HomeMy WebLinkAboutUtilities - Water Supply FINALUTILITIES: WATER SUPPLY
Water Supply Chapter
2040 Comprehensive Plan
Rosemount, Minnesota
ROSEM 146456 | May 2, 2019
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 2
Contents
1 Introduction ................................................................. 3
1.1 Purpose ................................................................................................. 3
2 Existing Water System Facilities ................................. 4
2.1 Supply .................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Treatment .............................................................................................. 5
2.3 Distribution ............................................................................................. 6
2.4 Storage .................................................................................................. 6
3 Population and Community Growth ............................ 7
3.1 Population and Relationship to 2040
Comprehensive Plan.............................................................................. 7
4 Water Requirements ................................................... 8
4.1 Variations in Customer’s Demand & Pumpage ...................................... 8
4.2 Water Consumption History ................................................................... 9
4.3 Hourly Demand Fluctuations .................................................................. 9
4.4 Water System Demand Projections ..................................................... 10
4.5 Water Needs for Fire Protection .......................................................... 11
5 Adequacy of Existing Water System ........................ 13
5.1 Water Supply, Storage and Distribution
Relationship ......................................................................................... 13
5.2 Supply (Wells and Pumps) ................................................................... 13
5.3 Storage ................................................................................................ 15
5.4 Distribution System .............................................................................. 15
6 Water System Improvements ................................... 16
6.1 Treated Water Supply .......................................................................... 16
6.2 Storage ................................................................................................ 16
6.3 Distribution System .............................................................................. 17
6.4 Potential Service to Coates .................................................................. 17
6.5 Phasing of Improvements .................................................................... 17
6.6 Cost Recovery System ........................................................................ 18
7 Additional Recommendations ................................... 18
7.1 Partnerships and Grants ...................................................................... 18
7.2 Sustainability ........................................................................................ 18
7.3 Infrastructure Improvements ................................................................ 19
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 3
Water Supply Chapter
2040 Comprehensive Plan
Prepared for City of Rosemount, Minnesota
1 Introduction
The City of Rosemount municipal water system consists of nine (9) active water supply wells, four
(4) elevated storage tanks, and approximately 136 miles of transmission and distribution water
mains, ranging in size from four (4) inches up to 36 inches in diameter. The distribution system is
comprised of two pressure zones (East and W est) with pressure maintained by the water level in
the elevated storage tanks.
Rosemount provides potable water to multiple large and small-scale industrial customers and
numerous commercial and residential customers. With proper planning and coordination, the
municipal water system facilities will be prepared for short-term and long-term community needs.
The City is expecting continued growth and development throughout the planning period.
Therefore, proper planning is essential to coordinate the expansion of municipal water system
facilities to meet the short-term and long-term needs of the community.
1.1 Purpose
Sound engineering and long range planning have guided the development and expansion of
Rosemount’s municipal water system since its inception. Prior reports have provided detailed
engineering evaluations, resulting in the orderly, efficient, and cost effective expansion of
Rosemount’s water system. A complete review of the entire water system was last conducted in
2007. Numerous focused updates to the 2007 plan have been made to address more specific
pending development. In 2016, the City undertook a thorough review of the Eastern Service
Area.
The City’s 2016 Local Water Supply Plan (Appendix A) meets the minimum planning
requirements of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Metropolitan
Council. The 2016 Water Supply Plan details historic and projected water use, the adequacy of
the existing water system, water conservation, resource sustainability, and emergency
preparedness.
The purpose of this Water Supply Chapter is to summarize the results of previous engineering
studies and the 2016 Water Supply Plan in light of Rosemount’s 2040 Local Comprehensive
Plan.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 4
2 Existing Water System Facilities
The City’s drinking water system provides water for domestic and fire protection uses. The water
system f acilities operated and maintained by the City include:
• Nine (9) active groundwater wells;
• Four (4) elevated water storage tanks;
• Water system controls; and
• 136 miles of water transmission and distribution system pipes, valves and hydrants.
The water system consists of two interconnected pressure zones. The W est Service Area serves
the majority of the City, including the downtown area. The W est Service Area operates at a high
water (overflow) elevation of 1105.0 ft above mean sea level (AMSL).
Rosemount's East Side water system (refer to Existing System map in Appendix C) was originally
constructed by the University of Minnesota (U of M), consisting of Rural Wells 1 and 2, and a
looped distribution system of 6 inch and 4 inch water mains. The original system provided
domestic water use only.
The U of M’s rural system was connected to the City of Rosemount’s system in 2001 with the
addition of 16 inch mains and a new 500,000 gallon East Side elevated reservoir. Trunk water
mains extended along US Hwy 52 and MN Hwy 55 provide water service to Flint Hills Resources
and some of the adjacent industrial customers. Since the ground elevations in eastern
Rosemount are lower than the west side, a new pressure zone was created in the east side. The
high water (overflow) elevation of the East Side water tower is 1050.0 AMSL. Water can flow
from the west side service area to the east side service area via a pressure reducing valve
located near Rural Wells 1 and 2.
The general location and layout of the water system facilities are illustrated on the Proposed
Trunk Water System Maps (East and West Systems) in Appendix C. This section presents a
summary of the design and operating characteristics of the existing water system components.
2.1 Supply
2.1.1 Groundwater Resources
Water is supplied from nine (9) municipal wells located in separate well fields. The water supply
wells vary in depth ranging from 400 to 507 feet, and draw water from the Jordan aquifer. Table 1
summarizes well data for each of the City’s active production wells.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 5
Table 1 – Existing City Water Production Wells
Well Name
Unique
Well
Number
Depth
(ft)
Capacity
(gpm)
Capacity
(MGD) Service Area Aquifer
RR #1 457167 400 500 0.72 East Jordan
RR #2 474335 400 500 0.72 East Jordan
Well No. 7 112212 490 1000 1.44 West Jordan
Well No. 8 509060 498 1100 1.58 West Jordan
Well No. 9 554248 481 1200 1.73 West Jordan
Well No. 12 706804 475 1500 2.16 West Jordan
Well No. 14 722623 485 1300 1.87 West Jordan
Well No. 15 753663 487 1300 1.87 West Jordan
Well No. 16 805374 507 2000 2.88 West Jordan
Total 10,400 15.0
Firm Capacity 7,900 11.4
The firm capacity listed in Table 1 is defined as the system capacity minus the capacity of the
largest pump in each service area. This is the capacity that can be provided consistently, even
during maintenance when a well pump might be out of service.
2.1.2 Emergency Interconnections
During emergencies, water can also be supplied to the City of Rosemount through system
interconnect with the City of Apple Valley. Closed valves at the interconnect locations prevent
water from passing between the two systems under normal operation. During an emergency, the
valves could be opened in order to maintain adequate water supply.
2.1.3 Wastewater Reuse
In addition to the existing groundwater supply currently in use, the Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services (MCES) is studying the possibility of reusing wastewater from the Empire
Treatment Plant. This would entail a level of treatment yet to be established at the MCES lift
station located at the site of the former Rosemount Wastewater Treatment Plant. It is possible
that this water could then be used for major industrial/commercial purposes in the area in the
CSAH 42/US Hwy 52 vicinity. Use of this water supply would require a long term commitment in
order for the infrastructure to be constructed.
