation system efficiencies  Industrial processing system efficiencies  Regulatory and barriers to conservation  Cultural barriers to conservation  Water reuse opportunities Once accurate data is compiled, water suppliers can set achievable goals for reducing water use. A successful water conservation plan follows a logical sequence of events. The plan should address both conservation on the supply side (leak detection and repairs, metering), as well as on the demand side (reductions in usage). Implementation should be conducted in phases, starting with the most obvious and lowest-cost options. In some cases one of the early steps will be reviewing regulatory constraints to water conservation, such as lawn irrigation requirements. Outside funding and grants may be available for implementation of projects. Engage water system operators and maintenance staff and customers in brainstorming opportunities to reduce water use. Ask the question: “How can I help save water?” Priority 1: Significant water reduction; low cost Priority 2: Slight water reduction, low costs (low hanging fruit) Priority 2: Significant water reduction; significant costs Priority 3: Slight water reduction, significant costs (do only if necessary) Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 35 Progress since 2006 Is this your community’s first Water Supply Plan? Yes ☐ No ☒ If yes, describe conservation practices that you are already implementing, such as: pricing, system improvements, education, regulation, appliance retrofitting, enforcement, etc. N/A If no, complete Table 21 to summarize conservation actions taken since the adoption of the 2006 water supply plan. Table 21. Implementation of previous ten-year Conservation Plan 2006 Plan Commitments Action Taken? Change water rates structure to provide conservation pricing ☒ Yes ☐ No Water supply system improvements (e.g. leak repairs, valve replacements, etc.) ☒ Yes ☐ No Educational efforts ☒ Yes ☐ No New water conservation ordinances ☐ Yes ☐ No Rebate or retrofitting Program (e.g. for toilet, faucets, appliances, showerheads, dish washers, washing machines, irrigation systems, rain barrels, water softeners, etc. ☐ Yes ☐ No Enforcement ☒ Yes ☐ No Describe other ☐ Yes ☐ No What are the results you have seen from the actions in Table 21 and how were results measured? Decreasing residential and total per capita demand while overall customer numbers increased. A. Triggers for Allocation and Demand Reduction Actions Complete table 22 by checking each trigger below, as appropriate, and the actions to be taken at various levels or stages of severity. Add in additional rows to the table as needed. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 36 Table 22. Short and long-term demand reduction conditions, triggers and actions Objective Triggers Actions Protect surface water flows ☒ Low stream flow conditions ☒ Reports of declining wetland and lake levels ☐ Other: ______________ ☒ Increase promotion of conservation measures ☐ Other: ____________ Short-term demand reduction (less than 1 year ☐ Extremely high seasonal water demand (more than double winter demand) ☐ Loss of treatment capacity ☐ Lack of water in storage ☐ State drought plan ☒ Well interference ☐ Other: _____________ ☒ Adopt (if not already) and enforce the critical water deficiency ordinance to restrict or prohibit lawn watering, vehicle washing, golf course and park irrigation & other nonessential uses. ☐ Supply augmentation through ____ ☐ Water allocation through____ ☐ Meet with large water users to discuss user’s contingency plan. Long-term demand reduction (>1 year) ☐ Per capita demand increasing ☒ Total demand increase (higher population or more industry)Water level in well(s) below elevation of _____ ☐ Other: _____________ ☒ Develop a critical water deficiency ordinance that is or can be quickly adopted to penalize lawn watering, vehicle washing, golf course and park irrigation & other nonessential uses. ☒ Enact a water waste ordinance that targets overwatering (causing water to flow off the landscape into streets, parking lots, or similar), watering impervious surfaces (streets, driveways or other hardscape areas), and negligence of known leaks, breaks, or malfunctions. ☒ Meet with large water users to discuss user’s contingency plan. ☒ Enhanced monitoring and reporting: audits, meters, billing, etc. Governor’s “Critical Water Deficiency Order” declared ☐ Describe ☐ Describe B. Conservation Objectives and Strategies – Key benchmark for DNR This section establishes water conservation objectives and strategies for eight major areas of water use. Objective 1: Reduce Unaccounted (Non-Revenue) Water loss to Less than 10% The Minnesota Rural Waters Association, the Metropolitan Council and the Department of Natural Resources recommend that all water uses be metered. Metering can help identify high use locations and times, along with leaks within buildings that have multiple meters. It is difficult to quantify specific unmetered water use such as that associated with firefighting and system flushing or system leaks. Typically, water suppliers subtract metered water use from total water pumped to calculate unaccounted or non-revenue water loss. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 37 Is your five-year average (2005-2014) unaccounted Water Use in Table 2 higher than 10%? Yes ☐ No ☒ What is your leak detection monitoring schedule? (e.g. monitor 1/3rd of the city lines per year) There is no formal leak detection monitoring schedule as leak detection is done as needed during the year. Water Audits - are intended to identify, quantify and verify water and revenue losses. The volume of unaccounted-for water should be evaluated each billing cycle. The American Water Works Association (AWWA) recommends that ten percent or less of pumped water is unaccounted-for water. Water audit procedures are available from the AWWA and MN Rural Water Association / . Drinking Water Revolving Loan Funds are available for purchase of new meters when new plants are built. What is the date of your most recent water audit? _______ Frequency of water audits: ☐ yearly ☒ other (specify frequency) _No Schedule_______ Leak detection and survey: ☐ every year ☐ every other year ☒ periodic as needed Year last leak detection survey completed: The City of Rosemount does not have a citywide leak detection survey. However, a leak detection survey is performed as part of street paving projects. If Table 2 shows annual water losses over 10% or an increasing trend over time, describe what actions will be taken to reach the <10% loss objective and within what timeframe There is a less than 10% loss for each year over the last 10 years. The year 2006 has the only loss greater than 10%. Metering -AWWA recommends that every water supplier install meters to account for all water taken into its system, along with all water distributed from its system at each customer’s point of service. An effective metering program relies upon periodic performance testing, repair, maintenance or replacement of all meters. AWWA also recommends that water suppliers conduct regular water audits to ensure accountability. Some cities install separate meters for interior and exterior water use, but some research suggests that this may not result in water conservation. Complete Table 23 by adding the requested information regarding the number, types, testing and maintenance of customer meters. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 38 Table 23. Information about customer meters Customer Category Number of Customers Number of Metered Connections Number of Automated Meter Readers Meter testing intervals (years) Average age/meter replacement schedule (years Residential 7440 7440 N/A As needed 10 years / Replace as needed Irrigation meters 82 82 N/A As needed 6 years / Replace as needed Institutional 30 30 N/A As needed 7 years / Replace as needed Commercial 163 163 N/A As needed 7 years / Replace as needed Industrial 34 34 N/A As needed 10 years / Replace as needed Public facilities 32 32 N/A As needed 5 years / Replace as needed TOTALS 7781 7781 NA NA For unmetered systems, describe any plans to install meters or replace current meters with advanced technology meters. Provide an estimate of the cost to implement the plan and the projected water savings from implementing the plan. None. The entire system is metered. Table 24. Water source meters Number of Meters Meter testing schedule (years) Number of Automated Meter Readers Average age/meter replacement schedule (years Water source (wells/intakes) 9 As needed 9 13 years / As needed Treatment plant The City of Rosemount does not currently operate a WTP. Objective 2: Achieve Less than 75 Residential Gallons per Capita Demand (GPCD) The 2002 average residential per capita demand in the Twin Cities Metropolitan area was 75 gallons per capita per day. Is your average 2010-2015 residential per capita water demand in Table 2 more than 75? Yes ☒ No ☐ What was your 2010 – 2015 five-year average residential per capita water demand? 81.2 g/person/day Describe the water use trend over that timeframe: The residential water demand has been decreasing since 2008 where the peak demand of 115 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) occurred. The residential per capita demand in 2015 was 70.1 gpcd. The overall residential water sold has also declined during this period, which corresponds to the decreasing water demand. The number of Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 39 customers has increased as well as the total population. The average day demand has also decreased during this time from a peak of 2.67 MGD in 2012 to 2023 MGD is 2015. Complete Table 25 by checking which strategies you will use to continue reducing residential per capita demand and project a likely timeframe for completing each checked strategy (Select all that apply and add rows for additional strategies): Table 25. Strategies and timeframe to reduce residential per capita demand Strategy to reduce residential per capita demand Timeframe for completing work ☒ Revise city ordinances/codes to encourage or require water efficient landscaping. Ongoing. City continues to review and revise as needed. ☐ Revise city ordinance/codes to permit water reuse options, especially for non-potable purposes like irrigation, groundwater recharge, and industrial use. Check with plumbing authority to see if internal buildings reuse is permitted ☒ Revise ordinances to limit irrigation. Describe the restricted irrigation plan: No watering during specific times Ongoing. Education on lawn watering. The city currently has an ordinance on odd/even day watering they enforce. ☐ Revise outdoor irrigation installations codes to require high efficiency systems (e.g. those with soil moisture sensors or programmable watering areas) in new installations or system replacements. ☒ Make water system infrastructure improvements Construct new WTP and maintain distribution system as needed. ☐ Offer free or reduced cost water use audits) for residential customers. ☐ Implement a notification system to inform customers when water availability conditions change. ☒ Provide rebates or incentives for installing water efficient appliances and/or fixtures indoors (e.g., low flow toilets, high efficiency dish washers and washing machines, showerhead and faucet aerators, water softeners, etc.) Ongoing ☐ Provide rebates or incentives to reduce outdoor water use (e.g., turf replacement/reduction, rain gardens, rain barrels, smart irrigation, outdoor water use meters, etc.) ☐ Identify supplemental Water Resources ☒ Conduct audience-appropriate water conservation education and outreach. (Pop-up for online payment with usage information) Ongoing ☐ Describe other plans Objective 3: Achieve at least a 1.5% per year water reduction for Institutional, Industrial, Commercial, and Agricultural GPCD over the next 10 years or a 15% reduction in ten years. Complete Table 26 by checking which strategies you will used to continue reducing non-residential customer use demand and project a likely timeframe for completing each checked strategy (add rows for additional strategies). Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 40 Where possible, substitute recycled water used in one process for reuse in another. (For example, spent rinse water can often be reused in a cooling tower.) Keep in mind the true cost of water is the amount on the water bill PLUS the expenses to heat, cool, treat, pump, and dispose of/discharge the water. Don’t just calculate the initial investment. Many conservation retrofits that appear to be prohibitively expensive are actually very cost-effective when amortized over the life of the equipment. Often reducing water use also saves electrical and other utility costs. Note: as of 2015, water reuse, and is not allowed by the state plumbing code, M.R. 4715 (a variance is needed). However several state agencies are addressing this issue. Table 26. Strategies and timeframe to reduce institutional, commercial industrial, and agricultural and non-revenue use demand Strategy to reduce total business, industry, agricultural demand Timeframe for completing work ☐ Conduct a facility water use audit for both indoor and outdoor use, including system components ☐ Install enhanced meters capable of automated readings to detect spikes in consumption ☐ Compare facility water use to related industry benchmarks, if available (e.g., meat processing, dairy, fruit and vegetable, beverage, textiles, paper/pulp, metals, technology, petroleum refining etc.) ☒ Install water conservation fixtures and appliances or change processes to conserve water Ongoing through Met Council grant program ☒ Repair leaking system components (e.g., pipes, valves) Ongoing ☐ Investigate the reuse of reclaimed water (e.g., stormwater, wastewater effluent, process wastewater, etc.) ☒ Reduce outdoor water use (e.g., turf replacement/reduction, rain gardens, rain barrels, smart irrigation, outdoor water use meters, etc.) Ongoing ☐ Train employees how to conserve water ☐ Implement a notification system to inform non-residential customers when water availability conditions change. ☐ Rainwater catchment systems intended to supply uses such as water closets, urinals, trap primers for floor drains and floor sinks, industrial processes, water features, vehicle washing facilities, cooling tower makeup, and similar uses shall be approved by the commissioner. Proposed plumbing code 4714.1702.1 http://www.dli.mn.gov/PDF/docket/4714rule.pdf ☐ Describe other plans: Objective 4: Achieve a Decreasing Trend in Total Per Capita Demand Include as Appendix 8 one graph showing total per capita water demand for each customer category (i.e., residential, institutional, commercial, industrial) from 2005-2014 and add the calculated/estimated linear trend for the next 10 years. Describe the trend for each customer category; explain the reason(s) for the trends, and where trends are increasing. