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