2.2 Treatment
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has set primary (enforceable)
standards, for drinking water. Rosemount’s water is tested regularly and is in conformance with
primary standards. The USEPA also has set secondary standards (non-enforceable
recommendations) for aesthetic water quality. The secondary standards are set to minimize the
potentially negative aesthetic qualities (such as color, taste, odors) of water containing high levels
of these contaminants. The secondary standard for iron and manganese in drinking water is set
at 0.3 milligrams per liter (mg/L) and 0.05 mg/L, respectively. Water from some of Rosemount’s
wells exceed the secondary standards for iron and manganese, however the City has managed
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 6
to minimize customer complaints by blending water from the wells and adding polyphosphates
(for sequestering iron and manganese) at the supply wells. Rosemount currently disinfects the
source water by chlorination at the well sites. Additional treatment includes fluoride (to prevent
tooth decay).
Existing water quality and treatment are discussed in more detail in the Adequacy of Facilities
section of this report. Appendix B provides a summary of the current EPA Water Quality
Requirements.
2.3 Distribution
The City water distribution system provides a means of transporting and distributing water from
the supply sources to customers and other points of usage. The distribution system must be
capable of supplying adequate quantities of water at reasonable pressures throughout the
service area under a range of operating conditions. Furthermore, the distribution system must be
able to provide not only uniform distribution of water during normal and peak demand conditions,
but must also be capable of delivering adequate water supplies for fire protection purposes. The
current water main size inventory is summarized in Table 2.
Table 2 – Existing Water Distribution System Summary
Pipe Size Length (ft) Length (Miles) % of total
Unknown 8,422 1.6 1.2
4-inch 17,014 3.2 2.4
6-inch 168,117 31.8 23.4
8-inch 285,672 54.1 39.8
12-inch 121,272 23.0 16.9
14-inch 297 0.1 0.0
16-inch 110,711 21.0 15.4
18-inch 100 0.0 0.0
24-inch 5,420 1.0 0.8
36-inch 989 0.2 0.1
Total 718,014 136.0 100%
Notes: Hydrant leads not included
Source: Rosemount GIS
The Rosemount water system is comprised of about 136 miles of water main ranging in size from
4 inches up to 36 inches in diameter. The existing distribution system is shown in the map in
Appendix C at the end of this report
2.4 Storage
The Rosemount water distribution system is currently operated using elevated storage tanks.
Water from these facilities is fed into the system by gravity. The City currently has four elevated
storage tanks that have a combined storage volume of 3,500,000 gallons. Table 3 summaries the
water storage facilities within the Rosemount water system.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 7
Table 3 – Existing Water Storage Facilities
Facility Name Year Constructed Total Volume
(gallon)
Usable Volume
(gallon)
Overflow
Elev. Style
Chippendale Tower 1972 500,000 500,000 1105 Elevated
Connemara Tower 1988 1,000,000 1,000,000 1105 Elevated
Bacardi Tower 2007 1,500,000 1,500,000 1105 Elevated
East Side Tower 1998 500,000 500,000 1050 Elevated
Total 3,500,000 3,500,000
Water storage facilities are important to water systems, as they help supply water during peak
hour demands. During times of peak demand, water is withdrawn from the storage tanks to
provide adequate pressures throughout the system and to minimize the pumping capacity
required and the size of transmission mains throughout the City. Water stored in elevated tanks
also provides system reliability during power outages, fire events, and well pump outages.
3 Population and Community Growth
In order to understand the requirements of the future water system, anticipated water use
characteristics must be determined. This involves first understanding how water is currently used
and then developing an estimate of how water might be used in the future. This section
summarizes the primary assumptions regarding future growth of the City’s water service area.
The present and future needs and characteristics of the identified service area have a direct
impact on the need for expansion or reconfiguration of water system facilities. Therefore, the
conclusions discussed in this section were used as a primary basis for projecting future water
needs, evaluating the adequacy of existing water system facilities, and identifying needs for
future water system improvements.
3.1 Population and Relationship to 2040 Comprehensive Plan
In many cases, there is a close relationship between a community's population and total water
consumption. As such, future water sales can be expected to reflect future changes in service
area population. Similarly, commercial and industrial water consumption will tend to vary
proportionately with the growth of the community. However, proportionally increased water use
and population growth can vary greatly depending on the specific characteristics of a community.
For the purposes of water system planning, City staff estimated the population served with
municipal water in each service area as shown in Table 4. These projections through 2040 are
consistent with Rosemount’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. For water system planning purposes,
City staff estimated potential service areas beyond the formally adopted 2040 Plan. The following
projections assume growth to occur within both the East Side and West Side Service Areas. The
projected population served by municipal water for the City of Rosemount is summarized in
Table 4.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 8
Table 4 – Projected Served Population
Year
Total
City
Population
Total
Population
Served (1)
East Side Only
Service Area
Population
Served (2)
West Side Only
Service Area
Population
Served (1)
2016 23,544 60 23,484
2017 23,857 60 23,797
2018 24,210 60 24,150
2019 25,011 60 24,951(3)
2020 25,380 60 25,320
2025 28,562 60 28,502
2030 36,421 500 35,921
2040 46,843 1,000 45,843(4)
Ultimate 98,000 28,000 70,000
Notes:
(1) Source: City Estimates
(2) Assume 20 homes currently served by U of M Rural Water System, but not served by municipal
sanitary sewer system
(3) Assumes Umore development begins
(4) 38,100 per Met Council, plus Umore Phases 1-5
4 Water Requirements
Projections of customer demands and service area serve as the basis for capital improvement
planning. Several standard methods were used in this study to project water supply and storage
needs based on estimates of population and community land use growth. This section
summarizes the methodology used and the results of these projections.
4.1 Variations in Customer’s Demand & Pumpage
Water demands are variable and change throughout the day, month, and year. Typically, two
water demand days are used for water system planning – average day and maximum day.
• Average Day Demand is defined as the total volume of water pumped throughout the
year divided by the number of days in the year. It is typically recommended that a water
system’s available water storage be equal to or exceed the average daily demand.
• Maximum Day Demand is defined as the maximum volume of water pumped during a
single day in a given year.
The maximum day demand conditions typically occur during the summer, when outdoor water
use is at its highest level of the year. A summary of recent MD levels is summarized in Table 5.
The maximum day demand is defined as the amount of water pumped during a single day of the
year with the highest water usage, and is often expressed as a ratio of the annual average day
pumpage. The maximum day pumpage is of particular importance to water system planning,
because water supply facilities are sized to meet this demand.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 9
4.2 Water Consumption History
An analysis of past water consumption characteristics is performed by reviewing historical water
use data. The data analyzed includes historical pumping records as well as select historical water
billing data.
Average Day (AD) water use was analyzed to develop overall water use trends. Maximum Day
(MD) water consumption was analyzed for the previous 10 years to develop an understanding of
maximum day peaking factors (refer to July 2016 Water Supply Plan contained in Appendix C).
Peaking factors are defined as the ratio of the maximum day water use to the average day water
use. Projections of future water requirements are based on the results of this analysis coupled
with estimates of population and community growth and future land use.