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 41 The overall trend for total water demand has been decreasing for the last 10 years. The projected 10- year linear trend also shows a decreasing total demand trend. The reason for the decreasing trend is due to lower water usage and a decrease in the amount of residential and water used for non-essential purposes. It can also be assumed that leak detection during street projects has helped reduce the amount of water lost thus reducing total demand. Water conservation techniques can also have reduced demand. This, paired with a moderate increase in population served has led to the decreasing trend of total demand. The residential demand also follows a decreasing trend. However, there are three years where the demand was greater than 100 gpcd. The 10-year linear trend shows a residential demand that continues to decrease. The moderate increase in population served coupled along with a decrease in the residential water sold leads to the decreasing residential demand. The reduced demand could be from an increase in water efficient appliances and water conservation techniques. Adjusting water rates also may play a key role is the reduction of the residential water demand. The C/I/I demand has remained consistent but shows a slight decline over the last 10 years. The future linear trend shows the C/I/I demand to slightly decrease. This could be from increased education on water conservation and new water efficient appliances. There are slight fluctuations in the demand data where years with higher total demands correspond to higher C/I/I demands. This could be due to larger than average water usage in the commercial/industrial/institutional category. Objective 5: Reduce Peak Day Demand so that the Ratio of Average Maximum day to the Average Day is less than 2.6 Is the ratio of average 2005-2014 maximum day demand to average 2005-2014 average day demand reported in Table 2 more than 2.6? Yes ☐ No ☒ Calculate a ten year average (2005 – 2014) of the ratio of maximum day demand to average day demand: 2.53 The position of the DNR has been that a peak day/average day ratio that is above 2.6 for in summer indicates that the water being used for irrigation by the residents in a community is too large and that efforts should be made to reduce the peak day use by the community. It should be noted that by reducing the peak day use, communities can also reduce the amount of infrastructure that is required to meet the peak day use. This infrastructure includes new wells, new water towers which can be costly items. Objective 6: Implement a Conservation Water Rate Structure and/or a Uniform Rate Structure with a Water Conservation Program Water Conservation Program Municipal water suppliers serving over 1,000 people are required to adopt demand reduction measures that include a conservation rate structure, or a uniform rate structure with a conservation program that achieves demand reduction. These measures must achieve demand reduction in ways that reduce water demand, water losses, peak water demands, and nonessential water uses. These measures must Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 42 be approved before a community may request well construction approval from the Department of Health or before requesting an increase in water appropriations permit volume (Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.291, subd. 3 and 4). Rates should be adjusted on a regular basis to ensure that revenue of the system is adequate under reduced demand scenarios. If a municipal water supplier intends to use a Uniform Rate Structure, a community-wide Water Conservation Program that will achieve demand reduction must be provided. Current Water Rates Include a copy of the actual rate structure in Appendix 9 or list current water rates including base/service fees and volume charges below. Volume included in base rate or service charge: per 1000 gallons or ____ cubic feet ___ other Frequency of billing: ☐ Monthly ☐ Bimonthly ☒ Quarterly ☐ Other: _________________ Water Rate Evaluation Frequency: ☒ every year ☐ every ___ years ☐ no schedule Date of last rate change: January 2016 Table 27. Rate structures for each customer category (Select all that apply and add additional rows as needed) Customer Category Conservation Billing Strategies in Use * Conservation Neutral Billing Strategies in Use ** Non-Conserving Billing Strategies in Use *** Residential ☐ Monthly billing ☒ Increasing block rates (volume tiered rates) ☐ Seasonal rates ☐ Time of use rates ☒ Water bills reported in gallons ☐ Individualized goal rates ☐ Excess use rates ☐ Drought surcharge ☐ Use water bill to provide comparisons ☒ Service charge not based on water volume ☐ Other (describe) ☐ Uniform ☐ Odd/even day watering ☐ Service charge based on water volume ☐ Declining block ☐ Flat ☐ Other (describe) Commercial/ Industrial/ Institutional ☐ Monthly billing ☒ Increasing block rates (volume tiered rates) ☐ Seasonal rates ☐ Time of use rates ☒ Water bills reported in gallons ☐ Individualized goal rates ☐ Excess use rates ☐ Drought surcharge ☐ Uniform ☐ Service charge based on water volume ☐ Declining block ☐ Flat ☐ Other (describe) Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 43 Customer Category Conservation Billing Strategies in Use * Conservation Neutral Billing Strategies in Use ** Non-Conserving Billing Strategies in Use *** ☐ Use water bill to provide comparisons ☒ Service charge not based on water volume ☐ Other (describe) ☐ Other * Rate Structures components that may promote water conservation:  Monthly billing: is encouraged to help people see their water usage so they can consider changing behavior.  Increasing block rates (also known as a tiered residential rate structure): Typically, these have at least three tiers: should have at least three tiers. o The first tier is for the winter average water use. o The second tier is the year-round average use, which is lower than typical summer use. This rate should be set to cover the full cost of service. o The third tier should be above the average annual use and should be priced high enough to encourage conservation, as should any higher tiers. For this to be effective, the difference in block rates should be significant.  Seasonal rate: higher rates in summer to reduce peak demands  Time of Use rates: lower rates for off peak water use  Bill water use in gallons: this allows customers to compare their use to average rates  Individualized goal rates: typically used for industry, business or other large water users to promote water conservation if they keep within agreed upon goals. Excess Use rates: if water use goes above an agreed upon amount this higher rate is charged  Drought surcharge: an extra fee is charged for guaranteed water use during drought  Use water bill to provide comparisons: simple graphics comparing individual use over time or compare individual use to others.  Service charge or base fee that does not include a water volume – a base charge or fee to cover universal city expenses that are not customer dependent and/or to provide minimal water at a lower rate (e.g., an amount less than the average residential per capita demand for the water supplier for the last 5 years)  Emergency rates -A community may have a separate conservation rate that only goes into effect when the community or governor declares a drought emergency. These higher rates can help to protect the city budgets during times of significantly less water usage. **Conservation Neutral**  Uniform rate: rate per unit used is the same regardless of the volume used  Odd/even day watering –This approach reduces peak demand on a daily basis for system operation, but it does not reduce overall water use. *** Non-Conserving ***  Service charge or base fee with water volume: an amount of water larger than the average residential per capita demand for the water supplier for the last 5 years  Declining block rate: the rate per unit used decreases as water use increases.  Flat rate: one fee regardless of how much water is used (usually unmetered). Provide justification for any conservation neutral or non-conserving rate structures. If intending to adopt a conservation rate structure, include the timeframe to do so: N/A Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 44 Objective 7: Additional strategies to Reduce Water Use and Support Wellhead Protection Planning Development and redevelopment projects can provide additional water conservation opportunities, such as the actions listed below. If a Uniform Rate Structure is in place, the water supplier must provide a Water Conservation Program that includes at least two of the actions listed below. Check those actions that you intent to implement within the next 10 years. Table 28. Additional strategies to Reduce Water Use & Support Wellhead Protection ☐ Participate in the GreenStep Cities Program, including implementation of at least one of the 20 “Best Practices” for water ☐ Prepare a master plan for smart growth (compact urban growth that avoids sprawl) ☒ Prepare a comprehensive open space plan (areas for parks, green spaces, natural areas) ☒ Adopt a water use restriction ordinance (lawn irrigation, car washing, pools, etc.) ☒ Adopt an outdoor lawn irrigation ordinance ☐ Adopt a private well ordinance (private wells in a city must comply with water restrictions) ☒ Implement a stormwater management program ☐ Adopt non-zoning wetlands ordinance (can further protect wetlands beyond state/federal laws- for vernal pools, buffer areas, restrictions on filling or alterations) ☐ Adopt a water offset program (primarily for new development or expansion) ☐ Implement a water conservation outreach program ☐ Hire a water conservation coordinator (part-time) ☒ Implement a rebate program for water efficient appliances, fixtures, or outdoor water management ☐ Other Objective 8: Tracking Success: How will you track or measure success through the next ten years? Observe a decreasing trend is water usage for residential customers. Monitor and document water levels in monitoring wells. Observe a decrease in the percent of unaccounted-for water to less than 10% yearly. The City will continue to monitor usage across all categories of users to determine if water efficiencies and water reductions are occurring. The City will also continue to monitor unaccounted for water, which will help determine if the City is properly metering and monitoring water use within the City. Tip: The process to monitor demand reduction and/or a rate structure includes: a) The DNR Hydrologist will call or visit the community the first 1-3 years after the water supply plan is completed. b) They will discuss what activities the community is doing to conserve water and if they feel their actions are successful. The Water Supply Plan, Part 3 tables and responses will guide the discussion. For example, they will discuss efforts to reduce unaccounted for water loss if that is a problem, or go through Tables 33, 34 and 35 to discuss new initiatives. c) The city representative and the hydrologist will discuss total per capita water use, residential per capita water use, and business/industry use. They will note trends. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 45 d) They will also discuss options for improvement and/or collect case studies of success stories to share with other communities. One option may be to change the rate structure, but there are many other paths to successful water conservation. e) If appropriate, they will cooperatively develop a simple work plan for the next few years, targeting a couple areas where the city might focus efforts. A. Regulation Complete Table 29 by selecting which regulations are used to reduce demand and improve water efficiencies. Add additional rows as needed. Copies of adopted regulations or proposed restrictions or should be included in Appendix 10 (a list with hyperlinks is acceptable). Table 29. Regulations for short-term reductions in demand and long-term improvements in water efficiencies Regulations Utilized When is it applied (in effect)? ☐ Rainfall sensors required on landscape irrigation systems ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared Emergencies ☒ Water efficient plumbing fixtures required ☒ New development ☐ Replacement ☒ Rebate Programs ☐ Critical/Emergency Water Deficiency ordinance ☐ Only during declared Emergencies ☒ Watering restriction requirements (time of day, allowable days, etc.) ☒ Odd/even ☐ 2 days/week ☐ Only during declared Emergencies ☒ Water waste prohibited (for example, having a fine for irrigators spraying on the street) ☒ Ongoing ☒ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared Emergencies ☐ Limitations on turf areas (requiring lots to have 10% - 25% of the space in natural areas) ☐ New development ☐ Shoreland/zoning ☐ Other ☒ Soil preparation requirement s (after construction, requiring topsoil to be applied to promote good root growth) ☒ New Development ☒ Construction Projects ☐ Other ☐ Tree ratios (requiring a certain number of trees per square foot of lawn) ☐ New development ☐ Shoreland/zoning ☐ Other ☐ Permit to fill swimming pool and/or requiring pools to be covered (to prevent evaporation) ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared Emergencies ☒ Ordinances that permit stormwater irrigation, reuse of water, or other alternative water use (Note: be sure to check current plumbing codes for updates) ☒ Describe: Possible Met Council wastewater reuse. B. Retrofitting Programs Education and incentive programs aimed at replacing inefficient plumbing fixtures and appliances can help reduce per capita water use, as well as energy costs. It is recommended that municipal water Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 46 suppliers develop a long-term plan to retrofit public buildings with water efficient plumbing fixtures and appliances. Some water suppliers have developed partnerships with organizations having similar conservation goals, such as electric or gas suppliers, to develop cooperative rebate and retrofit programs. A study