Headwaters Winter 2013: Utilities

H e a d w a t e r s | W i n t e r 2 0 1 3 1

Colorado Foundation For Water eduCation | Winter 2013

Turningon The

Tap

Why We Pay More For Water TodayWater Infrastructure That Demands Attention

Protecting Human Health and the Environment Through Water TreatmentA Step-By-Step Bathroom Makeover That Makes WaterSense

Opportunity + Conservation = Water

C o l o r a d o F o u n d a t i o n f o r W a t e r E d u c a t i o n | y o u r w a t e r c o l o r a d o . o r g

Strengthening Leadership

Apply Now for the 2013 Water Leaders Program Are you a mid-career professional that desires to have a long-term impact on Colorado water issues? Do you wish for a network of similarly minded peers? Do you want to further develop the leadership skills you possess, while focusing on those most important for a career in water?

If so, the CFWE Water Leaders Program may be for you! Through this program, you will gain understanding of leadership challenges in Colorado water, ex-

plore how your personal strengths equip you to face those challenges, and create a long-lasting group of friends and colleagues. A survey of employers who sent staff members through the program found marked growth in their employees’ confidence and self-awareness, their ability to self-reflect, and their leadership skills. Employers noted that they also benefited from the knowledge the participants’ gained and the new relationships they built during the program.

Applications to take part in this unique experience are now available at yourwatercolorado.org. They are due February 15, 2013.

CFWE Mission in MotionGrowing Capacity

CFWE Extends its Gratitude December is always a hustle and bustle, and we all struggle to find time to fit everything in. With that said, we are extremely pleased that so many supporters found time during the holiday season to show financial appreciation for CFWE as we wrapped up a successful end-of-the-year giving campaign.

More than 98 supporters demonstrated their passion for balanced and accurate water education by donating over $11,000. These donations mean a great deal to us—they allow us to continue delivering the outstanding educational programs you all know and love us for.

Thank you once again from the team here at CFWE!

Graduates of the 2012 Water Leaders course learned how to more effectively problem-solve and navigate conflict and diversity.

In Recognition of Leaders in Water Education

The Colorado Foundation for Water Education is proud to announce the recipient of our 2013 President’s Award, Jim Isgar. A state director for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Devel-opment, Jim was an integral member of CFWE’s creation 11 years ago as a former state senator. The award pays tribute to those who demonstrate steadfast commitment to water resources educa-tion. Join us in thanking Jim for his advancement of a greater understanding of water in Colorado.

We will also bestow our Emerging Leader Award to Amy Beatie. Amy has been the execu-tive director for the Colorado Water Trust for more than five years and is a graduate of CFWE’s Water Leaders Program. Congratulations, Amy!

A ceremony will be held to celebrate their work in April 2013 in downtown Denver. Tickets will be available at yourwatercolorado.org in early March. We hope to see you there!

Cultivating Participation

Speakers Increase Water Fluency Last year, the Colorado Water 2012 Speakers Bu-reau reached more than 2,800 community leaders and civic group members, helping them speak flu-ent water. CFWE couldn’t let all that momentum pass us by. Rather than ending the Speakers Bu-reau program with the close of 2012, CFWE ad-opted the program and will continue to engage volunteer speakers to increase water awareness across the state.

Welcome the new and improved CFWE Speak-ers Bureau! This year, we’re working with a diverse group of talented speakers who will reach out to civic groups and talk about drought and the value of water in Colorado. CFWE kicks off the new pro-gram with an updated presentation and handouts for speakers and educators to use—we’ll double our reach, speaking to more community leaders than ever before. Find a water speaker near you at yourwatercolorado.org.

Keep the Feedback Coming We asked. You answered. To improve our educa-tional offerings and capacity to provide relevant programs to our members, CFWE conducted our second annual survey of members and top CFWE supporters in December 2012.

Respondents relayed how they use both our Citizen’s Guides and Headwaters magazine, and let us know how accurate and balanced they feel these publications are. Ninety-eight percent of respondents said that Headwaters was “very or

moderately helpful” in helping them understand current Colorado water issues, and 94 percent of members use it as a reference. What topics would supporters like to see us cover? Top re-sponses were drought, supply and demand, and population growth on the East Slope.

This input will help staff set goals to reflect our members’ educational needs and preferences, and ensure that our work remains relevant and useful. Thanks to all participants!


Defining Values

On Tour With CFWE CFWE is gearing up to offer a water tour near you! These interactive programs help participants to define and understand the many values and uses associated with water in Colorado.

Join us in exploring the value of water in your life at any of these upcoming CFWE tours. Sign up to be notified as registration becomes available for specific tours at yourwatercolorado.org.

• March 8, 2013—Learn how climate science and water resources are connected at the National Ice Core Laboratory in Lakewood.

• May 2 and May 16, 2013—Explore how urban waterways are managed, restored and protected on an Urban Waters Bike Tour in Denver.

• May 30-31, 2013—Get a taste of Grand Valley water, agriculture and energy issues on the Lower Colorado River Basin Tour.

• June 20-21, 2013—Gain understanding of the relationship between river health and transbasin diversions on the Upper Colorado River Basin Tour.

• July 17-19, 2013—Broaden your perspective on interstate water issues on the Platte River Tour in Colorado, Wyoming and Nebraska.

Increasing Awareness

Headwaters Stories Step Off the Page As the Colorado Foundation for Water Educa-tion’s cornerstone publication, Headwaters reach-es thousands of Coloradans each year through engaging and balanced storytelling. Numerous individuals and groups find it an effective educa-tional tool to both increase awareness of water as a scarce resource and examine water-related values and uses.

CFWE is now taking Headwaters on the road! A panel discussion at the 2013 Colorado Wa-ter Congress Annual Convention will reveal the production process from conception to delivery. Journalists, sources and reviewers from the Win-ter 2013 utilities-focused issue and the Fall 2012 agriculture-focused issue will give a behind-the-scenes look at their respective articles. Conven-tion attendees will hear how farming practices are evolving in the face of shrinking water supplies and get an inside look at the nuts and bolts of transporting water to and from the tap.

Look for future Headwaters events as CFWE brings the faces, voices and stories from the magazine’s pages to life.

CFWE staff (left) gear up for the Nestle Waters tour stop.

Creating Knowledge

Hot Topics in Colorado Water Get ready to learn about the hottest topics in water! CFWE is creating one-page Water 101 fact sheets covering drought, wildfire and other on-demand subjects. These fact sheets can be downloaded from CFWE’s website for your reference or distri-bution. They’re ideal for public speaking engage-ments, classroom presentations, or as a quick guide to get an overview on a popular water topic. Check out existing fact sheets, and come back for many more this year at yourwatercolorado.org.

To manufacture 1 liter of your favorite bottled beverage takes about 2.26 liters of water if you prefer Coca-Cola, 1.37 liters if you’d rather

hydrate with Nestle Water, and 4.07 liters if your drink of choice is a Coors beer.

H e a d w a t e r s | F a l l 2 0 1 2

1

Colorado Foundation For Water eduCation | Fall 2012

Quality + Scarcity + Opportunity = Water

Keeping Water on Colorado’s FarmsCoping With Drought and a Competitive Water MarketAgricultural Water Rights 101

Tasting the Fruits of the North Fork Valley’s Labor

Grown in Colorado For the Rocky Mountain state,

agriculture means

quality food,

open space and

a boon to the economic engine

H e a d w a t e r s | F a l l 2 0 1 2

1 3

By Caitlin Coleman

iSto

ck.c

om (3

)

CFWE tour participants (above) got an inside look at the Miller-Coors water treatment facility in December 2012.

Executive Director

2 C o l o r a d o F o u n d a t i o n f o r W a t e r E d u c a t i o n | y o u r w a t e r c o l o r a d o . o r g

Nicole Seltzer, CFWE Executive Director

How much of one’s life should a job constitute?