Table 5 – Recent Historical Water Use
Year Population Served Total Water Pumped (MGY) Water Average Day Water Pumped (MGD) Max Day Water Pumped (MGD) MD/AD Ratio Avg Day Per Capita Water Use (gpd) Max Day Per Capita Water Use (gpd) 2007 22,474 937.5 2.57 na Na 114 na
2008 22,750 910.4 2.49 6.6 2.66 110 292
2009 23,244 937.9 2.57 6.5 2.52 111 278
2010 23,350 825.6 2.26 5.2 2.32 97 224
2011 22,239 855.8 2.34 6.3 2.67 105 281
2012 22,432 973.1 2.67 6.9 2.58 119 307
2013 22,711 880.6 2.41 6.4 2.64 106 280
2014 23,044 815.0 2.23 6.4 2.86 97 278
*2015 23,244 804.0 2.20 6.1 2.75 95 260
2016 23,574 920.1 2.52 6.0 2.47 107 255
2017 23,965 923.7 2.53 6.9 2.72 106 288
*2018 815.1 2.23 5.2 2.32
*Note: 2015 figures are estimates except for Max Day. 2018 Actual pumped water is estimated due to
well meter failure. Population Served not available.
Source: DNR Water Use Records, City Records
Based on this analysis, the existing MD demand is determined to be 6.9 MGD (million gallons per
day).
4.3 Hourly Demand Fluctuations
Water demands are variable throughout the day and can vary depending on common use among
users. Over the course of a given day, water uses often follow a diurnal demand distribution.
Table 6 represents a typical daily demand distribution for residential water use. Commercial and
industrial uses are usually more constrained and predictable. The residential demand graph
depicts low water demand during the late evening and early morning periods. As the morning
progresses, there is an increase in demand as indoor water use increases when people are
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 10
preparing for the day. During the summer this morning demand is also impacted by automatic
lawn sprinkler systems that are typically operated in the morning. During late morning to early
afternoon there is a slight recovery prior to a second peak use in the early evening after people
arrive home from their daily routine.
Most water systems are designed to meet the maximum daily demand rate with supply facilities
such as wells, treatment processes, and pumping facilities. Storage reservoirs are used to
supplement the supply of treated water during the peak usage hours within each day. During
lower usage periods, the system is able to produce water in excess of the demand. This excess
is used to fill the storage reservoirs. When the demand rate exceeds the production rate, the
stored water in the reservoirs is used to make up for the deficit.
Table 6 – Typical Diurnal Demand Curve
Time Demand
Multiplier Time Demand
Multiplier
12:00 AM 45% 12:00 PM 110%
1:00 AM 40% 1:00 PM 103%
2:00 AM 45% 2:00 PM 103%
3:00 AM 50% 3:00 PM 105%
4:00 AM 70% 4:00 PM 110%
5:00 AM 115% 5:00 PM 120%
6:00 AM 155% 6:00 PM 118%
7:00 AM 165% 7:00 PM 110%
8:00 AM 160% 8:00 PM 100%
9:00 AM 145% 9:00 PM 90%
10:00 AM 130% 10:00 PM 75%
11:00 AM 115% 11:00 PM 63%
Source: AWWA M32, Computer Modeling of Water Distribution Systems,
2012, American Water Works Association
4.4 Water System Demand Projections
Estimates of future water use are established through a review of future land use and population
projections. For the purposes of this study, City staff provided estimates of served population in
the East, West, and UMORE areas to aid in water system capital improvement planning.
Future water use projections are made using population projections and historic per capita water
usage (Table 5). Historic per capita usage is then adjusted based on future land uses. This land
use adjustment is especially important in the East Side Service Area, where the City is planning
for a higher percentage of commercial/industrial uses.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 11
4.4.1 Summary of Projected Water Demands
Table 7 provides a summary of the projected water demand.
Table 7 – Projected Water Demand
Year Population
Served
Average Day
Demand
(MGD)
Max Day
Demand
West Side1
(MGD)
Max Day
Demand
East Side2
(MGD)
Total
Maximum Day
Demand
(MGD)
2018 24,210 2.72 8.84 0.23 9.07
2020 25,380 2.93 9.50 0.27 9.77
2025 28,562 3.52 11.3 0.42 11.7
2030 36,421 4.12 13.1 0.60 13.7
2035 41,632 4.76 13.1 0.90 14.0
2040 46,843 5.40 13.8 1.20 15.0
Ultimate 98,000 13.7 21.1 13.1 34.2
Source: DNR Water Use Records, City of Rosemount
Notes: 1Source: WSB Tech Memos, SEH Tech Memo
2Source: SEH 2016 East Side Utilities Study
4.5 Water Needs for Fire Protection
In addition to the water supply requirements for domestic, commercial, and industrial
consumption, water system planning for fire protection requirements is an important
consideration. In most instances, water main sizes are designed specifically to supply adequate
fire flow.
Guidelines for determining fire flow requirements are developed based on recommendations
offered by the Insurance Services Office (ISO), which is responsible for evaluating and classifying
municipalities for fire insurance rating purposes. When a community evaluation is conducted by
ISO, the water system is evaluated for its capacity to provide needed fire flow at a specific
location and will depend on land use characteristics and the types of properties to be protected.
However, in high value districts, fire flow requirements of up to 3,500 gpm can be expected.
Therefore, for the purposes of this study, a basic fire flow requirement of 3,500 gpm for three
hours was used for establishing water supply and storage requirements. Based on current
insurance classification guidelines, this basic fire flow requirement is not expected to change over
the planning period.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 12
Other typical fire flow requirements based on land use are outlined in Table 8.
Table 8 – Typical Fire Flow Requirements
Land Use
Building
Separation
(feet)
Available fire flow
@ 20 psi (gpm)
Single & Two Family Residential >100 500
Single & Two Family Residential 30-100 750
Single & Two Family Residential 11-30 1000
Single & Two Family Residential <10 1500
Multiple Family Residential Complexes - 2,000 to 3,000+
Average Density Commercial - 1,500 to 2,500+
High Value Commercial - 2,500 to 3,500+
Light Industrial - 2,000 to 3,500
Heavy Industrial - 2,500 to 3,500+
Source: Insurance Services Office
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 13
5 Adequacy of Existing Water System
Water systems are analyzed, planned, and designed primarily through the application of basic
hydraulic principles. Some important factors that must be considered when performing this
analysis include:
• Location and capacity of supply facilities;
• Location, sizing, and design of storage facilities;
• Location, magnitude, and variability of customer demands;
• Water system geometry and geographic topography;
• Minimum and maximum pressure requirements; and,
• Land use characteristics with respect to fire protection requirements.
The system was evaluated based on the following standard water industry criteria:
• Pressure;
• Flow Capacity;
• Reliability;
• Supply; and,
• Storage.
Prior engineering studies have evaluated the Rosemount water system in detail to determine the
adequacy of the system to supply existing and future water needs and to supply water for fire
protection purposes. The following comments regarding the adequacy of the existing water
system are drawn from those reports. In general, the existing water system operates well. The
City has adequate well supply and treatment capacity, and the existing piping network and
storage facilities generally provide adequate flows and pressures.
5.1 Water Supply, Storage and Distribution Relationship
Water demands over the course of a Maximum Day event are met from a combination of water
supplied from the wells and water drawn from the water towers. Tower levels are drawn down
during the day, when the demand is highest, and are refilled at night, when demands are lowest.
Typically, water supply must equal 100% of the Maximum Day Demand, and the storage
reservoirs must have sufficient capacity to supply the peak hour demands.
The water distribution system pipes must be sized to convey a wide range of flow rates; such as
tank filling, peak hour demands, and fire flows.
5.2 Supply (Wells and Pumps)
5.2.1 Supply Capacity
The firm capacity of the existing wells (11.4 MGD) exceeds the expected 2018 MD demand.