by the AWWA Research Foundation (Residential End Uses of Water, 1999) found that the average indoor water use for a non-conserving home is 69.3 gallons per capita per day (gpcd). The average indoor water use in a conserving home is 45.2 gpcd and most of the decrease in water use is related to water efficient plumbing fixtures and appliances that can reduce water, sewer and energy costs. In Minnesota, certain electric and gas providers are required (Minnesota Statute 216B.241) to fund programs that will conserve energy resources and some utilities have distributed water efficient showerheads to customers to help reduce energy demands required to supply hot water. Retrofitting Programs Complete Table 30 by checking which water uses are targeted, the outreach methods used, the measures used to identify success, and any participating partners. Table 30. Retrofitting programs (Select all that apply) Water Use Targets Outreach Methods Partners ☒ Low flush toilets, ☐ Toilet leak tablets, ☐ Low flow showerheads, ☐ Faucet aerators; ☐ Education about ☐ Free distribution of ☒ Rebate ☐ Other ☐ Gas company ☐ Electric company ☒ Watershed organization ☒ Water conserving washing machines, ☐ Dish washers, ☐ Water softeners; ☐ Education about ☐ Free distribution of ☒ Rebate ☐ Other ☐ Gas company ☐ Electric company ☒ Watershed organization ☒ Rain gardens, ☒ Rain barrels, ☐ Native/drought tolerant landscaping, etc. ☒ Education about ☐ Free distribution of ☐ Rebate for ☐ Other ☐ Gas company ☐ Electric company ☐ Watershed organization Briefly discuss measures of success from the above table (e.g. number of items distributed, dollar value of rebates, gallons of water conserved, etc.): The water efficiency rebate program is new. Success will be measured by seeing a reduction in residential per capita demand and the number of rebates submitted. C. Education and Information Programs Customer education should take place in three different circumstances. First, customers should be provided information on how to conserve water and improve water use efficiencies. Second, information should be provided at appropriate times to address peak demands. Third, emergency notices and educational materials about how to reduce water use should be available for quick distribution during an emergency. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 47 Proposed Education Programs Complete Table 31 by selecting which methods are used to provide water conservation and information, including the frequency of program components. Select all that apply and add additional lines as needed. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 48 Table 31. Current and Proposed Education Programs Education Methods General summary of topics #/Year Frequency Billing inserts or tips printed on the actual bill Water conservation tips 1 ☒ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Consumer Confidence Reports Water conservation tips 1 ☒ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Press releases to traditional local news outlets (e.g., newspapers, radio and TV) Water conservation tips 1 ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☒ Only during declared emergencies Social media distribution (e.g., emails, Facebook, Twitter) ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Paid advertisements (e.g., billboards, print media, TV, radio, web sites, etc.) ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Presentations to community groups ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Staff training ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Facility tours ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Displays and exhibits ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Marketing rebate programs (e.g., indoor fixtures & appliances and outdoor practices) ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Community news letters ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Direct mailings (water audit/retrofit kits, showerheads, brochures) Water conservation tips New Residents ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 49 Education Methods General summary of topics #/Year Frequency ☐ Only during declared emergencies Information kiosk at utility and public buildings Water conservation tips Continual ☒ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Public service announcements ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Cable TV Programs ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Demonstration projects (landscaping or plumbing) ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies K-12 education programs (Project Wet, Drinking Water Institute, presentations) ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Community events (children’s water festivals, environmental fairs) ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Community education classes ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Water week promotions ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Website http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us/index Water conservation and previous water usage Continual ☒ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Targeted efforts (large volume users, users with large increases) ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Notices of ordinances Water conservation tips As Required ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Emergency conservation notices Water conservation tips As Required ☐ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 50 Education Methods General summary of topics #/Year Frequency ☐ Only during declared emergencies Other: Water conservation tips available on website Year- Round ☒ Ongoing ☐ Seasonal ☐ Only during declared emergencies Briefly discuss what future education and information activities your community is considering in the future: Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 51 Part 4. ITEMS FOR METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNITIES Minnesota Statute 473.859 requires WSPs to be completed for all local units of government in the seven-county Metropolitan Area as part of the local comprehensive planning process. Much of the information in Parts 1-3 addresses water demand for the next 10 years. However, additional information is needed to address water demand through 2040, which will make the WSP consistent with the Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act, upon which the local comprehensive plans are based. This Part 4 provides guidance to complete the WSP in a way that addresses plans for water supply through 2040. A. Water Demand Projections through 2040 Complete Table 7 in Part 1D by filling in information about long-term water demand projections through 2040. Total Community Population projections should be consistent with the community’s system statement, which can be found on the Metropolitan Council’s website and which was sent to the community in September 2015. Projected Average Day, Maximum Day, and Annual Water Demands may either be calculated using the method outlined in Appendix 2 of the 2015 Master Water Supply Plan or by a method developed by the individual water supplier. B. Potential Water Supply Issues Complete Table 10 in Part 1E by providing information about the potential water supply issues in your community, including those that might occur due to 2040 projected water use. The Master Water Supply Plan provides information about potential issues for your community in Appendix 1 (Water Supply Profiles). This resource may be useful in completing Table 10. You may document results of local work done to evaluate impact of planned uses by attaching a feasibility assessment or providing a citation and link to where the plan is available electronically. C. Proposed Alternative Approaches to Meet Extended Water Demand Projections Complete Table 12 in Part 1F with information about potential water supply infrastructure impacts (such as replacements, expansions or additions to wells/intakes, water storage and treatment capacity, distribution systems, and emergency interconnections) of extended plans for development and redevelopment, in 10-year increments through 2040. It may be useful to refer to information in the community’s local Land Use Plan, if available. Complete Table 14 in Part 1F by checking each approach your community is considering to meet future demand. For each approach your community is considering, provide information about the amount of Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 52 future water demand to be met using that approach, the timeframe to implement the approach, potential partners, and current understanding of the key benefits and challenges of the approach. As challenges are being discussed, consider the need for: evaluation of geologic conditions (mapping, aquifer tests, modeling), identification of areas where domestic wells could be impacted, measurement and analysis of water levels & pumping rates, triggers & associated actions to protect water levels, etc. D. Value-Added Water Supply Planning Efforts (Optional) The following information is not required to be completed as part of the local water supply plan, but completing this can help strengthen source water protection throughout the region and help Metropolitan Council and partners in the region to better support local efforts. Source Water Protection Strategies Does a Drinking Water Supply Management Area for a neighboring public water supplier overlap your community? Yes ☒ No ☐ If you answered no, skip this section. If you answered yes, please complete Table 32 with information about new water demand or land use planning-related local controls that are being considered to provide additional protection in this area. Table 32. Local controls and schedule to protect Drinking Water Supply Management Areas Local Control Schedule to Implement Potential Partners ☒ None at this time N/A N/A ☐ Comprehensive planning that guides development in vulnerable drinking water supply management areas ☐ Zoning overlay ☐ Other: Technical assistance From your community’s perspective, what are the most important topics for the Metropolitan Council to address, guided by the region’s Metropolitan Area Water Supply Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory Committee, as part of its ongoing water supply planning role? ☒ Coordination of state, regional and local water supply planning roles ☒ Regional water use goals ☒ Water use reporting standards ☐ Regional and sub-regional partnership opportunities ☐ Identifying and prioritizing data gaps and input for regional and sub-regional analyses ☐ Others: ___________________________________________________________________ Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 53 GLOSSARY Agricultural/Irrigation Water Use - Water used for crop and non-crop irrigation, livestock watering, chemigation, golf course irrigation, landscape and athletic field irrigation. Average Daily Demand - The total water pumped during the year divided by 365 days. Calcareous Fen - Calcareous fens are rare and distinctive wetlands dependent on a constant supply of cold groundwater. Because they are dependent on groundwater and are one of the rarest natural communities in the United States, they are a protected resource in MN. Approximately 200 have been located in Minnesota. They may not be filled, drained or otherwise degraded. Commercial/Institutional Water Use - Water used by motels, hotels, restaurants, office buildings, commercial facilities and institutions (both civilian and military). Consider maintaining separate institutional water use records for emergency planning and allocation purposes. Water used by multi- family dwellings, apartment buildings, senior housing complexes, and mobile home parks should be reported as Residential Water Use. Commercial/Institutional/Industrial (C/I/I) Water Sold - The sum of water delivered for commercial/institutional or industrial purposes. Conservation Rate Structure - A rate structure that encourages conservation and may include increasing block rates, seasonal rates, time of use rates, individualized goal rates, or excess use rates. If a conservation rate is applied to multifamily dwellings, the rate structure must consider each residential unit as an individual user. A community may have a separate conservation rate that only goes into effect when the community or governor declares a drought emergency. These higher rates can help to protect the city budgets during times of significantly less water usage. Date of Maximum Daily Demand - The date of the maximum (highest) water demand. Typically this is a day in July or August. Declining Rate Structure - Under a declining block rate structure, a consumer pays less per additional unit of water as usage increases. This rate structure does not promote water conservation. Distribution System - Water distribution systems consist of an interconnected series of pipes, valves, storage facilities (water tanks, water towers, reservoirs), water purification facilities, pumping stations, flushing hydrants, and components that convey drinking water and meeting fire protection needs for cities, homes, schools, hospitals, businesses, industries and other facilities. Flat Rate Structure - Flat fee rates do not vary by customer characteristics or water usage. This rate structure does not promote water conservation. Industrial Water Use - Water used for thermonuclear power (electric utility generation) and other industrial use such as steel, chemical and allied products, paper and allied products, mining, and petroleum refining. Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 54 Low Flow Fixtures/Appliances - Plumbing fixtures and appliances that significantly reduce the amount of water released per use are labeled “low flow”. These fixtures and appliances use just enough water to be effective, saving excess, clean drinking water that usually goes down the drain. Maximum Daily Demand - The maximum (highest) amount of water used in one day. Metered Residential Connections - The number of residential connections to the water system that have meters. For multifamily dwellings, report each residential unit as an individual user. Percent Unmetered/Unaccounted For - Unaccounted for water use is the volume of water withdrawn from all sources minus the volume of water delivered. This value represents water “lost” by miscalculated water use due to inaccurate meters, water lost through leaks, or water that is used but unmetered or otherwise undocumented. Water used for public services such as hydrant flushing, ice skating rinks, and public swimming pools should be reported under the category “Water Supplier Services”. Population Served - The number of people who are served by the community’s public water supply system. This includes the number of people in the community who are connected to the public water supply system, as well as people in neighboring communities who use water supplied by the community’s public water supply system. It should not include residents in the community who have private wells or get their water from neighboring water supply. Residential Connections - The total number of residential connections to the water system. For multifamily dwellings, report each residential unit as an individual user. Residential Per Capita Demand - The total residential water delivered during the year divided by the population served divided by 365 days. Residential Water Use - Water used for normal household purposes such as drinking, food preparation, bathing, washing clothes and dishes, flushing toilets, and watering lawns and gardens. Should include all water delivered to single family private residences, multi-family dwellings, apartment buildings, senior housing complexes, mobile home parks, etc. Smart Meter - Smart meters can be used by municipalities or by individual homeowners. Smart metering generally indicates the presence of one or more of the following:  Smart irrigation water meters are controllers that look at factors such as weather, soil, slope, etc. and adjust watering time up or down based on data. Smart controllers in a typical summer will reduce water use by 30%-50%. Just changing the spray nozzle to new efficient models can reduce water use by 40%.  Smart Meters on customer premises that measure consumption during specific time periods and communicate it to the utility, often on a daily basis.  A communication channel that permits the utility, at a minimum, to obtain meter reads on demand, to ascertain whether water has recently been flowing through the meter and onto the Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 55 premises, and to issue commands to the meter to perform specific tasks such as disconnecting or restricting water flow. Total Connections - The number of connections to the public water supply system. Total Per Capita Demand - The total amount of water withdrawn from all water supply sources during the year divided by the population served divided by 365 days. Total Water Pumped - The cumulative amount of water withdrawn from all water supply sources during the year. Total Water Delivered - The sum of residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, water supplier services, wholesale and other water delivered. Ultimate (Full Build-Out) - Time period representing the community’s estimated total amount and location of potential development, or when the community is fully built out at the final planned density. Unaccounted (Non-revenue) Loss - See definitions for “percent unmetered/unaccounted for loss”. Uniform Rate Structure - A uniform rate structure charges the same price-per-unit for water usage beyond the fixed customer charge, which covers some fixed costs. The rate sends a price signal to the customer because the water bill will vary by usage. Uniform rates by class charge the same price-per- unit for all customers within a customer class (e.g. residential or non-residential). This price structure is generally considered less effective in encouraging water conservation. Water Supplier Services - Water used for public services such as hydrant flushing, ice skating rinks, public swimming pools, city park irrigation, back-flushing at water treatment facilities, and/or other uses. Water Used for Nonessential Purposes - Water used for lawn irrigation, golf course and park irrigation, car washes, ornamental fountains, and other non-essential uses. Wholesale Deliveries - The amount of water delivered in bulk to other public water suppliers. Acronyms and Initialisms AWWA – American Water Works Association C/I/I – Commercial/Institutional/Industrial CIP – Capital Improvement Plan GIS – Geographic Information System GPCD – Gallons per capita per day Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 56 GWMA – Groundwater Management Area – North and East Metro, Straight River, Bonanza, MDH – Minnesota Department of Health MGD – Million gallons per day MG – Million gallons MGL – Maximum Contaminant Level MnTAP – Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (University of Minnesota) MPARS – MN/DNR Permitting and Reporting System (new electronic permitting system) MRWA – Minnesota Rural Waters Association SWP – Source Water Protection WHP – Wellhead Protection Local Water Supply Plan Template –July 8, 2016 57 APPENDICES TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE WATER SUPPLIER Appendix 1: Well records and maintenance summaries – see Part 1C Appendix 2: Water level monitoring plan – see Part 1E Appendix 3: Water level graphs for each water supply well - see Part 1E Appendix 4: Capital Improvement Plan - see Part 1E Appendix 5: Emergency Telephone List – see Part 2C Appendix 6: Cooperative Agreements for Emergency Services – see Part 2C Appendix 7: Municipal Critical Water Deficiency Ordinance – see Part 2C Appendix 8: Graph showing annual per capita water demand for each customer category during the last ten-years – see Part 3 Objective 4 Appendix 9: Water Rate Structure – see Part 3 Objective 6 Appendix 10: Adopted or proposed regulations to reduce demand or improve water efficiency – see Part 3 Objective 7 Appendix 11: Implementation Checklist – summary of all the actions that a community is doing, or proposes to do, including estimated implementation dates – see www.mndnr.gov/watersupplyplans Appendix 1 Date 10/19/2016 Details Lofgren - annual HVAC inspectionTotal Cost $275.33Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 06/23/2016 Details Done by 609Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 03/09/2016 Details Pump recondition. Done by EH Renner in March 2016.Total Cost $14,964.75Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 07/23/2015 Details Done by 609Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 05/28/2015 Details Master Electric - replace chemical switchTotal Cost $848.88Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 07/17/2014 Details Done by 609 and EH RennerTotal Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Date 10/10/2013 Details Fluorescent lights installed.Total Cost $695.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 08/28/2013 Details SCADA backup batteries.Total Cost $723.65Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 07/31/2013 Details Omni Contracting - antenna cable replaced.Total Cost $3,995.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/26/2013 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.75Activity007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0341DescriptionWELL 7Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 01/17/2013 Details Master Electric - replace pump room heater.Total Cost $1,010.28Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 05/21/2012 Details Lofgren Heating - reconnect ACTotal Cost $325.50Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/03/2012 Details E.H. Renner pump inspection.Total Cost $88.45Activity007 - Inspection Date 12/06/2011 Details In Control, Inc - Install transducer.Total Cost $3,740.62Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 11/28/2011 Details E.H. Renner - Install 1" PVC tube.Total Cost $1,410.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/15/2011 Details E.H. RennerTotal Cost $70.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 03/14/2011 Details LMI pump head kit from Hawkins, Inc.Total Cost $167.58Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/05/2010 Details Done 605Total Cost $35.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 03/01/2010 Details In Control, Inc. - engineering services to repair wellTotal Cost $1,916.41Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 05/14/2009 Details AC repaired by Nordic Mechanical ServicesTotal Cost $189.50Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 02/13/2009 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal Cost $65.00Activity007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0341DescriptionWELL 7Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 01/30/2008 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 11/06/2007 Details Pump recondition - keysTotal Cost $20,205.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 11/01/2006 Details Historical data from Manager PlusTotal Cost $42.00Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 07/25/2006 DetailsTotal CostActivity 006 - Cleaning Date 03/08/2006 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/23/2004 Details Annual inspectioin - KeysTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/12/2002 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/27/2001 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/24/2000 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 10/01/1999 Details Recondition - motor only - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 003 - General Service Date 05/25/1999 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0341DescriptionWELL 7Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 06/04/1998 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 06/05/1997 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/30/1996 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/18/1995 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/27/1994 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 02/01/1994 Details Recondition - complete - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 003 - General Service Date 04/29/1993 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 10/31/1991 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 10/25/1990 Details Annual inspectioin - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/08/1987 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 06/14/1984 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0341DescriptionWELL 7Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 05/19/1983 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/05/1982 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/28/1981 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/02/1980 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/02/1978 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/02/1977 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0341DescriptionWELL 7Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Total Cost $50,985 Date 10/19/2016 Details Lofgren - annual HVAC inspectionTotal Cost $275.33Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 08/24/2016 Details EH Renner - repair leading water pipe.Total Cost $2,163.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 06/23/2016 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 02/15/2016 Details In Control - replace transducer.Total Cost $2,864.37Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 02/12/2016 Details Master Electric - conduit and box replaced.Total Cost $420.15Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 07/23/2015 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 11/30/2014 Details EH Renner - repair leaking flange.Total Cost $995.40Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 07/31/2014 Details Pine Bend Paving - new blacktop.Total Cost $16,350.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 07/22/2014 Details CR Fischer & Sons - replace curb & gutterTotal Cost $6,990.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 07/14/2014 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0342DescriptionWELL 8Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 10/10/2013 Details Fluorescent lights installed.Total Cost $695.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/26/2013 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.75Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/24/2013 Details J-K Construction repairs.Total Cost $200.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 06/21/2012 Details EH Renner - sampling tap.Total Cost $227.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/03/2012 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $88.45Activity007 - Inspection Date 11/28/2011 Details E.H. Renner - packing.Total Cost $30.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/15/2011 Details E.H. RennerTotal Cost $70.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 09/20/2010 Details AC installed by Lofgren Heating/ACTotal Cost $11,700.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/06/2010 Details EH Renner & Sons - inspection/reconditionTotal Cost $560.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 05/05/2010 Details Repair pre-lube. Done 605Total Cost $35.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 03/04/2010 Details Pressure guage.Total Cost $88.23Activity499 - Miscellaneous Maintenance Details ID 0342DescriptionWELL 8Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 02/13/2009 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal Cost $65.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 03/19/2008 Details Pump recondition - KeysTotal CostActivity 475 - Equipment Repair Date 01/30/2008 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 11/01/2006 Details Historical data from Manager PlusTotal Cost $42.00Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 07/25/2006 DetailsTotal CostActivity 006 - Cleaning Date 03/23/2004 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/12/2002 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/27/2001 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/24/2000 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/25/1999 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 06/04/1998 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0342DescriptionWELL 8Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 06/05/1997 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/01/1997 Details Recondition - completed - Bergerson CaswellTotal CostActivity 003 - General Service Date 04/29/1996 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/18/1995 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/27/1994 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/28/1993 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 10/31/1991 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0342DescriptionWELL 8Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Total Cost $44,076 Date 10/19/2016 Details Lofgren - annual HVAC inspectionTotal Cost $275.33Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 06/23/2016 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 07/23/2015 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 07/17/2014 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/26/2013 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.75Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/26/2013 Details Pump recondition - EH Renner.Total Cost $21,944.85Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 12/18/2012 Details 480V electric heater from Grainger. Installed by Master Electric.Total Cost $592.04Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/01/2012 Details Hawkins, Inc. - gas alarm systemTotal Cost $2,163.69Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/15/2012 Details Balance pump motor - Al's Fan Balancing ServiceTotal Cost $560.