Depending on your point of view, it could be something that occupies your time from 9 to 5

and pays the bills, or something that defines you and gives you much more than a paycheck.

I don’t believe there is one universally right answer—we each have our own work-life bal-

ance that (hopefully) suits our lives. I will qualify the next statement, as I do not have much

professional experience outside the field of natural resources management, but it seems to

me there is a noticeably large portion of those who work in and around water whose jobs are

a meaningful part of their lives.

Surely the responsibility to provide clean, adequate water to Colorado communities is one to take seriously—and even honor. Our water and wastewater infrastructure keeps disease rates low, our rivers free from pollution, and the economic engine turning. I am proud to work alongside so many who display obvious passion for their work. Some of those people are interviewed and profiled in this issue; their stories and perspectives resonate.

Much of the work of water happens behind security gates, and this rare glimpse inside water utilities’ day-to-day probably doesn’t do justice to the importance or sheer impressive-ness of what they accomplish. I will go so far as to say that your local water treatment plant operator is an unsung hero.

As the Colorado Foundation for Water Education wraps up Water 2012, I am thankful for many other unsung heroes—all those who volunteered their time, resources and money to make Colorado’s Year of Water such a success. Partners, new and old, stepped up their water education contributions. More than 600 volunteers made a priority of communicating water’s importance. Those like the Colorado Water Conservation Board, Encana and Xcel Energy gave meaningful sums of money to make it happen. Others such as Continuing Legal Education of the Colorado Bar Association and Colorado Humanities gave organizational resources that helped exceed the goal of reaching 500,000 Coloradans with a message of water’s value.

With so much more left to do, it’s easy to just move on to the next project. But I would be remiss if, at the start of a new year, I did not stop and express my gratitude to everyone who helped CFWE thrive in 2012. Our annual report is available online. The list of donors and volunteers grows each year. I hope you will take a second to view the names of those who helped Colorado “speak fluent water” in 2012, and if your name isn’t on there yet, we can surely find a home for your talents!

Wishing you a peaceful, prosperous and enjoyable 2013,

ContentsWinter 2013


Turningon The

Tap

13 The Rising Cost of Bringing Water to a Faucet Near YouBy Caitlin ColemanWater rates have gone up dramatically over the past 20 years, and customers want to know why. Utilities aren’t out to turn a profit; they’re just trying to keep up with their own rising costs—for everything but the kitchen sink.

18 Beyond the TapBy Jerd SmithA labyrinth of water infrastructure lies beneath our city streets. And it’s getting old. Just what does it do for us, and how much attention—and funding—will its maintenance and replacement require?

23 The Art and Science of Pricing WaterBy Chris WoodkaSome utilities get tax dollars, others don’t. Some charge higher tap fees for new development, while others have higher rates. Ultimately, every utility must bill customers for their water use in order to cover costs, but each does so differently. A look at the not-so-simple process of setting rates, and why we aren’t all paying the same.

28 Water Quality’s Front LineBy Dan GordonWater moves into and out of our homes daily, coming in clean and going out dirty. On either end, someone is treating that water to keep it varying degrees of clean. Regulations stipulate the contaminants that must be filtered out, whether the water is destined for our bodies, our lawns or our rivers. It’s a protective barrier that wasn’t always in place.

Water is…8 A SourceWhy wildfires disrupt water supplies and have water utilities working in the forest, too; When it comes to source water protection, prevention is best; Opportunities to lend a hand protecting local water sources.

9 ConservationHow utilities maximize efficient water use; Watering restrictions and conservation messages help stretch scarce water supplies; Outdoor water use trivia.

10 SnowMountain snowpack serves as a natural reservoir, but that reservoir is at risk; Snowmaking can make up for some lack of natural snowfall, but has its limitations; An Arizona ski resort becomes the first to make snow with treated wastewater.

12 OpportunityWhy water and wastewater utilities are gearing up now to fill job vacancies; Cheat sheet for entering the water utility workforce; Water utility recruiters are going green.

36 DIY: Have a WaterSense WeekendWater conservation is a great excuse for a bathroom makeover. Plan a weekend to change out three bathroom fixtures for their water-saving counterparts, and watch the savings, both in water and energy costs, roll in. By Frank Kinder

On the Cover: Steve Ryken of Ute Water Conservancy District in the Grand Valley.

Mat

thew

Sta

ver

Kev

in M

olon

ey

Steve Hellman climbs out of the mechanical room at Aurora’s Charles A. Wemlinger water treatment plant.

Colorado Foundation for Water Education1580 Logan St., Suite 410 • Denver, CO 80203303-377-4433 • www.yourwatercolorado.org

Board MembersGregg Ten Eyck

President

Justice Gregory J. Hobbs, Jr.Vice President

Rita CrumptonPast President

Eric HecoxSecretary

Alan MatloszTreasurer

Becky BrooksNick Colglazier

Lisa DarlingSteve Fearn

Rep. Randy FischerJennifer GimbelGreg JohnsonPete KasperDan Luecke

Trina McGuire-CollierKaylee MooreReed Morris

Sen. Gail Schwartz Travis SmithAndrew ToddChris Treese

Reagan Waskom

StaffNicole Seltzer

Executive Director

Kristin MahargProgram Manager

Caitlin ColemanProgram Associate

Jennie GeurtsAdministrative Assistant

Adam HicksDevelopment Officer

Mission statEMEnt The mission of the Colorado Foundation for Water Education is to promote better understanding of water resources through education and information. The Foundation does not take an advocacy position on any water issue.

acknowledgments The Colorado Foundation for Water Education thanks the people and organizations who provided review, comment and assistance in the development of this issue.

Headwaters Magazine is published three times a year by the Colorado Foundation for Water Education. Headwaters is designed to provide Colorado citizens with balanced and accurate information on a variety of subjects related to water resources. Copyright 2013 by the Colorado Foundation for Water Education. ISSN: 1546-0584 Edited by Jayla Poppleton. Designed by Emmett Jordan.

ContributorsCaitlin Coleman is a writer and program associate with the Colorado Foundation for Water Education. Originally from New York state, where she grew up with a septic tank and well, reporting her story for this issue (“The Rising Cost of Bringing Water to a Faucet Near You,” page 13) gave her a new appreciation for utilities. “I’ve worked on water quality issues caused by limited wastewater treatment in impoverished areas, but that’s an extreme,” Caitlin says. “Talking with water utility managers about their role in securing the health and safety of a community, allowing cities and towns to prosper—it’s no different, but their service is something we all value.”

Jerd Smith is a Colorado-based writer and editor with a special interest in water and conservation issues. Reporting on water infrastructure for this issue (“Beyond the Tap,” page 18), Jerd says: “Let’s face it, there’s nothing very glamorous about a buried water pipe, and for decades they’ve been largely ignored by the general population. But deep within the bowels of water delivery systems, fascinating things are starting to occur that will help local water providers deliver water in ways that are less expensive and more efficient than we’ve ever seen.”

An editor and reporter for the Pueblo Chieftan, Chris Woodka makes a guest appearance writing for Headwaters this issue. He has reported on water issues for the Chieftain since 1985, specializing in large-scale water projects throughout Colorado. For 12 years, Chris was the president of a small ditch company west of Pueblo that mainly served hobby gardens. Today, he just farms bluegrass, relying on the Pueblo Board of Water Works for his water supply. In preparing his story on water-rate setting for this issue (“The Art and Science of Pricing Water,” page 23), he became so bogged down in numbers that he nearly forgot to shut down his sprinkler system for the winter months.