Therefore, the City has adequate well capacity to meet existing water demands. Since siting,
design, permitting, and construction of new water supply wells and storage can take two (2)
years, the City has a goal of adding wells and storage facilities generally concurrent with
development. This approach provides the City with a safety factor to know that adequate supply
and storage is available (or under construction) for all platted parcels – whether or not they are
immediately developed and connected to the water system.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 14
5.2.2 Water Quality
The water quality from all wells meets all enforceable EPA Primary Drinking Water Standards,
and is regularly tested by City staff and Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). Water from
Wells 12, 14, 15, and 16 contain iron and manganese in excess of the recommended Secondary
Standard. Although not a health hazard, iron and manganese levels in excess of the Secondary
Standards can result in customer aesthetic complaints (red, or black colored water, staining of
fixtures or clothing). The City currently manages the iron and manganese in these wells through
“sequestering” agents (polyphosphates). These polyphosphates keep the iron and manganese in
suspension, thus preventing the iron and manganese from settling out in the distribution system.
In the future, if polyphosphate treatment is ineffective, the City may consider adding a water
filtration/treatment system to remove iron and manganese.
Initial sampling of water quality during the construction of Well 16 indicates that Well 16 may
have radium concentrations slightly above the EPA standard for radium levels. The City will blend
the water from Well 16 with water from Well 14 to provide water to all residents that is below the
EPA radium standard. Additional testing will be conducted by the City as the well is placed into
service. The City has been working closely with the MDH to sample, test and plan the operational
strategy for placing Well 16 in service. At this time, it is not anticipated that radium removal
treatment will be necessary, but the City and MDH will continue to closely monitor the well. As
treatment options are considered, radium should be included as a possible contaminant to
address.
The City has completed and continues to actively implement a Wellhead Protection Plan
(WHPP). The goal of the WHPP is to prevent contaminants from entering the area that
contributes to the aquifer where the City’s water supply is withdrawn. The WHPP is updated
every 10 years, or when a new well is added.
5.2.3 Resource Sustainability
Static and pumping aquifer water levels are recorded and trended at each of the City’s supply
wells (refer to Water Supply Plan for details). Long term trends indicate a potential declining
aquifer level in the region. Regional planning summarized in the Metropolitan Council’s Master
Water Supply Plan suggests the following long-term concerns for a sustainable water supply in
the Rosemount area:
• Potential for water use conflicts between public and private wells.
• Potential for significant decline in aquifer water levels.
• Potential for impacts of groundwater pumping on surface water features and ecosystems.
• Significant vulnerability to contamination.
• Uncertainty about aquifer productivity and extent.
The City has been actively performing engineering and scientific studies and working with the
DNR and MDH prior to siting new wells. As each new well is installed, new aquifer and water
quality data becomes available for further analysis for use in siting the next well. The last
thorough well siting study was performed in 2005. It would be appropriate to update this study to
account for new wells constructed and revised water use projections, particularly in light of future
development south of CSAH 42 in the UMore area.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 15
5.3 Storage
The City’s four (4) steel elevated storage tanks are strategically located to provide adequate
pressure and fire flows to the system. The total available storage volume of 3.5 million gallons is
adequate for current needs.
5.4 Distribution System
5.4.1 Water System Pressures
Existing static water pressures are shown on the map in Appendix C. Pressure between 50
pounds per square inch (psi) and 80 psi are generally considered desirable. Pressures lower than
40 psi may trigger low pressure complaints, and customers with pressures above 80 psi should
be fitted with in-building pressure reducing valves to provide appropriate pressure.
Pressures are generally adequate throughout the system. Portions of the northwestern area of
the City have lower pressures, while the eastern portion of the City tends to have some higher
pressure areas. Isolated areas of low and high pressures exist throughout the system, however
the City does not regularly receive water pressure complaints.
The City should identify and map customers with in-home pressure reducing valves or in-home
booster stations for future reference.
5.4.2 Available Fire Flow Capabilities
Previous reports have utilized a computer model of the water distribution system to estimate
available fire flows throughout the system. Existing fire flows are generally adequate in the
Western Service Area.
Existing fire flows in the East Service Area are generally adequate where connected to the
recently installed trunk water mains. The existing 4 inch and 6 inch pipes from the Rural System
cannot convey a significant quantity of water required for fire protection. The existing 500,000
gallon East Side water tower cannot fully provide for a 3500gpm fire for 3 hours. In the event of a
large, long duration fire in the East Side, water is available to flow from the West Service to the
East Service area through pressure reducing valves.
Current water system design guidelines call for minimum 6-inch distribution mains to provide
adequate pressures and fire flows throughout the system. The City should continue to program
for replacement of the existing 4-inch mains with larger mains.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 16
6 Water System Improvements
Prior engineering planning studies have laid out a plan for the cost effective expansion of the
City’s water system to meet future growth. The following provides a summary of proposed
improvements and triggers for implementation.
6.1 Treated Water Supply
6.1.1 West Side (Southwest and Northwest) Well Fields
Wells 7, 8, 9, and 12 are in the southwestern portion of the City, while Wells 14, 15, and 16 are
near Barcardi Avenue, north of CSAH 42. Near-term plans are to continue developing the
Northwest Well Field first as new wells are needed, followed by addition of wells in the Southwest
well field. A site for future Well 17 has already been identified and acquired south of Bonaire Path
along Akron Avenue.
If water treatment is needed or desired in the future, it is assumed that there would be a
northwest and southwest water treatment plant.
6.1.2 East Well Field
Prior studies have identified a potential new east well field east of State Highway 52. If water
treatment is needed or desired in the future, an eastern water treatment plant could be
constructed in the east well field.
6.1.3 Water Supply Recommendations
The following is a summary of water supply recommendations.
• Continue to implement the City’s Water Conservation Plan to delay or reduce the need
for additional supply wells.
• Identify and acquire property for future well sites (minimum 150’ x 150’) and water
treatment plant sites (5 to 10 acres) in conjunction with development.
• Provide corridors for raw water piping from the wells to the water treatment plant site.
• Continue to monitor water levels and update groundwater analysis and planning.
• Continue to implement and update the City’s WHPP to protect existing and proposed
water supply.
• Initiate well siting, permitting, planning, design and construction a minimum of two (2)
years before the well is needed.
6.2 Storage
Additional water storage is planned for both the Eastern and Western Service Areas. Preliminary
sizing and locations of future storage has been identified to provide adequate pressures and
flows. Actual implementation of storage additions will be guided by development. Initiate storage
siting (minimum 400’ x 400’ site), planning, design and construction a minimum of two (2) years
prior to needing the storage in service.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 17
6.3 Distribution System
Expansion of the distribution system proceeds with development. The majority of distribution
system pipes added will be eight (8) inch to serve local residential needs, however some of these
pipes will be oversized to serve as the basis of a trunk pipe network that connects the water
supply and storage facilities, and provides large flows required for tank filling, peak hourly usage,
and fire flows.
6.4 Potential Service to Coates
The City of Coates is currently served by private wells, some of which may be experiencing
elevated nitrate levels. Coates is currently working with a consultant to complete a feasibility
study to address the nitrate concerns with the current private wells. One of the potential
recommendations that has been discussed is connecting to the City of Rosemount water
distribution system. In general, it appears that the City of Rosemount could be able to provide
municipal water service to the City of Coates if such service is requested. The details of a
potential connection, rates, capacity and proposed cost sharing mechanisms would need to be
the subject of a future engineering study. Ultimately, the decision would be made by each city’s
leadership.
6.5 Phasing of Improvements
Each year, City staff compare actual water use to projected water use based on current
development plans to prepare the trunk water system Capital Improvement Plan. The following
recommendations for phasing of trunk system improvements should be reviewed with each CIP
planning cycle.