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/03/2012 Details E.H. RennerTotal Cost $88.45Activity007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0343DescriptionWELL 9Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 06/15/2011 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $70.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 03/10/2011 Details Chlorine ejector from Hawkins, Inc.Total Cost $504.64Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 03/07/2011 Details Service call on heater - Master ElectricTotal Cost $1,049.58Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 09/20/2010 Details AC installed by Lofgren Heating/ACTotal Cost $13,000.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/11/2010 Details Master Electric service call.Total Cost $669.20Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 05/05/2010 Details Done 605Total Cost $35.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 02/13/2009 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal Cost $65.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 01/30/2008 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 11/01/2006 Details Historical data from Manager PlusTotal Cost $42.00Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 07/25/2006 DetailsTotal CostActivity 006 - Cleaning Date 03/01/2006 Details Recondition - complete - KeysTotal CostActivity 003 - General Service Maintenance Details ID 0343DescriptionWELL 9Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 03/23/2004 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/12/2002 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/27/2001 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/24/2000 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/25/1999 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 06/04/1998 Details Annual inspection - McCarthyTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0343DescriptionWELL 9Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Total Cost $41,277 Date 06/23/2016 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 07/23/2015 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 10/31/2014 Details EH Renner - installed pipe for sounder.Total Cost $1,747.65Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 07/17/2014 Details Done by 609 and EH Rener.Total Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/26/2013 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Date 08/01/2012 Details EH Renner - New motor, pump, check valve & wire. See attached.Total Cost $14,540.50Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 05/03/2012 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $88.45Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/15/2011 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $70.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 07/26/2010 Details Service by In Control.Total Cost $640.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 05/14/2010 Details Corporate Mechanical - rewire condenserTotal Cost $646.26Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Maintenance Details ID 0349DescriptionRURAL WELL 1 (10, N)Manufacturer ModelModel Year 1990Odometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 05/05/2010 Details Done 605Total CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/30/2009 Details In Control Inc - pump repairTotal Cost $500.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 02/13/2009 Details Annual inspectionTotal Cost $65.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 01/30/2008 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/01/2007 Details Pump reconditionTotal CostActivity 475 - Equipment Repair Date 03/08/2006 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/03/2004 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/12/2002 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/27/2001 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/24/2000 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/25/1999 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0349DescriptionRURAL WELL 1 (10, N)Manufacturer ModelModel Year 1990Odometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 06/04/1998 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 06/05/1997 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/30/1996 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/18/1995 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/27/1994 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 09/15/1993 Details Removed Techno check valve and installed a heavy-duty check valve, new motor cable, and 20 feet ofdrop pipe Total CostActivity 480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 09/01/1993 Details Installed Techno check valve on the pump.Total CostActivity 480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 04/28/1993 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0349DescriptionRURAL WELL 1 (10, N)Manufacturer ModelModel Year 1990Odometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Total Cost $18,515 Date 06/23/2016 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 07/23/2015 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 07/17/2014 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/26/2013 Details Done by 609 and EH RennerTotal Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/24/2013 Details J-K Construction repairsTotal Cost $200.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 11/19/2012 Details In Control - Computer repairs.Total Cost $325.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 05/03/2012 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $88.45Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/15/2011 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $70.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 07/26/2010 Details Service by In Control.Total Cost $640.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 05/05/2010 Details Done 605Total CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0350DescriptionRURAL WELL 2 (11, S)Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 11/20/2009 Details Corporate Mechanical - replace heater in well house. See attached invoice.Total Cost $2,006.05Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 04/16/2009 Details Keys Well Drilling - pump recondition. See attached invoice for details.Total Cost $16,197.50Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 02/13/2009 Details Annual inspectionTotal Cost $65.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 01/30/2008 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 11/01/2006 Details Historical data from Manager PlusTotal Cost $42.00Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 03/08/2006 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/23/2004 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 03/12/2002 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 06/01/2001 Details Pump reconditionTotal CostActivity 475 - Equipment Repair Date 03/27/2001 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 05/24/2000 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0350DescriptionRURAL WELL 2 (11, S)Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 05/25/1999 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 06/04/1998 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 06/05/1997 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/30/1996 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/18/1995 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/27/1994 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 04/28/1993 Details Annual inspectionTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0350DescriptionRURAL WELL 2 (11, S)Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Total Cost $19,852 Date 10/19/2016 Details Lofgren - annual HVAC inspectionTotal Cost $275.33Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 10/07/2016 Details Lofgren - AC replacedTotal Cost $9,748.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 06/23/2016 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 07/23/2015 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 02/23/2015 Details In Control - replaced soft startTotal Cost $13,367.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 02/02/2015 Details Pump recondition by EH Renner & Sons. See attached.Total Cost $23,655.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 09/20/2014 Details Concrete replacementTotal Cost $7,730.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 07/17/2014 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Date 10/10/2013 Details Fluorescent lights installed.Total Cost $690.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/26/2013 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.75Activity007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0345DescriptionWELL 12Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 07/09/2012 Details Control assembly charger - Cummins Power, LLC.Total Cost $817.12Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/03/2012 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $88.45Activity007 - Inspection Date 12/06/2011 Details In Control, Inc - Install transducer.Total Cost $3,740.63Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 11/28/2011 Details E.H. Renner - Install 1" PVC tube.Total Cost $2,360.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/15/2011 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $70.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 05/05/2010 Details Done 605Total Cost $35.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 03/04/2010 Details Pressure guageTotal Cost $88.23Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 02/13/2009 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal Cost $65.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 01/30/2008 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Date 11/01/2006 Details Historical data from Manager PlusTotal Cost $0.00Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 07/25/2006 DetailsTotal CostActivity 006 - Cleaning Maintenance Details ID 0345DescriptionWELL 12Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Maintenance Details ID 0345DescriptionWELL 12Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Total Cost $62,947 Date 10/19/2016 Details Lofgren - annual HVAC inspectionTotal Cost $275.33Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 06/23/2016 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 08/03/2015 Details In Control - SCADA communications repiarTotal Cost $2,282.42Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 07/23/2015 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 07/15/2015 Details Master Electric - motor repairTotal Cost $570.64Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 06/22/2015 Details In Control - repair failed soft start.Total Cost $455.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 12/08/2014 Details INW - Repair data logger.Total Cost $430.11Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 07/17/2014 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Date 10/10/2013 Details Fluorescent lights installed.Total Cost $345.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/26/2013 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.75Activity007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0346DescriptionWELL 14Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 06/17/2013 Details Replace tank heater, top off antifreeze. Parts: HTR79889Total Cost $151.99Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/21/2012 Details Lofgren Heating - reconnect ACTotal Cost $325.50Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/03/2012 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $88.45Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/15/2011 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $70.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 05/19/2010 Details Repair door locks - DW Venture LocksmithTotal Cost $40.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 05/05/2010 Details Done 605Total Cost $35.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 02/13/2009 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal Cost $65.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 01/30/2008 Details Annual inspection - KeysTotal CostActivity 007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0346DescriptionWELL 14Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Total Cost $5,352 Date 10/19/2016 Details Lofgren - annual HVAC inspectionTotal Cost $275.33Activity499 - Miscellaneous Date 06/23/2016 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 02/15/2016 Details In Control - re-terminate fiber optic.Total Cost $675.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 08/03/2015 Details In Control - SCADA communications repair.Total Cost $2,282.43Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 07/23/2015 Details Done by 609.Total Cost $19.88Activity007 - Inspection Date 11/30/2014 Details Low temp thermostat.Total Cost $251.52Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 07/17/2014 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.93Activity007 - Inspection Date 11/18/2013 Details In Control - troubleshoot telemetryTotal Cost $760.00Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 10/10/2013 Details Fluorescent lights installed.Total Cost $690.