First-time Headwaters contributor Dan Gordon returned to Colorado after growing tired of being buffeted by hurricanes in south Florida. He and his wife now live in La Junta, near where he grew up at Fort Lyon. “As a kid, I didn’t think much about water or the lack of it in this part of the world,” says Dan. Since returning, he has a new interest in how Coloradans share their water and how they built systems to deliver it for urban and agri-cultural uses. For this issue, he dove into the subject of water treatment (“Water Quality’s Front Line,” page 28). A 30-year veteran of newspapers, he has worked for the Rocky Mountain News in Denver and the Sun-Sentinel in Fort Lauderdale.

Barton Glasser is a commercial and editorial photographer based in western Colo-rado. In photographing water-based stories, Barton is repeatedly astonished by the engineering feats, vast infrastructure and great cooperation that are involved. He is grateful for the people that help make it possible for us to have the water we need to live, work and play in the West. His photography appears throughout this issue (“Beyond the Tap,” page 18, and “Water Quality’s Front Line,” page 28).

Photographer Kevin Moloney, based in Denver, jokes that he drives for a living and takes pictures on the side, given the vast stretches of road between assignments around the Rocky Mountain West. Photo shoots for this issue (“Beyond the Tap,” page 18, and “The Art and Science of Pricing Water,” page 23) kept him closer to home in Erie and Aurora, where he couldn’t help but notice how quiet and lonely automated water plants feel these days. Kevin’s work has regularly appeared in Headwaters, as well as the New York Times, publications of the National Geographic Society, and many other publications.

Matthew Staver is an editorial and documentary photographer based in Denver. “Cre-ating visual permanence in a world of relentless motion” is more than a tagline for Matthew; it is an ongoing mission that he strives to achieve during every commis-sion. His assignment for this issue (“The Rising Cost of Bringing Water to a Faucet Near You,” page 13, and “Water Quality’s Front Line,” page 28) took him to Vail and the Eagle River Valley. He hopes his photographs reveal water utilities’ connection to the environment in a way that helps foster a better understanding of this often underappreciated and evolving subject.

iSto

ck.c

om

4 C

On a bright sunny morning in December, I

donned my hardhat obediently and followed my hosts toward the sound of rushing water.

It had been nearly 16 years since I visited a wastewater treatment plant in college, and I

couldn’t remember being quite so excited then. But now, I was nearly giddy as I caught my

first glimpse of the grayish water tumbling around a sharp corner. Peering gingerly over the cement wall, I wondered if the wastewater below could be

coming from my own neighborhood in northeast Denver. Could this be the very water we had used hours earlier that day in our showers and sinks—and our toilets? Moving at high speed, it all blended into one big, murky river, and I was spared from imagining I might be seeing my next-door neighbor’s you-know-what.

Barbara Biggs, governmental affairs officer, and Marty Tiffany, plant operator, were gra-ciously giving me a personal tour of the Robert W. Hite Treatment Facility of the Metro Wastewater Reclamation District in north Denver, where nearly 2 million people’s waste-water is continuously processed. As we crossed a bridge over the west-bound interceptor canal to view several coming in from the opposite side of the city, I was impressed to note labels denoting sources as distant as “Golden.” At that moment, the dirty water was coming in at a rate of 150 million gallons per day for treatment.

Nearly two hours later, after trekking around the enormous plant and receiving patient answers to my many questions, I had a pretty good handle on exactly what Marty, Barbara and their colleagues accomplish for the community. As we watched the treated effluent pour into the South Platte River, it was comforting to know the water had been meticulously treated and tested to meet the many state and federal water quality standards in place for our protection. The whole process was pretty incredible, and I highly recommend taking a similar tour if you ever have the opportunity.

Despite the extent of our daily reliance on water, not to mention our dependence on its arrival and departure from our homes, many of us remain largely ignorant of what goes into moving, storing, treating and delivering it. We know we have to pay our bills or our water service could be shut off, but we don’t really know exactly what we’re paying for. What do water utilities really do? How do they keep up with the nonstop, and often growing, daily water demand of their communities? And what role do they play in protecting both public health and the environment?

In this issue, we invite you to explore these questions and more as we delve into the realm of water and wastewater utilities. Next time you turn on your tap and clean water comes out, you’ll have a better idea of what—and who—made that small miracle possible.

Jayla Poppleton

TenT h i n g s To D o

I n T h i s I s s u e :

1 Apply for CFWE’s 2013 Water Leaders Program (inside front cover).

2 Attend Headwaters’ first live discussion, where its stories will step off the page (page 1).

3 Lend a hand to protect the source of your drinking water (page 8).

4 Check out what Americans nationwide have to say about water infrastructure (page 16).

5 Visit your water utility’s website for a water quality report and tips on in-home water infrastructure maintenance (page 22).

6 Compare water rate structures for a handful of Colorado utilities (page 25).

7 Learn how to decipher your water bill (page 26).

8 Follow your flush through the wastewater treatment process (page 32).

9 Find out which ingredients in your personal care products aren’t removed by wastewater treatment (page 33).

10 Swap your old bathroom fixtures for their water-saving counterparts (page 36).


Editor

Jayla Poppleton, Editor


Headwaters Photo Contest See your photo in the next issue of Headwaters magazine! The Colorado Foundation for Water Education is now accepting entries of profes-sional and amateur photographs that tie in with the topical focus of upcoming issues. The winning photo will appear on this two-page format, while other photos may be used throughout the magazine. Find contest rules and details on future topics at www.yourwatercolorado.org.

Walking On WaterWinning photo submission by Steve VanderleestStaff from the Glenwood Springs Water and Wastewater Department traverse along

an 800-foot pipeline that brings raw water bound for Glenwood from Grizzly Creek.

The pipeline, accessible by foot trail, was 90 years old when it was replaced in 2002.

Materials had to be delivered by helicopter.


A Source > Conservation > Snow > Opportunity

Water is Colorado

Water is A Source


Protecting Water From Fire In 2012, wildfires blazed across Colorado landscapes, incinerating thousands of forested acres and leaving barren slopes and loose soils. The same was true during the drought of 2002, when water utilities saw fires wreaking havoc on their water sources. Water providers have since invested more heavily in restoring and protecting their watersheds from fire.

“We learned that water infrastructure is more than pipes and dams,” says Travis Thompson, me-dia coordinator for Denver Water. “For Denver Water, our ‘infrastructure’ encompasses more than 2.5 million acres of land in 13 counties. Our investment in these watersheds is a long-term commit-ment to keeping them healthy decades from now.”

Deep in a healthy forest, a web of strong root systems holds soils in place, sustains vegetation and naturally filters water. Intense fire destroys that network, leaving ash, sediment and burnt debris with no anchor. Storms that follow bring those sediments rushing in torrents down mountainsides—and into streams and water supplies.

Even a small rain can trigger large ash flows after a fire, says Eric Reckentine, deputy director of water resources for Greeley Water. Last summer, northern Colorado’s Poudre River ran black with ash from the High Park Fire, while the Clifton Water District to the west of the Continental Divide saw a muddied Colorado River full of burnt pine needles, ash and other debris after the Pine Ridge Fire.

In June 2012, Greeley and Fort Collins stopped drawing water from the Poudre because of ash. In normal years, flows from the Poudre supply about 25 percent of Greeley’s water.

To prevent ongoing damage to water quality, utilities like Greeley must stabilize burn-area soils and promote new plant growth—yet they don’t always own the land surrounding their water sup-plies. Instead, they partner with organizations like the U.S. Forest Service, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, volunteer groups and private landowners to restore forest health by mulch-ing and seeding, planting trees and shrubs, installing erosion control bars and sediment traps, and thinning trees prone to future wildfires.