• Continue to expand the water distribution (lateral) system in conjunction with
development.
• Install trunk mains through developments as practical and cost-effective to take
advantage of the lateral benefit of oversizing lateral mains to function as trunk lines also.
• Current well supply capacity is adequate to provide for projected near-term growth (up to
11.3 MGD Maximum Day Demand). The City may wish to consider adding Well 17
slightly before actually required to allow for less construction disruption to residents.
• Provide water supply to serve growth of the East Side service area from the existing
Rural Wells, and supplement from water supplied to the West Side service area (through
pressure reducing valves).
• Current water storage capacity is adequate for projected near-term growth. Acquire sites
in conjunction with development plans. Consider construction of the storage facility in
advance of development to minimize potential neighborhood complaints.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROS
Page 18
6.6 Cost Recovery System
The City of Rosemount currently recovers the cost of constructing lateral and trunk water system
facilities through a combination of water rates (based on usage), and trunk system charges. In
general, water rates fund the ongoing operation and maintenance of the water system, while the
trunk charge system pays for supply, storage and trunk distribution system pipes. Water rates
and trunk charges are regularly updated based on actual costs and projections.
Recommendations:
• Review the current tiered rate structure as it pertains to high water users and property
owners with irrigation meters.
• Consider reviewing and updating the current Water Availability Charge (WAC).
7 Additional Recommendations
As Rosemount continues to develop, there are additional actions that will provide significant near
term and long term benefits to the residents. Additionally, these steps may reduce the need for
additional infrastructure, reduce cost and protect valuable natural resources.
7.1 Partnerships and Grants
Funding for water system expansion can create challenges to studying other aspects of the
system. As a result, the following recommendations are made:
• Pursue grant opportunities through the MDH to manage and protect the current water
supply
• Work with other partner organizations to maximize opportunities to avoid duplicate work,
improve aquifer understanding, and maximize resource allocation.
• Partner with the residents on water conservation, surface water reuse (i.e. rain barrels,
rain gardens, etc), and native vegetaion as appropriate.
7.2 Sustainability
By insuring that there is a sufficient and safe water supply in the future, it is recommended that
Rosemount consider the following for resource sustainability:
• Continue education efforts aimed at water conservation. This may include community
outreach, utility billing inserts, blog posts, and open house type discussions.
• Review existing public infrastructure that can be improved to promote better efficiency
and reduce system leaks.
• Promote the use of infiltration practices that are essential to aquifer recharge. This
should include new development, redevelopment, public improvements and even private
home owner improvements such as rain gardens.
• Continue to improvement of enforcement of current irrigation ordinances and policies.
• Review the potential for additional restrictions on irrigation and other less essential water
usage.
WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER ROSEMPage 19
7.3 Infrastructure Improvements In addition to the preceding recommendations, Rosemount should consider the following factors when planning, designing and constructing/reconstructing public improvements: Implement new standards and smart technology as it becomes available to insure that the long term financial viability and efficiency of the system. Monitor existing infrastructure and ensure that replacement/reconstruction is planned as appropriate to reduce repair, maintenance and operating costs. Review and adopt as appropriate best management practices from other communities. Calibrate the current water system model on a periodic basis to insure that decision making is performed with the best available information. Continue coordination as appropriate with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services for wastewater reuse.
Maps
Figure 1 – Existing Water System
Figure 2 – Ultimate Water System
Figure 3 – Static Water Pressure
@?@?!!
@?
!R
!R
!R
!R
@?
@?
@?
@?
@?@?
@?
@?
@?
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!)p
?ØA@
G±WX
?§A@
SÈ
GÑWX
G¸WX
GªWX
G¥WX
)p
?ØA@
G±WX
G±WX
?§A@ )p
G¥WX
Water Distribution System
October 2018
F00.5 10.25 Mile
MXD: T:\Project\CommDev\CompPlan\2018Update\FinalDrafts\WaterDistributionSystem.mxd PDF: I:\GIS\Map_Library\CommDev\CompPlan\2018Update\FinalDrafts
!!Manhole
@?Monitoring W ell
@?Production W ell
!R Reservoir
Water Main
ULTIMATE WATER SYSTEM MAP
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*#*#*#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
3Q
3Q 3Q
NNNN
IIIUT
D
D
D
D
IIIUT
D
D
D
D
IIIUT
D
D
D
D
IIIUT
D
D
D
D
IIIUT
D
D
D
D
IIIUT
D
D
D
D
IIIUT
D
D
D
D
IIIUT
D
D
D
D
ChippendaleTower
ConnameraTower
BacardiTower
East SideTower
3535 VADNAIS CENTER DR.ST. PAUL, MN 55110PHONE: (651) 490-2000FAX: (888) 908-8166TF: (800) 325-2055www.sehinc.comPath: S:\PT\R\ROSEM\146456\5-final-dsgn\51-drawings\90-GIS\MXDs\Maps\Figure X - Ultimate Water System.mxdRosemount, MN
Map by:Projection: Dakota County CoordinatesSource: Dakota County, City of Rosemount, SEH
Project: ROSEM 135036Print Date: 4/5/2019
This map is neith er a legally recorded map nor a survey ma p and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information, and data gathered from various sources listed on this map and is to be used for reference purposes only. SEH doe s not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and SEH doe s not represent that the GIS Data can be u sed for navigational, tracking, or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. T he user of this map acknowledges that S EH shall not beliable for any dama ges which arise out of the user's acce ss or use of data provided.
Legend
IIIUT
D
D
D
D Future Tank
IIIUT
D
D
D
D Existing Tank
N PRV
3Q Future WTP
#*Existing Well
#*Future Well
Future Trunk Water Main
Pressure Zone BoundaryExisting Water Main
4-Inch
6-Inch
8-Inch
12-Inch
14-Inch
16-Inch
E A S T P R E S S U R E Z O N EWEST P R E S S U R E Z O N E
0 3,6001,800
Feet
I Draft
STATIC WATER PRESSURE
Empire
GreyCloudIsland
Nininge r
Vermillion
Coates
CottageGrove
AppleValley
Eagan
InverGroveHeights
Lake ville
RosemountRobert Tr SCourthouse Blvd
US Hwy 52Co
urthouseBlvd
Hastings Tr
3535 VADNAIS CENTER DR.ST. PAUL, MN 55110PHONE: (651) 490-2000FAX: (888) 908-8166TF: (800) 325-2055www.sehinc.comPath: \\sp3020-1\projects\PT\R\Rosem\135036\5-final-dsgn\51-drawings\90-GIS\MXDs\Water\Overall Static Pressure Map.mxdRosemount, MN
Map by:Projection: Dakato County CoordinatesSource: Dakato County, City of Rosemount, SEH
Project: ROSEM 135036Print Date: 8/21/2018
This map is neith er a legally recorded map nor a survey ma p and is not intended to be used as o ne. This map is a compilation of records, information, and data gathered from vario us sources listed on this map and is to b e used for reference purposes only. SEH does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and SEH does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking, o r any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. The user of this map acknowledges that SEH shall not beliable for any dama ges which arise out of the user's acce ss or use of data provided.
Legend
Pres. Zone Bound.