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 06/26/2013 Details Done by 609 and EH Renner.Total Cost $88.75Activity007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0348DescriptionWELL 15Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Date 11/19/2012 Details In Control - Computer repairs.Total Cost $2,818.90Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 06/21/2012 Details EH Renner - sampling tap.Total Cost $227.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/15/2012 Details Balance pump motor - Al's Fan Balancing ServiceTotal Cost $280.00Activity480 - Equipment Maintenance Date 05/03/2012 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $88.45Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/15/2011 Details EH RennerTotal Cost $70.00Activity007 - Inspection Date 06/03/2010 Details Select Electrical - switch repairedTotal Cost $224.40Activity475 - Equipment Repair Date 05/05/2010 Details Done 605Total Cost $35.00Activity007 - Inspection Maintenance Details ID 0348DescriptionWELL 15Manufacturer ModelModel YearOdometer Date:Monday, November 14, 2016Report Title:Mainenance Summary Rosemount Total Cost $8,895 Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031767870 County Dakota Entry Date 10/11/2012 Quad Update Date 03/10/2014 Quad ID Received Date 07/19/2012 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed CITY OF 115 19 W 27 DCC 280 ft.280 ft.06/21/2012 Elevation Elev. Method Drill Method Non-specified Rotary Drill Fluid Other Address Use irrigation Status Active Well Hydrofractured?XYes No From To WeldedCasing Type Single casing No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Well SEE REMARKS ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SAND/GRAVEL 0 95 SOFTBROWN GRAVEL 95 115 MEDIUMBROWN SAND 115 120 SOFTBROWN CLAY/GRAVEL 120 150 MEDIUMYELLOW LIMESTONE 150 220 HARDYEL/BRN LIMESTONE 220 280 HARDGRAY Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 12 160in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 17 160in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 160Open Hole From ft.To ft.280 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) DRILLING FLUID: MUD/AIR DAKOTA CO. PERMIT NO. 12-767870 Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.160 ft.5 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 767870 HE-01205-15 Printed on 11/21/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeXX GRUNDFOS X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.65 Measureland surface 06/21/2012 ft.110 hrs.7 Pumping at 500 g.p.m. 1000 feet North Direction Sewer Type Well disinfected upon completion?X Yes Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. 06/20/2012 3005300-8 30 460 250147 Submersible XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes X No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Keys Well Drilling Co. 1347 KASSE, B. Remarks Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock System X Y ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031798068 County Dakota Entry Date 09/13/2013 Quad Update Date 09/13/2013 Quad ID Received Date 07/09/2013 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed MW 141 115 19 W 31 DDA 52 ft.52 ft.06/06/2013 Elevation Elev. Method Drill Method Auger (non-specified)Drill Fluid Address Use monitor well Status Active Well Hydrofractured?XYes No From To Casing Type Single casing No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Well 15675 CHIPPENDALE AV W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SAND/GRAVEL 0 10 MEDIUMBROWN GRAVEL/SAND 10 40 MEDIUMBROWN GRAVEL/SAND WET 40 50 MEDIUMBROWN Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 2 41.5in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 8.2 in. To ft. stainlessScreen?Make JOHNSONXType Diameter Slot/Gauze Length Set 2 10in.ft.41.510 51.5 ft.ft. Open Hole From ft.To ft. Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) MW 141 Material FromAmount To bentonite ft.4 36.5 ft.1 Sacks neat cement ft.4 ft.2 Sacks Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 798068 HE-01205-15 Printed on 11/21/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.43 Measureland surface 06/06/2013 ft.hrs.Pumping at g.p.m. feet Direction Type Well disinfected upon completion?Yes X X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes X No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Thein Well Co., Inc. 1337 HERRBOLDT, N. Remarks Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock System X Y ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031802726 County Dakota Entry Date 04/04/2014 Quad Inver Grove Update Date 06/24/2014 Quad ID 103D Received Date 05/16/2014 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 115 19 W 21 ABBBCD 506 ft.506 ft.04/10/2014 Elevation 957.8 Elev. Method LiDAR 1m DEM (MNDNR)Drill Method Non-specified Rotary Drill Fluid Bentonite Address Use monitor well Status Active Well Hydrofractured?XYes No From To WeldedCasing Type Single casing No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Contact 2875 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Well 12850 BACARDI AV W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness DRIFT (QUATERNARY)0 193 SFT-MEDVARIED SHAKOPEE DOLOMITE 193 396 HARD JORDAN SANDSTONE 396 498 MEDIUMWHITE ST. LAWRENCE 498 506 HARD Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 8 203 28.5in. To ft.lbs./ft. 4 412 10.8in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 12.202.in. To ft. 8 506in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 412Open Hole From ft.To ft.506 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) GAMMA LOGGED 4-1-2014 BY JIM TRAEN. M.G.S. NO. 5390. Material FromAmount To pearock ft.230 270 ft.0.25 Cubic yards neat cement ft.203 ft.75 Sacks neat cement ft.410 ft.120 Sacks Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 802726 HE-01205-15 Printed on 11/21/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeXX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.113.Measureland surface 04/10/2014 ft.121.hrs.4 Pumping at 50 g.p.m. feet Direction Type Well disinfected upon completion?X Yes Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes X No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Bergerson Caswell, Inc. 1767 KLUVER, D. Remarks Prairie Du Chien Group Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock St.Lawrence Formation Minnesota Geological Survey Jordan 193 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:24,000) System X Y491666 4956296 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 04/04/2014Info/GPS from data Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031767876 County Dakota Entry Date 06/04/2012 Quad Coates Update Date 03/10/2014 Quad ID 88A Received Date 07/19/2012 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed U MORE PARK-1 115 19 W 27 DCBCBC 438 ft.438 ft.06/21/2012 Elevation 937 ft.Elev. Method 7.5 minute topographic map (+/- 5 feet)Drill Method Non-specified Rotary Drill Fluid Address Use environ. bore hole Status Well Hydrofractured?XYes No From To WeldedCasing Type Step down No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Well 14860 AKRON AV ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SAND & GRAVEL 0 125 SOFTBROWN CLAY 125 141 MEDIUMTAN CLAY 141 145 MEDIUMTAN LIMEROCK 145 210 MED-HRDTAN LIMEROCK 210 272 HARDGRAY LIMEROCK 272 328 HARDGRAY LIMEROCK 328 330 HARDGRAY SANDSTONE 330 340 SOFTGRAY SANDSTONE 340 430 MEDIUMGRAY SANDSTONE/SHALE 430 438 MEDIUMGREEN Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 2 357 3.66in. To ft.lbs./ft. 6 160.18.9in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 10 160in. To ft. 6 438in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 357Open Hole From ft.To ft.438 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) GAMMA LOGGED 5-30-2012. M.G.S. NO. 5254. LOGGED BY JIM TRAEN. Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.357 ft.99 Sacks neat cement ft.160 ft.4 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 767876 HE-01205-15 Printed on 11/21/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.65 Measureland surface 06/21/2012 1000 feet Northeas Direction Septic tank/drain field Type Well disinfected upon completion?Yes X X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes X No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Keys Well Drilling Co. 1347 KASSE, B. Remarks Prairie Du Chien Group Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock St.Lawrence Formation Minnesota Geological Survey Jordan 141 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:24,000) System X Y493246 4953430 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 06/04/2012Info/GPS from data Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031702837 County Dakota Entry Date Quad Inver Grove Update Date 03/10/2014 Quad ID 103D Received Date 05/26/2004 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 115 19 W 21 CADACB 518 ft.496 ft.03/10/2004 Elevation 990 ft.Elev. Method 7.5 minute topographic map (+/- 5 feet)Drill Method Non-specified Rotary Drill Fluid Other Address Use test well Status Active Well Hydrofractured?XYes No From To Welded 2.33 ft. Casing Type Step down No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Contact 2875 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Well BELMONT TR ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SAND-GRAVEL 0 120 SOFTBROWN SILTY SAND 120 170 SOFTRED SANDY CLAY 170 180 MEDIUMGRAY WEATHERED 180 188 MEDIUMWHT/ORN WEATHERED 188 206 MEDIUMWHT/ORN WEATHERED 206 210 MEDIUMWHT/ORN LIMESTONE BUFF 210 402 HARD SANDSTONE 402 417 MEDIUMWHT/GRY SANDSTONE 417 496 MEDIUMWHT/GRY SANDSTONE 496 498 MEDIUMWHT/GRY LIMESTONE-SHALE 498 518 HARD Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 4 419in. To ft.lbs./ft. 8 225in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 15 190in. To ft. 12 225in. To ft. 8 518in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 419Open Hole From ft.To ft.496 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) GAMMA LOGGED 2-17-2004. M.G.S. NO. 4311. THIS WELL WAS COMPLETED BY FILLING THE ST. LAWRENCE WITH 5.5 BAGS OF PORTLAND. Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.496 518 ft.5.5 Sacks neat cement ft.225 ft.8 Cubic yards neat cement ft.419 ft.10 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 702837 HE-01205-15 Printed on 09/30/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.120 Measureland surface 03/10/2004 60 feet West Direction Septic tank/drain field Type Well disinfected upon completion?Yes X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. Yes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Bergerson-Caswell 27058 HOLMEN, G. Remarks St.Peter-Prairie Du Chien Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock St.Lawrence Formation Minnesota Geological Survey Jordan 188 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:24,000) System X Y491552 4955345 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 06/24/2004Information from Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031783280 County Dakota Entry Date 10/04/2011 Quad Inver Grove Update Date 02/11/2016 Quad ID 103D Received Date 06/16/2011 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed MW 115 19 W 21 CADABC 194 ft.194 ft.05/25/2011 Elevation 989.8 Elev. Method LiDAR 3m DEM (MNDNR)Drill Method Non-specified Rotary Drill Fluid Other Address Use monitor well Status Active Well Hydrofractured?XYes No From To WeldedCasing Type Single casing No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Well 13581 AZALEA AV ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SAND & GRAVEL 0 193 MEDIUMVARIED SHALE 193 194 HARDGREEN Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 4 174in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 8 194in. To ft. slotted pipeScreen?Make BIG FOOTXType Diameter Slot/Gauze Length Set 4 10in.ft.17420 194 ft.ft. Open Hole From ft.To ft. Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) DRILLING FLUID-MUD&BENTONITE MW-OB/11E-29076 Material FromAmount To bentonite ft.170 ft.16 Sacks Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 783280 HE-01205-15 Printed on 11/21/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.hrs.Pumping at g.p.m. feet Direction Type Well disinfected upon completion?X Yes X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes X No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Bergerson Caswell, Inc. 1767 SCHWARTZ, M. Remarks Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock Minnesota Department of Health Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:12,000) System X Y491547 4955340 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 02/11/2016Info/GPS from data Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031112212 County Dakota Entry Date 12/27/1989 Quad Farmington Update Date 02/11/2016 Quad ID 88B Received Date Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 7 115 19 W 29 CCCCCB 490 ft.490 ft.04/13/1976 Elevation 960 ft.Elev. Method LiDAR 3m DEM (MNDNR)Drill Method Cable Tool Drill Fluid Address Use community supply(municipal)Status Active Well Hydrofractured?Yes No From To Welded 2 ft. Casing Type Step down No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Contact 2875 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Well 42 CR ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SAND & GRAVEL 0 99 SHALE 99 104 BLU/GRY MUDDY SAND &104 170 LIMEROCK 170 379 LIMEROCK &379 384 HARD ROCK 384 490 Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 16 400in. To ft.lbs./ft. 20 175 78in. To ft.lbs./ft. Screen?MakeType 400Open Hole From ft.To ft.490 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.0 400 ft. Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 112212 HE-01205-15 Printed on 09/30/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.74 Measureland surface 04/13/1976 ft.125 hrs.Pumping at 1600 g.p.m. feet Direction Type Well disinfected upon completion?X Yes X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. 