This work doesn’t come free. Greeley Water expects to share a $9.9 million investment in High Park Fire remediation with the cities of Loveland and Fort Collins as well as three nearby districts collectively referred to as the Tri-Districts, with partial reimbursement from the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Denver Water plans to spend $16.5 million on forest treatment projects over a five-year period. The U.S. Forest Service will match the utility’s investment, enabling them to target more than 38,000 acres in priority watersheds. —Caitlin Coleman

Going to the Source Communities take pride in the quality of their drinking water—or they worry about it. Either way, protecting the source of the water supply can be both personal and a matter of public health.

Source water protection work is in progress across Colorado, but looks different depending on the locale. Activities range from addressing nonpoint sources of pollution such as farm fertilizer runoff or contamination from roads, to reducing access to reservoirs or promoting forest health.

Grand Junction developed a watershed protection ordinance in 2007 after Genesis Gas and Oil acquired leases to drill within the Plateau Creek watershed on the Grand Mesa, a source of the city’s water. Residents were concerned about the potential impacts of drilling—particularly hydraulic fracturing—on their drinking water supply. To deal with these concerns, stakeholders including the cities of Grand Junction and Palisade, Genesis, federal land managers and local citizens came together, agreeing to a set of best management practices once drilling began. Genesis has avoided developing its leases within the watershed so far. In the meantime, Grand Junction is funding a water monitoring study to establish a baseline for the

quality of its water. Monitoring is something Colleen Williams, source water protection spe-

cialist for the Colorado Rural Water Association, frequently recommends to the water utilities she works with. By establishing a baseline for water quality, communities can track what is showing up in their water over time and watch for red flags. “It’s really important to have some way that they would know that there is a problem in that water source,” says Williams.

Some communities face concerns about oil and gas drilling, others with abandoned mine drainage or septic tank maintenance. Then there’s fire and drought—two of the biggest concerns, Williams says. Fortunately, much of Colorado doesn’t have contaminated water, she adds. A lot of the focus is on prevention—keeping water clean in the first place is far more cost-effective.

Williams also recommends public outreach and information sharing: “We want the community to encourage everyone to become a stakeholder, to become a steward of that drinking water source.”

—Caitlin Coleman

Lend a Hand to Protect Source Water Get involved in protecting your drinking water with volunteer opportunities around the state:

>> High Park Restoration Coalition: High Park and Hewlett Gulch fire restoration work is underway near Fort Collins through a coalition of organizations that includes Wildlands Restoration Volunteers; Trees, Water and People; and Rocky Mountain Fly Casters. Expect to help seed native grasses, plant native trees and shrubs, install erosion control structures and apply mulches, primarily on private lands. Visit www.wlrv.org.

>> Coalition for the Upper South Platte: CUSP teaches communities how to live with and survive fire in the 2,600 square-mile Upper South Platte watershed that stretches southwest from Denver nearly to Buena Vista. CUSP’s most immediate work is with the Waldo Canyon Fire. Volunteer to help with sandbagging, erosion control, revegetation and chipping wood for fire prevention. Go to www.uppersouthplatte.org.

>> Volunteers for Outdoor Colorado: Volunteers for Outdoor Colorado is also working on High Park Fire and Waldo Canyon Fire projects, among others. See www.voc.org.

>> Local Watershed Group: The Colorado Watershed Assembly supports the efforts of grassroots, nonprofit groups working to protect watersheds. Find out if a group near you is involved with source water protection work at www.coloradowater.org.

—Caitlin Coleman

Aerial mulching is used to stablize soil in the Monument Gulch area in Larimer County after the High Park Fire.

US

DA

For

est S

ervi

ce


Water is Conservation

Waste Not, Want Not She’s got her headphones on—must be listening to some chart-topping song. No, in fact, water utility employees routinely conduct leak surveys, listening with headphones or setting up equipment to sound for leaks, then repairing broken pipes. Such actions can save millions of gallons each year of a limited—and increasingly expensive—resource.

All utilities unavoidably lose some water through leaks, broken meters, water main breaks and more. As utilities detect and fix leaks, they prevent larger breaks and cut costs.

“If you’re buying more water than you need, that’s not very efficient at all,” says Roby Forsyth, distribution and collection manager for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. The district completes a leak survey of its entire distribution system at least twice each year, sounding through sections of water main that need more analysis. Leaks, large to small, can sound like water rumbling through rapids in a river or like the spraying noise you hear if you put your finger over a faucet.

By reducing water loss, utilities can bill for more of the water that’s run-ning through their systems. They also save energy and treatment costs by not pumping as much soon-to-be-lost water partway through the system.

Improving efficiency is just one way utilities maximize their water sup-plies. They also run conservation programs to raise public awareness about water use, encourage water savings and reuse water. As water reaches customers, many utilities encourage wise water use through tiered rate structures, rebates on low water-use devices, public education cam-paigns, xeriscape demonstration gardens, water use audits and more.

For water providers that deliver 2,000 acre feet or more each year (2,000 acre feet typically meets the needs of about 5,000 households), such actions were stipulated by the state legislature in 2004 in the form of water conservation plans. These providers must develop and imple-ment, then periodically evaluate and revise, a water conservation plan or they become ineligible for financial assistance from the Colorado Water Conservation Board or Colorado Water Resources and Power Develop-ment Authority.

The conservation plans are meant to further promote a range of sustain-able practices that water utilities across the state, many of which have reduced demand by 20 percent over the past decade, may already employ. —Caitlin Coleman

Watering Restrictions: Conservation Measure or Drought Response? Water monitors in Castle Rock pass their sum-mer cruising around town, enforcing mandatory watering restrictions during the peak water use months of June, July and August. From their ve-hicles, they scan for wasteful watering or water-ing at the wrong time or on the wrong day, and educate customers. The “water cops” of Castle Rock didn’t just come out for the 2012 drought; the town has implemented this aspect of its con-servation program every summer since 1985.

Castle Rock is not the only water provider that includes watering restrictions in its regular conservation plan. Denver Water and the cities of Brighton, Thornton and Greeley are among many who implement such restrictions—often limiting watering days and times—regardless of drought conditions. Denver Water, for example, asks that from May 1 through October 1 cus-tomers water between 6 p.m and 10 a.m., refrain from watering during rain or wind storms, avoid

watering sidewalks and streets, and only water three days a week. The restrictions are enforced by “Water Savers,” who hand out warnings for first-time offenders. After that, fines start at $50; multiple offenders could have their water service shut off. Similarly, the city of Thornton has a wa-ter waste code; however, Thornton only hires patrols when responding to drought.

Utility water conservation and drought miti-gation efforts are often completely separate programs, but they can piggyback off each other. Many Colorado cities implement water conservation plans year-round through market-ing, rebates, customer education and watering restrictions—but during drought, those mes-sages intensify.

“The efforts that we’re making now in educat-ing and communicating to our consumers about water conservation is what is getting us through the 2012 drought,” says Joseph Burtard, public

relations officer for the Ute Water Conservancy District and chairman of the Drought Response Information Project (DRIP).

DRIP is a product of the 2002 drought, when the four water providers in the Grand Valley—Ute Water, the city of Grand Junction, the town of Palisade and Clifton Water District—came to-gether to create a drought plan. Through DRIP, the utilities promote conservation year-round through outreach channels such as radio and television ads targeting residential and commer-cial water use. When the 2012 drought struck, DRIP was able to quickly reach out to custom-ers, asking them to implement voluntary water-ing restrictions.

“Conservation awareness and behavior helps prepare communities for drought conditions,” Burtard says. “I think everybody saw that this year across the state.”

—Caitlin Coleman

Did You Know?

55 Percent of residential water in Front Range urban areas is used outdoors, primarily to water turf, making lawn watering the largest demand on municipal water supplies.

3 Gallons of water are required to sustain each square foot of buffalograss for a season. The more commonly seen Kentucky bluegrass needs 18 to 20.