Municipal Boundary
Static Water Pressure
40 - 49
50 - 59
60 - 69
70 - 79
80 - 89
90 - 99
0 3,5001,750
Feet
I 2040 WATER SUPPLY CHAPTER
Appendix A
MNDNR Water Supply Plan
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 B
Water Quality Requirements
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
Contaminant MCL or TT1
(mg/L)2
Potential health effects from long-term3 exposure above the MCL
Common sources of contaminant in drinking water Public Health Goal (mg/L)2
Acrylamide TT4 Nervous system or blood
problems; increased risk of cancer
Added to water during sewage/
wastewater treatment zero
Alachlor 0.002
Eye, liver, kidney, or spleen
problems; anemia; increased risk
of cancer
Runoff from herbicide used on row
crops zero
Alpha/photon
emitters
15 picocuries
per Liter
(pCi/L)
Increased risk of cancer
Erosion of natural deposits of certain
minerals that are radioactive and
may emit a form of radiation known
as alpha radiation
zero
Antimony 0.006 Increase in blood cholesterol;
decrease in blood sugar
Discharge from petroleum refineries;
fire retardants; ceramics; electronics;
solder 0.006
Arsenic 0.010
Skin damage or problems with
circulatory systems, and may have
increased risk of getting cancer
Erosion of natural deposits; runoff
from orchards; runoff from glass &
electronics production wastes 0
Asbestos
(fibers >10
micrometers)
7 million
fibers per Liter
(MFL)
Increased risk of developing
benign intestinal polyps
Decay of asbestos cement in water
mains; erosion of natural deposits 7 MFL
Atrazine 0.003 Cardiovascular system or
reproductive problems
Runoff from herbicide used on row
crops 0.003
Barium 2 Increase in blood pressure
Discharge of drilling wastes; discharge
from metal refineries; erosion
of natural deposits 2
Benzene 0.005 Anemia; decrease in blood
platelets; increased risk of cancer
Discharge from factories; leaching
from gas storage tanks and landfills zero
Benzo(a)pyrene
(PAHs)0.0002 Reproductive difficulties;
increased risk of cancer
Leaching from linings of water storage
tanks and distribution lines zero
Beryllium 0.004 Intestinal lesions
Discharge from metal refineries and
coal-burning factories; discharge
from electrical, aerospace, and
defense industries
0.004
Beta photon
emitters
4 millirems
per year Increased risk of cancer
Decay of natural and man-made
deposits of certain minerals that are
radioactive and may emit forms of
radiation known as photons and beta
radiation
zero
Bromate 0.010 Increased risk of cancer Byproduct of drinking water
disinfection zero
Cadmium 0.005 Kidney damage
Corrosion of galvanized pipes; erosion
of natural deposits; discharge
from metal refineries; runoff from
waste batteries and paints
0.005
Carbofuran 0.04 Problems with blood, nervous
system, or reproductive system
Leaching of soil fumigant used on rice
and alfalfa 0.04
LEGEND
DISINFECTANT DISINFECTION
BYPRODUCT INORGANIC
CHEMICAL
MICROORGANISM ORGANIC
CHEMICAL RADIONUCLIDES
LEGEND
DISINFECTANT DISINFECTION
BYPRODUCT INORGANIC
CHEMICAL
MICROORGANISM ORGANIC
CHEMICAL RADIONUCLIDES
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations EPA 816-F-09-004 | MAY 2009
Contaminant MCL or TT1
(mg/L)2
Potential health effects
from long-term3 exposure
above the MCL
Common sources of contaminant
in drinking water
Public Health
Goal (mg/L)2
Carbon
tetrachloride 0.005 Liver problems; increased risk of
cancer
Discharge from chemical plants and
other industrial activities zero
Chloramines
(as Cl2)MRDL=4.01 Eye/nose irritation; stomach
discomfort; anemia
Water additive used to control
microbes MRDLG=41
Chlordane 0.002 Liver or nervous system problems;
increased risk of cancer Residue of banned termiticide zero
Chlorine
(as Cl2)MRDL=4.01 Eye/nose irritation; stomach
discomfort
Water additive used to control
microbes MRDLG=41
Chlorine dioxide
(as ClO2)MRDL=0.81
Anemia; infants, young children,
and fetuses of pregnant women:
nervous system effects
Water additive used to control
microbes MRDLG=0.81
Chlorite 1.0
Anemia; infants, young children,
and fetuses of pregnant women:
nervous system effects
Byproduct of drinking water
disinfection 0.8
Chlorobenzene 0.1 Liver or kidney problems Discharge from chemical and
agricultural chemical factories 0.1
Chromium (total)0.1 Allergic dermatitis Discharge from steel and pulp mills;
erosion of natural deposits 0.1
Copper TT5; Action
Level=1.3
Short-term exposure:
Gastrointestinal distress. Long-
term exposure: Liver or kidney
damage. People with Wilson’s
Disease should consult their
personal doctor if the amount of
copper in their water exceeds the
action level
Corrosion of household plumbing
systems; erosion of natural deposits 1.3
Cryptosporidium TT7
Short-term exposure:
Gastrointestinal illness (e.g.,
diarrhea, vomiting, cramps)
Human and animal fecal waste zero
Cyanide
(as free cyanide)0.2 Nerve damage or thyroid
problems
Discharge from steel/metal
factories; discharge from plastic and
fertilizer factories 0.2
2,4-D 0.07 Kidney, liver, or adrenal gland
problems
Runoff from herbicide used on row
crops 0.07
Dalapon 0.2 Minor kidney changes Runoff from herbicide used on
rights of way 0.2
1,2-Dibromo-3-
chloropropane
(DBCP)
0.0002 Reproductive difficulties;
increased risk of cancer
Runoff/leaching from soil fumigant
used on soybeans, cotton,
pineapples, and orchards zero
o-Dichlorobenzene 0.6 Liver, kidney, or circulatory system
problems
Discharge from industrial chemical
factories 0.6
p-Dichlorobenzene 0.075 Anemia; liver, kidney, or spleen
damage; changes in blood
Discharge from industrial chemical
factories 0.075
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.005 Increased risk of cancer Discharge from industrial chemical
factories zero
LEGEND
DISINFECTANT DISINFECTION
BYPRODUCT INORGANIC
CHEMICAL
MICROORGANISM ORGANIC
CHEMICAL RADIONUCLIDES
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations EPA 816-F-09-004 | MAY 2009
Contaminant MCL or TT1
(mg/L)2
Potential health effects
from long-term3 exposure
above the MCL
Common sources of
contaminant in drinking water
Public Health
Goal (mg/L)2
1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.007 Liver problems Discharge from industrial
chemical factories 0.007
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene 0.07 Liver problems Discharge from industrial
chemical factories 0.07
trans-1,2,
Dichloroethylene 0.1 Liver problems Discharge from industrial
chemical factories 0.1
Dichloromethane 0.005 Liver problems; increased risk of
cancer
Discharge from industrial
chemical factories zero
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.005 Increased risk of cancer Discharge from industrial
chemical factories zero
Di(2-ethylhexyl)
adipate 0.4 Weight loss, liver problems, or
possible reproductive difficulties
Discharge from chemical
factories 0.4
Di(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate 0.006 Reproductive difficulties; liver
problems; increased risk of cancer
Discharge from rubber and
chemical factories zero
Dinoseb 0.007 Reproductive difficulties Runoff from herbicide used on
soybeans and vegetables 0.007
Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD)0.00000003 Reproductive difficulties; increased
risk of cancer
Emissions from waste
incineration and other
combustion; discharge from
chemical factories
zero
Diquat 0.02 Cataracts Runoff from herbicide use 0.02
Endothall 0.1 Stomach and intestinal problems Runoff from herbicide use 0.1
Endrin 0.002 Liver problems Residue of banned insecticide 0.002
Epichlorohydrin TT4 Increased cancer risk; stomach
problems
Discharge from industrial
chemical factories; an impurity
of some water treatment
chemicals
zero
Ethylbenzene 0.7 Liver or kidney problems Discharge from petroleum
refineries 0.7
Ethylene dibromide 0.00005
Problems with liver, stomach,
reproductive system, or kidneys;
increased risk of cancer
Discharge from petroleum
refineries zero
Fecal coliform and
E. coli MCL6
Fecal coliforms and E. coli are
bacteria whose presence indicates
that the water may be contaminated
with human or animal wastes.