0 Yes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Bergerson-Caswell 27058 HENRICH, E Remarks Prairie Du Chien Group Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock Jordan Sandstone Minnesota Department of Health Jordan 170 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:12,000) System X Y489229 4953212 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 02/02/2001Info/GPS from data Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031509060 County Dakota Entry Date 06/13/1991 Quad Farmington Update Date 03/10/2014 Quad ID 88B Received Date Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 8 115 19 W 31 CAADCA 498 ft.498 ft.01/00/1990 Elevation 949 ft.Elev. Method 7.5 minute topographic map (+/- 5 feet)Drill Method Cable Tool Drill Fluid Address Use community supply(municipal)Status Active Well Hydrofractured?Yes No From To Welded 2 ft. Casing Type Step down No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Contact 2875 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 65068 Well 2109 SHANNON PK ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SAND AND GRAVEL 0 167 SOFTBROWN SAND, GRAVEL & CLAY 167 174 SOFTBROWN LIMEROCK 174 378 HARDGRAY SANDROCK 378 495 MEDIUMGRAY SANDROCK & SHALE 495 498 MEDIUMGRAY Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 30 65 118.in. To ft.lbs./ft. 18 389 70.6in. To ft.lbs./ft. 24 177 94.6in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 30 65in. To ft. 23 498in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 389Open Hole From ft.To ft.498 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) M.G.S. NO. 3371. BLASTED WITH 200# DYNAMITE AND BAILED OUT 316 YDS OF LOOSE SANDROCK AIR DEVELOPED 54 HOURS. TEST PUMPED 57.5 HOURS Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.0 389 ft.25 Cubic yards neat cement ft.0 64 ft.5 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 509060 HE-01205-15 Printed on 09/30/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.53 Measureland surface 01/10/1990 ft.86.3 hrs.8 Pumping at 1016 g.p.m. feet Direction Type Well disinfected upon completion?X Yes X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. Yes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Keys Well Co.62012 RUSSELL, J. Remarks Prairie Du Chien Group Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock St.Lawrence Formation Minnesota Department of Health Jordan 174 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:12,000) System X Y488353 4952200 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 02/02/2001Information from Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031554248 County Dakota Entry Date 01/10/1997 Quad Farmington Update Date 02/11/2016 Quad ID 88B Received Date Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 9 115 19 W 31 BDAAAA 481 ft.481 ft.11/22/1996 Elevation 944.5 Elev. Method LiDAR 3m DEM (MNDNR)Drill Method Cable Tool Drill Fluid Water Address Use community supply(municipal)Status Active Well Hydrofractured?Yes No From To Welded 0 ft. Casing Type Step down No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Contact 2875 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Well SHANNON PK ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SAND AND GRAVEL 0 62 SOFTBROWN SAND 62 85 SOFTBROWN SAND AND GRAVEL 85 120 SOFTBROWN SAND 120 163 SOFTBROWN LIMESTONE 163 364 HARDGRAY SANDSTONE 364 466 MEDIUMGRY/WHT SANDROCK AND 466 481 MEDIUMGRAY Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 24 374 94.6in. To ft.lbs./ft. 30 166 118.in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 29 481in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 374Open Hole From ft.To ft.481 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) M.G.S. NO. 3820. Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.0 374 ft.35 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 554248 HE-01205-15 Printed on 09/30/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.42 Measureland surface 11/07/1996 ft.51 hrs.4 Pumping at 1056 g.p.m. 100 feet West Direction Septic tank/drain field Type Well disinfected upon completion?X Yes X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. 0 Yes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Keys Well Co.62012 UNERTL, S. Remarks Prairie Du Chien Group Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock St.Lawrence Formation Minnesota Department of Health Jordan 163 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:12,000) System X Y488402 4952757 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 09/19/1996Info/GPS from data Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031706804 County Dakota Entry Date Quad Coates Update Date 04/16/2015 Quad ID 88A Received Date 12/06/2004 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 12 115 19 W 32 ABCDAD 475 ft.475 ft.10/12/2004 Elevation 965 ft.Elev. Method 7.5 minute topographic map (+/- 5 feet)Drill Method Cable Tool Drill Fluid Bentonite Address Use community supply(municipal)Status Active Well Hydrofractured?Yes No From To WeldedCasing Type Step down No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Contact 2875 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Well 15150 BOULDER AV ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness CLAY & SAND &0 165 HARDBROWN PDC/DOLOMITE 165 191 V.HARDTAN SANDSTONE/DOLOMIT 191 270 V.HARDGRY/TAN ONEOTA DOLOMITE 270 384 V.HARDGRY/TAN JORDAN S.S.384 469 M.HARDLT. GRY ST. LAWRENCE SHALE 469 475 HARDGRN/GRY Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 24 401.94.6in. To ft.lbs./ft. 30 178.118.in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 29 398in. To ft. 23 475in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 395Open Hole From ft.To ft.475 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.395 ft.34.6 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 706804 HE-01205-15 Printed on 09/30/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.76.4 Measureland surface 10/04/2004 ft.112.hrs.15 Pumping at 1500 g.p.m. 120 feet North Direction Septic tank/drain field Type Well disinfected upon completion?X Yes X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes X No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Renner E.H. Well 71015 STAN/JIM Remarks Prairie Du Chien Group Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock St.Lawrence Formation Minnesota Department of Health Jordan 165 GPS SA Off (averaged) System X Y490201 4952829 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 04/15/2004 Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031722623 County Dakota Entry Date Quad Inver Grove Update Date 02/11/2016 Quad ID 103D Received Date 12/29/2005 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 14 115 19 W 21 CADABD 485 ft.485 ft.12/29/2005 Elevation 990.4 Elev. Method LiDAR 3m DEM (MNDNR)Drill Method Cable Tool Drill Fluid Bentonite Address Use community supply(municipal)Status Active Well Hydrofractured?XYes No From To WeldedCasing Type Single casing No Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Contact 2875 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Well 13599 AZALEA AV ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SAND & GRAVEL 0 170 SOFTBROWN SANDY CLAY 170 184 MEDIUMGRAY PRAIRIE DU CHIEN 184 217 MEDIUMORANGE PRAIRIE DU CHIEN 217 410 V.HARDORANGE JORDAN SANDSTONE 410 485 M.SOFTGRAY Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 30 137.94.6in. To ft.lbs./ft. 18 413 70.5in. To ft.lbs./ft. 24 218 94.6in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 30 143in. To ft. 24 413in. To ft. 18 485in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 413Open Hole From ft.To ft.485 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) M..G.S. NO. 4508. Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.0 413 ft.47.5 Cubic yards neat cement ft.0 137 ft.8.5 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 722623 HE-01205-15 Printed on 09/30/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX GOULD X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.131 Measureland surface 12/29/2005 ft.166.hrs.8 Pumping at 1250 g.p.m. 100 feet West Direction Septic tank/drain field Type Well disinfected upon completion?Yes Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. 07/12/2006 12CHC-5 125 480 1200200 Submersible XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes X No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Renner E.H. Well 71015 COLBURN, S. Remarks St.Peter Sandstone Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock Jordan Sandstone Minnesota Department of Health Jordan 184 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:12,000) System X Y491557 4955356 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 12/22/2005Info/GPS from data Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031753663 County Dakota Entry Date 09/25/2007 Quad Inver Grove Update Date 02/11/2016 Quad ID 103D Received Date 12/01/2008 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 15 115 19 W 21 DADACD 487 ft.487 ft.05/16/2008 Elevation 965 ft.Elev. Method LiDAR 3m DEM (MNDNR)Drill Method Cable Tool Drill Fluid Bentonite Address Use community supply(municipal)Status Active Well Hydrofractured?XYes No From To WeldedCasing Type No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Contact 2875 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 550684941 Well 13610 AUTUMN PA ROSEMOUNT MN 550684941 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness SANDY CLAY 0 10 SOFTBROWN SAND & GRAVEL 10 145 SFT-MEDBROWN ST. PETER 145 170 MEDIUMWHT/BRN PDC 170 380 HARDORANGE JORDAN SANDSTONE 380 420 SOFTTAN JORDAN SANDSTONE 420 483 MED-HRDGRAY ST. LAWRENCE S.S.483 487 HARDGRAY Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 24 390 94.6in. To ft.lbs./ft. 30 180 118.in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 30 390in. To ft. 24 487in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 390Open Hole From ft.To ft.487 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) MULTI TOOL LOGGED 10-26-2007. WATER WAS ABNORNALLY WARM AND FOAMY. M.G.S. NO. 4793. Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.0 390 ft.42.7 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 753663 HE-01205-15 Printed on 11/08/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX GOULD X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.107 Measureland surface 05/09/2008 ft.127.hrs.24 Pumping at 1330 g.p.m. 120 feet Northwes Direction Sewer Type Well disinfected upon completion?Yes Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. 10/07/2008 12CHC5 150 460 180 Turbine XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes X No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller EH Renner and Sons, Inc. 1431 COLBURN, S. Remarks St.Peter Sandstone Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock St.Lawrence Formation Minnesota Department of Health Jordan 145 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:12,000) System X Y492365 4955300 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 09/21/2007Info/GPS from data Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031805374 County Dakota Entry Date 09/24/2015 Quad Inver Grove Update Date 05/12/2016 Quad ID 103D Received Date 03/28/2016 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 16 115 19 W 21 ABBBCD 507 ft.507 ft.00/00/2015 Elevation 962 ft.Elev. Method LiDAR 1m DEM (MNDNR)Drill Method Cable Tool Drill Fluid Bentonite Address Use community supply(municipal)Status Active Well Hydrofractured?XYes No From To Welded 6 ft. Casing Type Single casing No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint Contact 2875 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Well 12850 BACARDI AV W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness CLAY, SAND, STONES 0 68 MEDIUMBROWN HARDPAN 68 80 MEDIUMVARIED SAND/GRAVEL 80 194 HARDVARIED SAND/GRAVEL 194 195 HARDVARIED PDC-SHAKOPEE 195 396 HARDBROWN JORDAN SANDSTONE 396 406 MEDIUMTAN/GRY JORDAN SANDSTONE 406 498 MEDIUMTAN/GRY ST. LAWRENCE SHALE 498 507 HARDYEL/GRN Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 30 141 118.in. To ft.lbs./ft. 8 411 70.6in. To ft.lbs./ft. 24 208 94.6in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 30 150in. To ft. 24 504in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 411Open Hole From ft.To ft.507 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) M.G.S. NO. 5531. Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.406 ft.28.5 Cubic yards neat cement ft.150 ft.8.5 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 805374 HE-01205-15 Printed on 11/21/2016 PUMP HOUSEPitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.113 Measureland surface 09/21/2015 ft.167.hrs.24 Pumping at 2000 g.p.m. 91 feet West Direction Septic tank/drain field Type Well disinfected upon completion?X Yes Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. 7 460 XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes X No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller EH Renner and Sons, Inc. 1431 SIGAFOOS, R. Remarks Prairie Du Chien Group Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock St.Lawrence-Tunnel City Minnesota Geological Survey Jordan-St. 195 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:24,000) System X Y491670 4956314 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 03/10/2016Info/GPS from data Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031457167 County Dakota Entry Date 06/26/1992 Quad Coates Update Date 02/11/2016 Quad ID 88A Received Date Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 1 115 19 W 27 ADCBCC 400 ft.400 ft.03/18/1989 Elevation 940.1 Elev. Method LiDAR 3m DEM (MNDNR)Drill Method Non-specified Rotary Drill Fluid Other Address Use community supply(municipal)Status Active Well Hydrofractured?Yes No From To Welded 1 ft. Casing Type Step down No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint C/W 1367 145TH ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness CLAY 0 4 MEDIUMBROWN GRAVEL 4 95 MEDIUMBROWN SANDROCK 95 119 SOFTYELLOW SANDROCK 119 125 HARDWHITE LIME 125 170 HARDYELLOW LIME 170 195 MEDIUMBROWN LIME 195 225 HARDYELLOW LIME 225 260 MEDIUMORANGE LIME 260 285 HARDWHITE SANDROCK 285 292 SOFTYELLOW LIME 292 312 HARDWHITE LIME 312 329 HARDBLUE SANDROCK 329 345 MEDIUMWHITE SANDROCK 345 370 MEDIUMYELLOW SANDROCK 370 390 MEDIUMWHITE SANDROCK 390 400 MEDIUMBLUE Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 10 345 40.4in. To ft.lbs./ft. 16 119 62.5in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 20 119in. To ft. 15 345in. To ft. 10 400in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 345Open Hole From ft.To ft.400 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.0 345 ft.42 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 457167 HE-01205-15 Printed on 09/30/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.73 Measureland surface 03/18/1989 ft.200 hrs.3 Pumping at 500 g.p.m. 300 feet South Direction Septic tank/drain field Type Well disinfected upon completion?Yes X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. 