9:00 is the time of day that bookends efficient lawn watering hours. Watering after 9 p.m. and before 9 a.m. helps reduce evaporation losses due to hot and windy weather.

50 Percent of flower bed irrigation needs can be cut by using mulch, which reduces evaporation from the soil surface.

Source: CSU ExtensionDenver Water’s “Use Only What You Need” messaging is highly visible around the metro area.

Cou

rtes

y D

enve

r W

ater

1 0 C o l o r a d o F o u n d a t i o n f o r W a t e r E d u c a t i o n | y o u r w a t e r c o l o r a d o . o r g

Water is Snow

Bring on the Snow Liquid assets is a term used by money manag-ers, but should it not also apply to the recreation industry? For resort communities and the snow sports industry across Colorado, water that falls as snow is a tremendous asset; the entire state depends on the income it generates. But what happens when there isn’t enough?

“Snow trumps all,” says Greg Ralph, marketing director at Monarch Mountain. “Snow is why they come here.” Low snowpack, as experienced dur-ing the 2011 to 2012 winter, draws fewer skiers to the slopes. In some cases snowmaking can make up for that loss, but to a limited extent.

Last year, Monarch received only 195 inches of snow, just more than half its average 350 inches. This, along with Monarch’s no-snowmaking poli-cy, caused a 19 percent decrease in skier visits. “It was devastating,” Ralph says.

Collectively, the 22 Colorado Ski Country USA resorts, which include Monarch and most other major ski resorts except for those owned by Vail Resorts, weren’t hit quite as hard, seeing an 11.9 percent decrease in skier visits compared to the five-year average. Colorado Ski Country USA

also attributes this decline to the dry and warm 2011 to 2012 winter—West Slope precipitation was 43 percent below average.

Aspen Snowmass faced only a 1.8 percent de-cline in skier visits last year. But Aspen has a strong international clientele, people who book their trips months in advance. The resort isn’t heavily reliant on Front Range traffic, says Jeff Hanle, director of public relations at Aspen Snowmass. That doesn’t change the fact that Aspen received only half its average annual snowfall. Aspen Snowmass used its early-season snowmaking, though limited, to cover high traffic areas where natural snowfall wouldn’t have been sufficient, says Hanle.

Resort managers might make more snow if they could, but snowmaking has its limitations. Most resorts divert directly from streams during winter months, when rivers run low. If their water rights are behind other users in line, or the stream is be-low stipulated flow levels, they may have to shut off their blowers. Snowmaking is also limited by temperature—if it’s not cold, there won’t be snow. Other limiting factors can include high operating costs and community water and energy needs.

Historically, Aspen Snowmass starts making snow November 1 and stops before Christmas each year—the resort is limited by its water right decree from pulling water from Snowmass Creek after December. In the future, they may have more flexibility. In July 2012, Aspen Skiing Company purchased rights to a portion of the water stored in Zeigler Reservoir, located on the mountain. The $3.25 million agreement with Snowmass Water and Sanitation District will prevent low flows from being further depleted by snowmaking withdraw-als in Snowmass Creek and allow for later-season snowmaking. The resort will also save on energy costs previously used to pump water uphill from the creek. “For environmental reasons, for ef-ficiency reasons, for making-snow-at-optimum-time reasons, this was a huge deal for us…a win-win-win-win grand slam,” says Hanle.

Still, although snowmaking technology has im-proved, it’s not the same as skiing fresh powder, Monarch’s Ralph contends. “Most of the time na-ture takes care of us pretty well. Skiing on all-nat-ural snow—it’s one of our marketing attributes.”

—Caitlin Coleman

Recycling Hits the Slopes:

Where does your snow come from?This winter the Arizona Snowbowl resort just north of Flagstaff became the first in the world to

make snow entirely from reclaimed, treated wastewater effluent.

The plan has been a long time coming. In February 2012, a federal appeals court put an end

to a 10-year legal battle brought by a coalition of environmental groups and 13 American Indian

tribes by ruling in favor of Arizona Snowbowl. The decision will allow the use of treated waste-

water effluent from the nearby city of Flagstaff to powder the resort’s slopes. Opponents cite the

desecration of sacred land, health concerns and ecological impacts of chemicals that may remain

in the effluent-based snow.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, reclaimed water is already being used for

snowmaking in Maine, Pennsylvania and California, as well as in Canada and Australia—but none

of these resorts use effluent alone. Although the use of reclaimed wastewater effluent to make snow

hasn’t yet been tried in Colorado, it is used for other purposes, such as watering city parks.

Until the recent decision, Arizona Snowbowl was short a water supply to use for snowmaking.

Now, after spending approximately $12 million on legal fees and infrastructure to move the re-

claimed wastewater uphill from Flagstaff, its snow machines are running.

Many Colorado ski areas also face challenges in securing sufficient water supplies for snow-

making, and a few reclaim water in their own way to compensate for slim streamflows in winter

months. Loveland Ski Area recaptures up to 70 percent of its manufactured snowmelt, storing it in

an off-site reservoir and releasing it to make up for river diversions the following year. The practice,

called a substitute water supply plan, doesn’t go so far as to cut river diversions for snowmaking at

the point of diversion, but it does allow the ski area, with its relatively junior priority water rights, to

keep making snow when it otherwise legally couldn’t take water from the stream. —Caitlin Coleman

Reclaimed wastewater, also called treated effluent, must meet water quality standards to protect all applicable uses of the receiving water body. Regulation 84 of the Colorado Water Quality Control Division is in place to further protect public health if reclaimed wastewater is to be reused for nonpotable uses such as landscaping.

iSto

ck.c

om

H e a d w a t e r s | W i n t e r 2 0 1 3 1 1

Water is Snow

Nature’s Reservoir at Risk “Colorado’s mountain snowpacks are the first and foremost reservoir for Colorado water supplies,” says Chris Landry, executive director for the Silver-ton-based Center for Snow and Avalanche Studies. Most of Colorado’s water supplies are first banked as snowpack before they flow into constructed reservoirs. That natural snow bank is beginning to face pressures, creating challenges for Colorado’s people, environment and water managers.

Between 60 percent and 90 percent of the water used in the western United States is mountain run-off, says Mark Williams, a researcher at the Institute of Alpine and Arctic Research at the University of Colorado. At Williams’ research station on Niwot Ridge, 20 miles west of Boulder, 87 percent of an-nual precipitation falls as snow.

“If we had rain instead of snow during the winter, it would just run off and leave our system,” explains Williams. Instead, snowpack accumulates and re-mains frozen in the mountains all winter, melting throughout the spring and summer and feeding riv-ers. By the end of June, only half the snow at Niwot Ridge is gone, with plenty remaining to melt in July and August, when summer temperatures heighten irrigation demands for lawns and crops. “That water is released from the snowpack when we need it the most,” Williams says.

According to a 2012 U.S. Geological Survey study based in part on Williams’ research, how-ever, Colorado snow is melting—and fueling peak runoff—two to three weeks earlier than it did in the 1970s. Changes are related to warming cli-mate trends and are additionally affected by phe-nomena such as “dust on snow” and heightened evapotranspiration rates for forest plants. All causes lead to the same effect—earlier and pos-

sibly reduced runoff.When Colorado’s snow

melts early, water comes to people and water man-agers before it can be fully put to use. Reservoirs and water storage can help trap and hold water for use later in the year. But Wil-liams believes reservoirs aren’t enough to ease con-cern surrounding overall reduced runoff: “We can’t engineer our way out of it through the construction of new dams.”

Impacts reach beyond water managers—forests can’t intentionally bank water. When snow melts early, water may run off before forest vegetation can use it; then soils dry out. “Your fire danger just goes through the roof,” Williams says.