Microbes in these wastes may cause
short term effects, such as diarrhea,
cramps, nausea, headaches, or
other symptoms. They may pose a
special health risk for infants, young
children, and people with severely
compromised immune systems.
Human and animal fecal waste zero6
LEGEND
DISINFECTANT DISINFECTION
BYPRODUCT INORGANIC
CHEMICAL
MICROORGANISM ORGANIC
CHEMICAL RADIONUCLIDES
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations EPA 816-F-09-004 | MAY 2009
Contaminant MCL or TT1
(mg/L)2
Potential health effects
from long-term3 exposure
above the MCL
Common sources of contaminant
in drinking water
Public Health
Goal (mg/L)2
Fluoride 4.0
Bone disease (pain and
tenderness of the bones); children
may get mottled teeth
Water additive which promotes
strong teeth; erosion of natural
deposits; discharge from fertilizer
and aluminum factories
4.0
Giardia lamblia TT7
Short-term exposure:
Gastrointestinal illness (e.g.,
diarrhea, vomiting, cramps)
Human and animal fecal waste zero
Glyphosate 0.7 Kidney problems; reproductive
difficulties Runoff from herbicide use 0.7
Haloacetic acids
(HAA5)0.060 Increased risk of cancer Byproduct of drinking water
disinfection n/a9
Heptachlor 0.0004 Liver damage; increased risk of
cancer Residue of banned termiticide zero
Heptachlor epoxide 0.0002 Liver damage; increased risk of
cancer Breakdown of heptachlor zero
Heterotrophic plate
count (HPC)TT7
HPC has no health effects; it is an
analytic method used to measure
the variety of bacteria that are
common in water. The lower
the concentration of bacteria
in drinking water, the better
maintained the water system is.
HPC measures a range of bacteria
that are naturally present in the
environment n/a
Hexachlorobenzene 0.001
Liver or kidney problems;
reproductive difficulties; increased
risk of cancer
Discharge from metal refineries
and agricultural chemical factories zero
Hexachloro-
cyclopentadiene 0.05 Kidney or stomach problems Discharge from chemical factories 0.05
Lead TT5; Action
Level=0.015
Infants and children: Delays in
physical or mental development;
children could show slight deficits
in attention span and learning
abilities; Adults: Kidney problems;
high blood pressure
Corrosion of household plumbing
systems; erosion of natural deposits zero
Legionella TT7 Legionnaire’s Disease, a type of
pneumonia
Found naturally in water; multiplies
in heating systems zero
Lindane 0.0002 Liver or kidney problems Runoff/leaching from insecticide
used on cattle, lumber, and gardens 0.0002
Mercury (inorganic)0.002 Kidney damage
Erosion of natural deposits;
discharge from refineries and
factories; runoff from landfills and
croplands
0.002
Methoxychlor 0.04 Reproductive difficulties
Runoff/leaching from insecticide
used on fruits, vegetables, alfalfa,
and livestock 0.04
Nitrate (measured
as Nitrogen)10
Infants below the age of six
months who drink water
containing nitrate in excess of
the MCL could become seriously
ill and, if untreated, may die.
Symptoms include shortness of
breath and blue-baby syndrome.
Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching
from septic tanks, sewage; erosion
of natural deposits 10
LEGEND
DISINFECTANT DISINFECTION
BYPRODUCT INORGANIC
CHEMICAL
MICROORGANISM ORGANIC
CHEMICAL RADIONUCLIDES
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations EPA 816-F-09-004 | MAY 2009
Contaminant MCL or TT1
(mg/L)2
Potential health effects
from long-term3 exposure
above the MCL
Common sources of contaminant
in drinking water
Public Health
Goal (mg/L)2
Nitrite (measured
as Nitrogen)1
Infants below the age of six
months who drink water
containing nitrite in excess of
the MCL could become seriously
ill and, if untreated, may die.
Symptoms include shortness of
breath and blue-baby syndrome.
Runoff from fertilizer use; leaching
from septic tanks, sewage; erosion
of natural deposits 1
Oxamyl (Vydate)0.2 Slight nervous system effects
Runoff/leaching from insecticide
used on apples, potatoes, and
tomatoes 0.2
Pentachlorophenol 0.001 Liver or kidney problems;
increased cancer risk
Discharge from wood-preserving
factories zero
Picloram 0.5 Liver problems Herbicide runoff 0.5
Polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs)0.0005
Skin changes; thymus gland
problems; immune deficiencies;
reproductive or nervous system
difficulties; increased risk of
cancer
Runoff from landfills; discharge of
waste chemicals zero
Radium 226
and Radium 228
(combined)
5 pCi/L Increased risk of cancer Erosion of natural deposits zero
Selenium 0.05
Hair or fingernail loss; numbness
in fingers or toes; circulatory
problems
Discharge from petroleum and
metal refineries; erosion of natural
deposits; discharge from mines 0.05
Simazine 0.004 Problems with blood Herbicide runoff 0.004
Styrene 0.1 Liver, kidney, or circulatory system
problems
Discharge from rubber and plastic
factories; leaching from landfills 0.1
Tetrachloroethylene 0.005 Liver problems; increased risk of
cancer
Discharge from factories and dry
cleaners zero
Thallium 0.002 Hair loss; changes in blood; kidney,
intestine, or liver problems
Leaching from ore-processing sites;
discharge from electronics, glass,
and drug factories 0.0005
Toluene 1 Nervous system, kidney, or liver
problems
Discharge from petroleum
factories 1
Total Coliforms 5.0 percent8
Coliforms are bacteria that
indicate that other, potentially
harmful bacteria may be present.
See fecal coliforms and E. coli
Naturally present in the
environment zero
Total
Trihalomethanes
(TTHMs)
0.080
Liver, kidney, or central nervous
system problems; increased risk
of cancer
Byproduct of drinking water
disinfection n/a9
Toxaphene 0.003 Kidney, liver, or thyroid problems;
increased risk of cancer
Runoff/leaching from insecticide
used on cotton and cattle zero
2,4,5-TP (Silvex)0.05 Liver problems Residue of banned herbicide 0.05
1,2,4-
Trichlorobenzene 0.07 Changes in adrenal glands Discharge from textile finishing
factories 0.07
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations EPA 816-F-09-004 | MAY 2009
Contaminant MCL or TT1
(mg/L)2
Potential health effects from long-term3 exposure above the MCL
Common sources of contaminant in drinking water
Public Health Goal (mg/L)2
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane 0.2 Liver, nervous system, or circulatory problems
Discharge from metal
degreasing sites and other
factories 0.2
1,1,2-
Trichloroethane 0.005 Liver, kidney, or immune system problems Discharge from industrial
chemical factories 0.003
Trichloroethylene 0.005 Liver problems; increased risk of cancer
Discharge from metal
degreasing sites and other
factories zero
Turbidity TT7
Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of
water. It is used to indicate water quality and
filtration effectiveness (e.g., whether disease-
causing organisms are present). Higher turbidity
levels are often associated with higher levels of
disease-causing microorganisms such as viruses,
parasites, and some bacteria. These organisms
can cause short term symptoms such as nausea,
cramps, diarrhea, and associated headaches.