0 Yes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Kimmes-Bauer 19521 ANDERSON, L. Remarks St.Peter Sandstone Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock Jordan Sandstone Minnesota Department of Health Jordan 95 Digitization (Screen) - Map (1:12,000) System X Y493656 4954082 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 12/28/1994Info/GPS from data Angled Drill Hole Minnesota Unique Well Number MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AND BORING REPORT Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1031474335 County Dakota Entry Date 01/04/1993 Quad Coates Update Date 03/10/2014 Quad ID 88A Received Date 01/06/2014 Well Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed ROSEMOUNT 115 19 W 27 ADCBBC 400 ft.400 ft.01/09/1990 Elevation 941 ft.Elev. Method 7.5 minute topographic map (+/- 5 feet)Drill Method Non-specified Rotary Drill Fluid Foam Address Use community supply(municipal)Status Active Well Hydrofractured?Yes No From To Welded 1 ft. Casing Type Step down No X Above/BelowYesDrive Shoe? Joint C/W 1367 145HT ST W ROSEMOUNT MN 55068 Geological Material From To (ft.)Color Hardness CLAY SAND 0 40 MEDIUMYELLOW SAND GRAVEL 40 90 SOFTBROWN SANDROCK 90 120 SOFTBROWN SANDROCK 120 127 HARDBROWN LIME 127 240 HARDYELLOW SANDROCK 240 250 SOFTBROWN LIME 250 335 HARDGRAY SANDROCK 335 380 MEDIUMGRAY SANDROCK 380 400 MEDIUMBLUE Stratigraphy Information Casing Diameter Weight 10 345 40.4in. To ft.lbs./ft. 16 128 62.5in. To ft.lbs./ft. Hole Diameter 20 128in. To ft. 15 345in. To ft. 10 400in. To ft. Screen?MakeType 345Open Hole From ft.To ft.400 Static Water Level Pumping Level (below land surface) Material FromAmount To neat cement ft.0 345 ft.18.5 Cubic yards Wellhead Completion Pump Nearest Known Source of Contamination Abandoned Variance Well Contractor Minnesota Well Index Report 474335 HE-01205-15 Printed on 09/30/2016 Pitless adapter manufacturer Model At-grade (Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Casing Protection 12 in. above gradeX X Does property have any not in use and not sealed well(s)? Grouting Information Well Grouted?Yes No Not Specified No ft.75 Measureland surface 01/09/1990 ft.200 hrs.3 Pumping at 500 g.p.m. feet Direction Type Well disinfected upon completion?X Yes X Not Installed Date Installed Manufacturer's name Model Number HP Volt Length of drop pipe Capacity Typftg.p. 0 XYes No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this well?Yes No Licensee Business Lic. or Reg. No.Name of Driller Kimmes-Bauer 19521 ANDERSON, L. Remarks St.Peter Sandstone Miscellaneous Last Strat Aquifer Depth to Bedrock Located by Locate Method First Bedrock Jordan Sandstone Minnesota Department of Health Jordan 90 GPS Differentially Corrected System X Y493662 4954152 ft UTM - Mad83, Zone 15, Meters Unique Number Verification Inpute Date 12/28/1994Information from Angled Drill Hole Appendix 2 Water Level Monitoring The City of Rosemount continually monitors well water levels using SCADA. The information is saved for use by the City for planning purposes and monitoring well water levels. New wells are connected to SCADA when they are installed and they are monitored according to the Table below. Rosemount Water Level Monitoring Plan Unique Well Number Local Name Type Location Monitoring Frequency Monitoring Method 112212 Well No. 7 Water Supply 14950 Chippendale Avenue Daily SCADA 457167 RR No. 1 Water Supply 1301 145th Street East(South) Daily SCADA 474335 RR No. 2 Water Supply 1289 145th Street East(North) Daily SCADA 509060 Well No. 8 Water Supply 15623 Shannon Parkway Daily SCADA 554248 Well No. 9 Water Supply 15260 Shannon Parkway Daily SCADA 702837 MW 14 East Monitoring 13581 Azalea Ave As Needed N/A 706804 Well No. 12 Water Supply 15210 Boulder Avenue Daily SCADA 722623 Well No. 14 Water Supply 13599 Azalea Avenue Daily SCADA 753663 Well No. 15 Water Supply 13610 Autumn Path Daily SCADA 783280 MW 14 West Monitoring 13581 Azalea Ave As Needed N/A 767870 IRUmore Irrigation 14860 Akron Avenue - Umore As Needed N/A 767876 MW Umore Monitoring 14860 Akron Avenue - Umore As Needed N/A 798068 MW 141 Monitoring 15675 Chippendale Ave W. As Needed N/A 802726 TW – 16 Test Well 12850 Bacardi Avenue As Needed N/A 805374 Well No. 16 Water Supply (Not Active 12850 Bacardi Avenue Daily SCADA Appendix 3 740.0 760.0 780.0 800.0 820.0 840.0 860.0 880.0 900.0 Water Level Elevation (ft)Date Rosemount Well No. 7 Well Pumping Elevation Static Water Level Elevation 700.0 725.0 750.0 775.0 800.0 825.0 850.0 875.0 900.0 925.0 Water Level Elevation (ft)Date Rosemount Well No. 8 Well Pumping Elevation Static Water Level Elevation 780.0 800.0 820.0 840.0 860.0 880.0 900.0 920.0 Water Level Elevation (ft)Date Rosemount Well No. 9 Well Pumping Elevation Static Water Level Elevation 740.0 760.0 780.0 800.0 820.0 840.0 860.0 880.0 900.0 Water Level Elevation (ft)Date Rosemount Well No. 12 Well Pumping Elevation Static Water Level Elevation 650.0 700.0 750.0 800.0 850.0 900.0 Water Level Elevation (ft)Date Rosemount Well No. 14 Well Pumping Elevation Static Water Level Elevation 650.0 700.0 750.0 800.0 850.0 900.0 Water Level Elevation (ft)Date Rosemount Well No. 15 Well Pumping Elevation Static Water Level Elevation 700.0 720.0 740.0 760.0 780.0 800.0 820.0 840.0 860.0 880.0 Water Level Elevation (ft)Date Rosemount Rural Well No. 1 Well Pumping Elevation Static Water Level Elevation Appendix 5 Attachment 5 Rosemount, MN Emergency Telephone List Emergency Response Team Name Work Telephone Alternate Telephone Emergency Response Lead Jim Koslowski 612-322-2022 Alternate Emergency Response Lead Christine Watson 651-322-2091 Water Operator N/A Alternate Water Operator N/A Public Communications Christine Watson 651-322-2091 State and Local Emergency Response Contacts Name Work Telephone Alternate Telephone State Incident Duty Officer Minnesota Duty Officer 800/422-0798 Out State 651-649-5451 Metro County Emergency Director National Guard Minnesota Duty Officer 800/422-0798 Out State 651-649-5451 Metro Mayor/Board Chair Bill Droste 651-423-1944 651-322-2020 Fire Chief Richard Schroeder 651-322-2066 Sheriff Tim Leslie 651-438-4710 Police Chief Mitchell Scott 651-322-2010 651-423-4491 Ambulance Police Department 651-423-4491 Hospital Doctor or Medical Facility State and Local Agencies Name Work Telephone Alternate Telephone MDH District Engineer MDH Drinking Water Protection 651-201-4700 State Testing Laboratory Minnesota Duty Officer 800/422-0798 Out State 651-649-5451 Metro MPCA DNR Area Hydrologist Jennie Skancke 651-259-5790 County Water Planner Utilities Name Work Telephone Alternate Telephone Electric Company Gas Company Telephone Company Gopher State One Call Utility Locations 800-252-1166 651-454-0002 Highway Department Mutual Aid Agreements Name Work Telephone Alternate Telephone Neighboring Water System Emergency Water Connection City of Apple Valley 612-790-7167 952-953-2500 Materials Technical/Contracted Services/Supplies Name Work Telephone Alternate Telephone MRWA Technical Services MN Rural Water Association 800-367-6792 Well Driller/Repair Keys Well Drilling 651-646-7871 Pump Repair Keys Well Drilling 651-646-7871 Electrician Countryman Electric 651-351-0714 612-247-2777 Plumber Backhoe Windmer Inc. 952-446-1495 Chemical Feed Meter Repair Generator Valves HD Supply 952-937-9666 Pipe & Fittings HD Supply 952-937-9666 Water Storage Laboratory Engineering firm Communications Name Work Telephone Alternate Telephone News Paper Rosemount Town Pages 651-460-6606 Radio Station School Superintendent Jane K. Berenz 651-423-7749 Property & Casualty Insurance Critical Water Users Name Work Telephone Alternate Telephone Hospital Critical Use: Nursing Home Critical Use: Public Shelter Critical Use: Appendix 6 Cooperative Agreements for Emergency Water Services The City of Rosemount currently has a Cooperative Agreements for Emergency Water Services with the City of Apple Valley, MN. During an emergency, the City of Rosemount can utilize 23,000 gpm from the City of Apple Valley. No other interconnects are available with any other utilities or other service providers. Appendix 7 Appendix 8 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 160.0 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025Gallons Per Capita Day (gpcd)Rosemount Water Usage Residential GPCD C/I/I GPCD Total GPCD Linear (Residential GPCD)Linear (C/I/I GPCD)Linear (Total GPCD) Appendix 9 7 ATTACHMENT 1 Water Sanitary Sewer, Storm Water Usage Rates: Water and Sanitary Sewer User Fees Usage—Based on Quarterly Meter Readings Water Use Residential Quarterly usage (gallons) Rates*: 0 – 12,000 $1.11 12,001 – 24,000 $1.39 24,001 – 48,000 $1.74 >48,000 $2.60 *per thousand gallons Commercial/Industrial Quarterly usage (gallons) Rates*: 0 – 100,000 $1.29 100,001 – 200,000 $1.62 200,001 – 300,000 $2.02 > 300,000 $2.60 *per thousand gallons Irrigation Meters Rates: (Usage for single-family homes with a second meter are added together, then put through the tiers. All other irrigation meters will be charged the flat rate of $2.60/1,000 gallons.) $2.60/1000 gallons Water Fixed Charge $12.28 each account Sanitary Sewer Use Charge $1.80/1000 gallons Sanitary Sewer Fixed Charge $23.50 each account Water Surcharge and Meter Maintenance Per Chart Below (Quarterly) Meter Size Surcharge Meter Maintenance** Single Family - 3/4" $ 8.80 0 Multi-Family - 3/4" $ 6.80 0 1" (*)$ 13.50 $ 6.25 1 ½” (*) $ 28.00 $ 11.25 2" (*) $ 31.50 $ 18.15 3" (*) $ 47.00 $ 26.25 4" (*) $ 70.00 $ 45.00 6" (*) $154.00 $100.00 8” (*) $170.00 $130.00 *Commercial, Industrial or Institutional/Commercial and Industrial are taxable **Meter maintenance applied to Base Fixed Water Charge based on meter size. Sewer Only Users $50.00 per quarter per SAC unit Irrigation Meters: Exempt from Sanitary Sewer Usage charges. Pays Water Usage charge, Fixed Water charge by meter size and Surcharge by meter size. Appendix 10 Appendix 10: List of Hyperlinks for proposed restrictions Lawn Watering: http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us/index.aspx?NID=258 Appendix 11 Instructions 9/30/15 Minnesota Water Supply Plan Instructions & Checklist 2016-2018 Public Water Suppliers All public water suppliers in Minnesota that operate a public water distribution system, serve more than 1,000 people and/or all cities in the seven-county metropolitan area, must have a water supply plan approved by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Water supply plans must be updated and submitted to the DNR for approval every ten years. This requirement, in place since the 1990s, is designed to encourage communities to deal proactively with providing sustainable drinking water for citizens, businesses, and industry.1 These plan updates will be due between 2016 and 2018; the DNR will be notifying communities of the due date for each specific city water plan. All sections of the water supply plan must be completed in order for the plan to be approved. A checklist is included with these instructions on pages 4 and 5. What is New? •Plans can be submitted through Minnesota DNR Permitting and Reporting System (MPARS). •DNR Hydrologists will be meeting with clusters of communities rather than individually. Inthe Twin Cities metropolitan area, Metropolitan Council staff will also provide technicalassistance and in Greater MN, staff from MN Rural Waters Association will join us. •There is a greater emphasis on water conservation/demand reduction and on developingrate structures that encourage conservation. •Simplified reporting: More tables with check boxes; less writing required. •Part 4 of the plan, required for communities in the seven-county metropolitan area, nowreflects the Twin Cities metropolitan area Master Water Supply Plan •Resources - can be found at www.mndnr.gov/watersupplyplans including copies of samplerate structures, conservation ordinances, education programs, water level recordingforms, certificate of adoption, and other items as well as links to useful conservationweb pages. Submitting a Plan for DNR Approval Preferably, please submit plans electronically to: https://webapps11.dnr.state.mn.us/mpars/public/authentication/login Steps for electronic submission: 1.Follow the above link and log into MPARS.2.From your Account Overview Permits Tab, click on your primary Water Supply PermitNumber.3.Then click on Communication Tab.4.Click New Message to Hydrologist (under Communication heading) 1 see Minn. Stat. 103G.291 1 Instructions 9/30/15 5.Type in the Subject heading and a brief message 6.Click Add Attachment7.Under Document Type drop down, select Water Supply Plan8.Click choose file and attach your Water Supply Plan - Naming convention:WSP_cityname_permitnumber_date.docPlease include list of all permit numbers associated with this Water Supply in the messagefield9.Hit Send at the bottom of the pageOr submit completed plans to: DNR Waters Water Permit Programs Supervisor 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155-4025 Plans for communities in the seven-county metropolitan area will be automatically shared with the Metropolitan Council. 2 Instructions 9/30/15 If you have questions regarding water supply plans, please call (651) 259-5034 or e-mail questions to wateruse.dnr@state.mn.us Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Requirements All communities that operate a public water supply system within the seven county Twin Cities metropolitan area, even those with fewer than 1,000 people, must complete a local water supply plan and submit it to the Metropolitan Council, adjacent communities, and the county for review and comment. These plans include completion of Part 4 of the local water supply plan template. Please submit plans to DNR Ecological and Water Resources Division as described above. Plans for communities in the seven-county metropolitan area will be shared with the Metropolitan Council. Final Plan Adoption by City or Board Communities give the plan preliminary approval subject to DNR review and, for communities in the seven-county metropolitan area, by Metropolitan Council review. If the DNR or Metropolitan Council have recommended changes, the community should incorporate them into the plan or respond before the plan is finally adopted. Communities and utility boards must officially adopt the plan after it is approved by the DNR and, for metro communities, reviewed by Metropolitan Council. A template of a city certification of adoption is found at www.mndnr.gov/watersupplyplans 3 Instructions 9/30/15 Certification of Plan Adoption Date: 6