Compounding the effect of early snowmelt on water supply, plant activity may also begin earlier, resulting in increased evapotranspiration; plants release more water to the atmosphere, further re-ducing runoff. A 2010 study coauthored by Landry found that runoff was decreased by about 5 percent when plants became active earlier in the year.

Another contributing factor is what’s known as dust on snow. The Center for Snow and Avalanche Studies’ data show as many as three to 12 dust events each year. When dust from lands disturbed by agriculture or development settles on snow, the dark layer absorbs more of the sun’s heat, reduces

reflectivity and causes snow to melt faster. Landry and others, including Brad Udall at the University of Colorado’s Western Water Assessment, have shown that dust is a factor in early and rapid runoff. The amount of dust settling on the Rocky Moun-tains, according to their joint report published in the 2010 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci-ences, has increased over the past 150 years by as much as 600 percent.

Temperature, snow depth, snow water equiva-lents, radiation and other factors all play a role in early or reduced runoff as well. When there just plain isn’t a lot of snow, for example, snow melts earlier. “Precipitation is still the principle factor determining snowmelt behavior,” Landry says. “First and fore-most you have to have a snowpack.”

—Caitlin Coleman

Researchers take climate measurements near an elevation of 12,000 feet on Niwot Ridge, 20 miles west of Boulder, in the 1950s.

iSto

ck.c

om

© C

ente

r fo

r S

now

and

Ava

lanc

he S

tudi

es

University of Utah graduate students Annie Bryant (left) and McKenzie Skiles collected dust samples from a snowpit at Rabbit Ears Pass between Kremmling and Steamboat Springs in 2010. Dust events, which can cause snow to melt faster, leave behind dark layers in the snowpack.

Cou

rtes

y Jo

hn M

arr

and

the

Niw

ot R

idge

LTE

R p

rogr

am a

rchi

ves


Water is Opportunity

Water Recruiters Wear Green The slogan, “If you’re going green, you got to think BLUE,” adorns the cover of a career pamphlet from an American Water Works Association chapter in Texas. Closer to home, the Pueblo Board of Water Works includes “promoting environmental values” on its career brochure. They hope the message, which highlights water utilities’ role in resource stewardship and sustainability, will resonate with the next generation of employees.

“The millennial generation reacts to a different message than baby boomers in what is important to them in taking on a job or starting a career,” says Paul Fanning, public relations administrator at the Pueblo Board of Water Works. Fanning uses “green talk” when speaking with younger potential employees as it has a more inspirational and emotional appeal, he says. And why not?

“We say that at heart, we are the original green industry,” says Cynthia Lane with the American Water Works Association. While it’s a shift for people to view utility jobs as green or progressive, public and environmental health rest in the hands of water and wastewater utilities, Lane explains. Perhaps blue really could be the new green. —Caitlin Coleman

Working With Water: A Career Awaits Stability and reliability—that’s what we expect from our water utility service. Those are also the qualities one finds in water utility sector employment. And, along with the element of social responsibility, those are the qualities water utilities hope will attract the next generation of employees.

According to the Water Research Foundation, as much as 31 to 37 percent of the water workforce could retire within the next 10 years. Even without the looming exodus of retiring baby boomers, the water utility sector, which includes both drinking water providers and wastewater treatment, is ex-pected to need additional employees in coming years—up to 45 percent more—in order to adapt to more stringent regulations, add and replace pipe-lines and treatment plants, and meet the demands of a growing population. Although the high level of expected turnover poses a challenge for utilities, it’s a great opportunity for job seekers.

“A lot of people retiring have been there forever,” says Cynthia Lane, who directs sustainability pro-grams for the American Water Works Association, a nonprofit educational association that provides re-

sources for water utility professionals. “We’re losing that knowledge, and we’re losing the people who saw working at utilities as a good, stable profession that supported their family and gave them a sense of well-being that their job makes a difference to others.”

To fill open positions, some utilities have estab-lished training programs and recruitment websites. Many utilities are specifically in need of operators and technicians. There are also plenty of other jobs in the field, from engineers and project managers to biologists and communication specialists.

At Ute Water Conservancy District in the Grand Valley, water treatment operators at the highest certification level are making $57,000 annually with benefits. With a high retention rate—99 percent this past year—the district hasn’t yet needed to recruit. “We’re a steady industry,” says Kalanda Isaac, who works in human resources and risk management at Ute Water. “The pay and benefits are generally quite good, and I think people like knowing that they’ve done something good for people.”

—Caitlin Coleman

Career-Ready Training Opportunities>> Connect directly with water utilities: For drinking

water, wastewater and stormwater utility em-ployment opportunities, resources and training programs in Colorado, visit getintowaterco.org. For national opportunities, check out workfor-water.org. Looking for a job with a specific water or wastewater utility? Many offer apprenticeship and internship programs.

>> Gain technical training and on-the-job experience: Colorado’s community colleges and water utilities are collaborating to provide tech-nical training for treatment plant operators and technicians. Red Rocks Community College in Lakewood and Pikes Peak Community College in Colorado Springs started training programs a few years ago. West Slope utilities saw a similar need and created a training program with Western Colorado Community College in Grand Junction. The first class from Western will graduate with associate’s degrees in Applied Science in Water Quality Management in 2014.

>> Pursue a college degree to be used in water utility work: The rate at which students earn bach-elor’s or master’s degrees in science and tech-nical fields has declined in the United States from one in six in 1960 to just one in 10 in 2000, according to the Water Research Foundation. Colorado’s top colleges and universities offer programs in higher education that would give any graduate an edge when applying for a water or wastewater utility job. Check out these top Colorado water programs:

>> Metro State University of Denver’s new One World, One Water Center offers an interdis-ciplinary water studies minor.

>> The Water Center at Colorado State Univer-sity offers water courses or a water minor.

>> The Water Center at Colorado Mesa Univer-sity has degree programs and continuing

education courses.

—Caitlin Coleman

A water utility employee changes out a reverse osmosis filter in a water treatment plant.

© iS

tock

.com

(2)

The Rising Cost of Bringing Water to a Faucet Near You

The good old days. remember when movies were just $0.20,

when the town of Vail was tiny, and when “conservation”

wasn’t part of your vocabulary? Or remember just 10 years

ago when water bills were half what they are today?

By Caitlin Coleman

Things have changed. As water services have expanded

to meet demand, so too has the cost of those services.

“There is no difference between a water bill, an airline fare

or the cost of McDonalds,” says Peter Binney, manager of

sustainable infrastructure for Merrick & Company and former

director of Aurora Water. “People see costs going up and

they think, ‘What the heck is going on?’”


A gallon of bottled water at Safeway goes for $1.29. For the same price, Denver Water delivers 498 gallons directly to customers’ homes.


Water rates have surged in the past de-cade, doubling across much of Colorado. Nationally, according to the American Wa-ter Works Association, water and wastewa-ter charges for 1,000 gallons of water have increased annually by 4.7 percent and 4.9 percent respectively—a rate nearly double the annual Consumer Price Index increase of 2.5 percent. (By comparison, the aver-age electricity rate in Colorado increased by just 1.6 percent between 1990 and 2011.) At the same time, the roles of water and wastewater utilities have changed, and the environment they operate in is wrought with expense. “I don’t think we’ve done a good job of making people understand, appreci-ate and support why our water bill is what it is,” Binney says.

The charges on customers’ water bills in-corporate more than just the volume of liq-uid that pours from the tap or flushes down the toilet. They cover the cost of hiring and training staff, building and maintaining in-frastructure, installing improved technology to meet regulatory requirements, paying for electricity to pump and treat water, provid-ing water for firefighting and other emer-gency services, protecting existing water sources and acquiring new ones, planning for drought, and more.