Soil runoff n/a
Uranium 30μg/L Increased risk of cancer, kidney toxicity Erosion of natural deposits zero
Vinyl chloride 0.002 Increased risk of cancer Leaching from PVC pipes;
discharge from plastic factories zero
Viruses (enteric)TT7 Short-term exposure: Gastrointestinal illness
(e.g., diarrhea, vomiting, cramps)
Human and animal fecal
waste zero
Xylenes (total)10 Nervous system damage
Discharge from petroleum
factories; discharge from
chemical factories 10
RADIONUCLIDESORGANIC
CHEMICALMICROORGANISMINORGANIC
CHEMICAL
DISINFECTION
BYPRODUCTDISINFECTANT
LEGEND
1 Definitions
• Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG): The level of a contaminant in drinking
water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs allow for a
margin of safety and are non-enforceable public health goals.
• Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL): The highest level of a contaminant that is
allowed in drinking water. MCLs are set as close to MCLGs as feasible using the
best available treatment technology and taking cost into consideration. MCLs are
enforceable standards.
• Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal (MRDLG): The level of a drinking water
disinfectant below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not
reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbial contaminants.
• Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL): The highest level of a disinfectant
allowed in drinking water. There is convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant
is necessary for control of microbial contaminants.
• Treatment Technique (TT): A required process intended to reduce the level of a
contaminant in drinking water.
2 Units are in milligrams per liter (mg/L) unless otherwise noted. Milligrams per liter are
equivalent to parts per million (ppm).
3 Health effects are from long-term exposure unless specified as short-term exposure.
4 Each water system must certify annually, in writing, to the state (using third-party or
manufacturers certification) that when it uses acrylamide and/or epichlorohydrin to treat
water, the combination (or product) of dose and monomer level does not exceed the
levels specified, as follows: Acrylamide = 0.05 percent dosed at 1 mg/L (or equivalent);
Epichlorohydrin = 0.01 percent dosed at 20 mg/L (or equivalent).
5 Lead and copper are regulated by a Treatment Technique that requires systems to
control the corrosiveness of their water. If more than 10 percent of tap water samples
exceed the action level, water systems must take additional steps. For copper, the action
level is 1.3 mg/L, and for lead is 0.015 mg/L.
6 A routine sample that is fecal coliform-positive or E. coli-positive triggers repeat samples-
-if any repeat sample is total coliform-positive, the system has an acute MCL violation. A
routine sample that is total coliform-positive and fecal coliform-negative or E. coli-
negative triggers repeat samples--if any repeat sample is fecal coliform-positive or E.
coli-positive, the system has an acute MCL violation. See also Total Coliforms.
7 EPA’s surface water treatment rules require systems using surface water or ground
water under the direct influence of surface water to (1) disinfect their water, and (2) filter
their water or meet criteria for avoiding filtration so that the following contaminants are
controlled at the following levels:
• Cryptosporidium: 99 percent removal for systems that filter. Unfiltered systems are
required to include Cryptosporidium in their existing watershed control provisions.
• Giardia lamblia: 99.9 percent removal/inactivation
• Viruses: 99.9 percent removal/inactivation
• Legionella: No limit, but EPA believes that if Giardia and viruses are removed/
inactivated, according to the treatment techniques in the surface water treatment rule,
Legionella will also be controlled.
• Turbidity: For systems that use conventional or direct filtration, at no time can turbidity
(cloudiness of water) go higher than 1 nephelometric turbidity unit (NTU), and samples
for turbidity must be less than or equal to 0.3 NTU in at least 95 percent of the samples
in any month. Systems that use filtration other than the conventional or direct filtration
must follow state limits, which must include turbidity at no time exceeding 5 NTU.
• HPC: No more than 500 bacterial colonies per milliliter
• Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment: Surface water systems or ground
water systems under the direct influence of surface water serving fewer than 10,000
people must comply with the applicable Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water
Treatment Rule provisions (e.g. turbidity standards, individual filter monitoring,
Cryptosporidium removal requirements, updated watershed control requirements for
unfiltered systems).
• Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment: This rule applies to all surface water
systems or ground water systems under the direct influence of surface water. The rule
targets additional Cryptosporidium treatment requirements for higher risk systems
and includes provisions to reduce risks from uncovered finished water storages facilities
and to ensure that the systems maintain microbial protection as they take steps to
reduce the formation of disinfection byproducts. (Monitoring start dates are staggered
by system size. The largest systems (serving at least 100,000 people) will begin
monitoring in October 2006 and the smallest systems (serving fewer than 10,000
people) will not begin monitoring until October 2008. After completing monitoring
and determining their treatment bin, systems generally have three years to comply
with any additional treatment requirements.)
• Filter Backwash Recycling: The Filter Backwash Recycling Rule requires systems that
recycle to return specific recycle flows through all processes of the system’s existing
conventional or direct filtration system or at an alternate location approved by the state.
8 No more than 5.0 percent samples total coliform-positive in a month. (For water systems
that collect fewer than 40 routine samples per month, no more than one sample can be
total coliform-positive per month.) Every sample that has total coliform must be analyzed
for either fecal coliforms or E. coli. If two consecutive TC-positive samples, and one is also
positive for E. coli or fecal coliforms, system has an acute MCL violation.
9 Although there is no collective MCLG for this contaminant group, there are individual
MCLGs for some of the individual contaminants:
• Haloacetic acids: dichloroacetic acid (zero); trichloroacetic acid (0.3 mg/L)
• Trihalomethanes: bromodichloromethane (zero); bromoform (zero);
dibromochloromethane (0.06 mg/L)
NOTES
NATIONAL SECONDARY DRINKING WATER REGULATION
National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations are non-enforceable guidelines regarding contaminants
that may cause cosmetic effects (such as skin or tooth discoloration) or aesthetic effects (such as taste,
odor, or color) in drinking water. EPA recommends secondary standards to water systems but does not
require systems to comply. However, some states may choose to adopt them as enforceable standards.
To order additional posters or other ground
water and drinking water publications,
please contact the National Service Center for
Environmental Publications at: (800) 490-9198,
or email: nscep@bps-lmit.com.
Contaminant Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level
Aluminum 0.05 to 0.2 mg/L
Chloride 250 mg/L
Color 15 (color units)
Copper 1.0 mg/L
Corrosivity Noncorrosive
Fluoride 2.0 mg/L
Foaming Agents 0.5 mg/L
Iron 0.3 mg/L
Manganese 0.05 mg/L
Odor 3 threshold odor number
pH 6.5-8.5
Silver 0.10 mg/L
Sulfate 250 mg/L
Total Dissolved Solids 500 mg/L
Zinc 5 mg/L
visit: epa.gov/safewater
call: (800) 426-4791
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON EPA’S
SAFE DRINKING WATER:
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations EPA 816-F-09-004 | MAY 2009
Sustainable buildings, sound infrastructure, safe transportation systems, clean water,
renewable energy and a balanced environment. Building a Better World for All of Us communicates
a companywide commitment to act in the best interests of our clients and the world around us.
We’re confident in our ability to balance these requirements.