Water utilities exist to meet community needs; many are public entities. Some, like Aurora Water, operate within the city gov-ernment structure and are governed by the city council. Others, like the Greeley Water and Sewer Department, are governed jointly by the city council and an appointed board of directors. Then there are the special dis-tricts, like the Eagle River Water and Sanita-tion District, quasi-municipal corporations governed by an elected board of directors. In all cases, water and wastewater utilities fill a necessary role across Colorado. “The ability to provide low-cost reliable service is absolutely essential to a community’s quality of life and economic viability,” says Wayne Vanderschuere, general manager in water services at Colorado Springs Utilities.

Keeping Pace With GrowthEarly public water systems in the United States expanded substantially in the early 20th century, largely due to fire danger. Cities were highly flammable and needed a consistent, high-pressure water supply capable of dousing fires. Giant infernos in San Francisco and Chicago provided the impetus for resizing pipes across the country. Today’s engineers continue to size pipes in order to meet demand for firefight-ing, as opposed to drinking water or toilet flushing, says David LaFrance, executive director of the American Water Works As-sociation. Public water systems have since evolved further, making our water safer to drink, and treating our wastewater so thor-oughly that many water-borne diseases

have been virtually eliminated. In many cases, utilities have innovated

and allowed communities to grow, Bin-ney points out. Look at Los Angeles in the 1920s and 1930s, Las Vegas in the 1970s and 1980s—the water systems they had in place were stifling growth because they were too small, but the communities didn’t let infrastructure define them; they built am-ple water systems to meet their needs.

The same was true in Colorado’s Eagle River Valley, where the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has been consis-tently growing since the 1962 founding of Vail. As the resort community matured, the district had to keep pace. “We were having to make large investments in infrastructure,” says Becky Bultemeier, finance manager for the Eagle River district.

Now, Front Range cities like Aurora con-tinue to face the realities of providing water—and collecting wastewater—for a large and growing population. “There was no question in the minds of the mayor or chambers of commerce that as people wanted to locate there [in Aurora], they were going to be able to provide the services,” Binney says. Au-rora Water had to figure out how to meet the demand, and the expanded infrastructure meant an increase in rates. “It’s a question of what kind of community do you want to live in? A community that can suit your needs?”

The city of Grand Junction made a differ-ent decision when, in the 1950s, it chose not to expand its system. People outside city limits wanted to connect with the city’s wa-ter system, but Grand Junction didn’t think there would be enough growth in the Grand Valley area to warrant running water lines to those outliers, says Rick Brinkman, Grand Junction’s water services manager. In 1956, those without water service formed a con-servancy district—Ute Water. In the 1970s, Clifton Water District also secured a more reliable source from the Colorado River. Today, the three systems are connected, but abut one another, limiting each other’s growth. “We just got surrounded,” Brinkman says. “We [Grand Junction’s water services] haven’t grown very much because we’re pretty much landlocked.”

Investing in TomorrowJust as communities decide on growth for public water systems and utilities respond to that direction, the public, water boards and city councilors strive to keep water rates in check. Public water entities are non-profits, and because they operate in a mo-nopolistic setting, there are some controls placed on their finances. Many have some ability to establish funds that roll over from year to year, used to stabilize revenues or build up capital for infrastructure projects. But, for the most part, they operate based on their costs of service in a pay-as-you-go system. Ultimately, the vast majority of the

WATERLAWPATRICK|MILLER|KROPF|NOTO

�e world�s �ost precious resource deserves

a law �r� �ocused only on water

ASPEN • BASALT DENVER • TULSAwww.waterlaw.com

800.282.5458

©


revenue a water utility uses to provide for the community comes from customer wa-ter rates. “Rates,” reiterates Greg Kail, di-rector of communications for the American Water Works Association. “That’s how they pay for their operations and manage their assets into the future.”

In addition to rates, utilities charge tap fees when a new house or business comes online. In theory, tap fees should cover the costs of expanding water and wastewater systems, but big projects still have to be financed in advance. Municipal systems typically fund major repairs and other in-frastructure work by issuing bonds that are repaid over time.

Since the economic downturn, many cit-ies haven’t experienced ample growth to finance the infrastructure they built to ac-commodate expanding populations. “There are no more tap fees coming in; that’s dried up,” Bultemeier says of the Eagle River Val-ley. So, to service its debt, the district relies more heavily on existing customers. “That puts pressure on our rates.”

The American Water Works Association conducts a state-of-the-industry survey each year, speaking with about 2,000 util-ity professionals. The same issues regularly rise to the top: water infrastructure needs, regulatory challenges and the ability of utili-ties to finance those needs. Those same issues weigh heavily on utility managers in Colorado, and have been magnified in recent years by the challenging economy.

Much of Colorado’s infrastructure was built 30 to 50 years ago, or earlier. In the meantime cities have been able to rely on that infrastructure without making additional large capital investments. “Our generation

has not experienced that cost before,” Kail says. “It was our parents, our grandparents, our great-grandparents who put most of the pipes in the ground. We’ve arrived at a new moment in our country’s history.”

The severity of the need to update infra-structure varies by utility. Vanderschuere estimates that about 75 percent of Colo-rado Springs Utilities’ budget is allocated for repairing and modernizing infrastructure. Some of the city’s infrastructure dates back to the 1800s, while the most recent seg-ments were built between the 1950s and 1970s. Colorado Springs is also looking to-ward the future; the utility is in the process of building its Southern Delivery System, laying more than 50 miles of pipe to deliver water stored in Pueblo Reservoir northward to Colorado Springs, Fountain, Security and Pueblo West. The project’s first phase will cost about $1 billion, to be paid over 40 years by customers and developers through increased water rates and tap fees.

The job of meeting demands for growth, however, is largely viewed differently by utili-ties than it was 50 years ago. Since large water projects have become increasingly difficult to permit, cities are putting more effort into managing demand—focusing on conservation and efficiency to better use available water. Not only is conservation a public expectation, it comes back to cost, Binney says. Large capital projects cost hundreds of millions of dollars. “Public rate-payers, policy makers, city councilors…they expect you to find ways to solve problems so you don’t go through the rate increases,” Binney says. “Water conservation is the minimum point of entry to actually running any utility now. And it’s a good thing.”

At the same time, water conservation poses its own set of financial challenges. Utilities need a budget to staff conservation programs, fund outreach campaigns and finance rebates. When conservation is ef-fective, water suppliers collect less income because consumption drops, while costs to utilities to continue providing services remain fixed or increase over time. “I call it the near-perfect storm,” says Bultemeier. “We’ve spent years telling people, ‘Don’t buy our product,’ and we’ve built facilities for growth. Now people are buying less and the growth is coming slower than project-ed, so our current customers have to pay those fixed costs.”

Adapting to New ChallengesThose fixed costs are going up in the Ea-gle River Valley and elsewhere. New state nutrient regulations are requiring utilities to better treat their wastewater for nitrogen and phosphorous, which can produce large algal blooms in water bodies. When those plants die off, the decaying matter deprives the water of oxygen, posing problems for aquatic life. The U.S. Environmental Protec-tion Agency requires states to limit nitrogen and phosphorous pollution. Now, the Colo-rado Department of Public Health and En-vironment will require 44 facilities to install additional treatment—total costs are esti-mated at $1.5 billion.

“This is a big deal,” Bultemeier says, with emphasis. Small utilities are exempt from complying with the new rules, and the larg-est utilities are better able to distribute the cost of treatment plant upgrades among their many customers. Eagle River Water and Sanitation District is just big enough

Mat

thew

Sta

ver

Becky Bultemeier (left) oversees finances for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District in Vail, in a balancing act to keep revenues on par with fixed costs and capital improvements. At the end of 2012 (right), about 30 miles of pipeline—more than half of what will be needed—had been installed for the Southern Delivery System regional water project. The project, slated for completion in 2016, will transport water stored in Pueblo Reservoir to communities as far north as Colorado Springs.

Cou

rtes

y C

olor

ado

Spr

ings

Util

ities

This graphic is courtesy of Xylem

Profile Ann TerrySpec ia l D i s t r i c t Assoc i a t i on o f Co lo rado


Ann Terry is a familiar face at the state Capitol. There she represents special districts from around the state, help-ing legislators to understand their specific concerns. For the past three years, Terry has served as executive director of the Special District Asso-ciation of Colorado, dividing her time between advocacy work, project management, and meetings or train-ings with any number of the organi-zation’s 1,355 member districts.

Many of the special districts SDA represents have some tie to

water and sanitation services, but they also provide a wide range of other functions, including fire protection, hospital and emer-gency care, parks and recreation, and library services. “The com-mon tie is that these are local governments created for specific purposes,” says Terry.

In all cases, citizens came together to tax themselves or charge usage fees in order to provide a needed service to the community. “It’s my ideal government,” says Terry. “Special districts are the clos-est form of government to the people. All are governed by a board of elected officials, so they answer to the people and property owners who they represent.”

With a law degree and a background of serving as a lobbyist at the Capitol and in Colorado criminal justice, Terry took the helm at SDA in 2009. Her ability to understand complex issues and bring a new perspective to those issues made her a perfect fit for the position.

Now, as part of SDA’s three-member advocacy team, Terry works

to both construct and shape public policy that affects member dis-tricts. In 2010, she worked to defeat measures 60, 61 and 101, which would have eliminated certain taxes special districts rely on. “They [the referendums and proposition] would have been harmful to all forms of local government,” says Terry.

Currently, SDA is working with fire districts and the Colorado Di-vision of Fire Safety on several bills related to wildfire issues. And, she says, “We are actively monitoring the new state nutrients require-ments [for wastewater treatment] very closely. We are concerned with the unfunded mandate to districts to achieve compliance.”

Terry believes her ability to interact with all kinds of people with diverse backgrounds has helped her bring a customer service ap-proach to her job. “I love the idea that special districts affect Colora-do in such a positive way, and that I have a chance to interact with not only SDA members, but with other local governments, as Colorado works toward a healthier economy,” she says.

For member organizations, SDA’s annual conference features edu-cational and training opportunities and assistance through its leader-ship academy, individual workshops, publications and board member trainings. In addition, districts can post their transparency notices on SDA’s website, where the public can access board member names and contact information, meeting dates, and mill levy information.

At the Capitol, Terry takes every opportunity to share special dis-trict success stories. “For the public and state legislators to under-stand the successes, we need to highlight special districts and how they can be used to assist a community.” —Jayla Poppleton

SDA will host its annual conference for members in Keystone in Sep-tember 2013. Anyone interested in presenting hot topics in water is invited to apply beginning in February or March at www.sdaco.org.

that it has to comply, and because of its to-pography, the district uses three wastewa-ter treatment plants, each of which is sub-ject to the new regulations. “We’re looking at a $90 million improvement in wastewater over the next 10 years,” Bultemeier says. “Those are not numbers we’ve ever used before. Our last improvements, when we to-tally improved the wastewater plants in the ‘90s, we spent $20 million.”

Of course, even $20 million is a lot of money. The city of Longmont plans to spend $20 million to comply with the new nutrient regulations—that is in addition to $20 million in other upgrades the city had already planned to complete during the same time period. The upgrades will be funded through rate increases that will raise the average Longmont household’s monthly sewer bill from $22.08 in 2012 to $35.80 by 2018. Small commercial users and multi-family buildings will face higher bills. Initially, bonds and cash will cover the costs of the projects—repaid by rate-

payers over the next 20 years. Then there are federal regulations that

serve to protect water quality, but can drive up costs. “As the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water acts continue to move for-ward in time and more stringent regulations spin off of those, we have to employ tech-niques and technologies which can be very costly to remain in compliance,” Vander-schuere says. “From an industry perspec-tive, it’s going to be expensive.”

Still, the national and state regulations on water quality serve a key purpose. By limit-ing contamination from both man-made and naturally-occurring substances, they ensure waterways remain vibrant and healthy, and protect humans from life-threatening illness—benefits that, if understood, most customers would likely be willing to pay to preserve.

The American Water Works Association runs an “Only Tap Water Delivers” campaign to raise awareness about water utility service. “It plays on the fact that water is out of sight and out of mind. The advertisements bring

that water infrastructure above-ground and ask the customer, ‘If only our water infrastruc-ture could talk to us, what might it say?’” Kail says. “I think it’s having an impact, but we’re talking about many decades of people pay-ing under $3 for 1,000 gallons of water. When you think about what we pay for less essential things, it really is astounding.”

The cost of water, for the utility and the customer, will only continue to climb, right along with the cost of electricity and infra-structure and the price of securing new wa-ter supplies in an increasingly competitive market. It is, after all, a scarce resource, and without substitute. And for that, people will simply have to pay.

“I think this is a major change for water, how we provide the service,” Binney says. “The real water utility managers are social scientists, communicators, team leaders and strategists. We in the water industry need to do a better job of working with communities, having them understand what the value of water is.” q

Connect with the American Water Works Association’s Only Tap Water Delivers Facebook page to learn more about investing in water infrastructure: www.facebook.com/OnlyTapWaterDelivers.

By Jerd Smith

It is just after 8 a.m. on a bright fall morning in Erie. At

the Lynn J. Morgan Water Treatment Plant, Evelyn Crocfer,

a plant operator, and Bruce Chameroy, chief of operations,

have been on the job for an hour. They work in a sunny,

window-filled room that is part operations center and part

gleaming laboratory.

Dozens of water samples taken from different sites around

the system sit on a counter. As a quality control measure,

Crocfer checks the samples for various constituents first

thing, carefully recording results as residents begin their day.

Across the room, a large computer screen glows with

diagrams of the water treatment plant and the delivery system.

This supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system

gives a detailed, underground view of everything water-

related, from old town Erie out to its polished Vista Ridge

neighborhood and golf course.

Beyond the TapA mostly buried network of infrastructure calls for our attention


New pipe awaits installation in Aurora (top). Bruce Chameroy (right) completes daily inspections at Erie’s water treatment plant to ensure the automated system is running smoothly.

Kev

in M

olon

ey

Ron

Mey

er


Ninety-one percent of Coloradans get their domestic water from surface supplies such as reservoirs, lakes and rivers, while

the other 9 percent rely on groundwater tapped by wells. Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources


Chameroy and Crocfer check the com-puter and know almost instantly how much water is being consumed throughout the system, and what the capacity is in various storage tanks and reservoirs. This morning, the plant is quiet. It has adequate treated water stored to meet the day’s forecasted demand of 1.5 million gallons. This is enough water for Erie residents to cook breakfast, shower and get their children off to school. By contrast, that number exceeds 7 million gallons on hot summer days when sprinkler systems kick into high gear, and the plant ramps up to run nearly at capacity.

Chameroy and Crocfer are members of a full-time staff of seven responsible for ensur-ing that Erie’s rapidly growing population has enough water each day and that the precious liquid is safe to drink and tastes right. Their day starts with an inspection of this hyper-modern water treatment plant, an automated facility that has sophisticated sensors, pres-sure gauges and filters that work around the clock so that Erie, population 20,000 and counting, can run its water system with a handful of people working 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. seven days a week, instead of the 24-hour staffing older facilities require.

Most water utilities use SCADA systems

now, but large utilities, such as Denver Wa-ter still staff their systems round-the-clock. No matter how they’re staffed, water utilities must work closely with police and fire de-partments and residents to ensure they can respond quickly if and when there is an emer-gency. Sophisticated alarm systems tell on-call operators if there’s been a sharp change in water pressure, for example, which may indicate a major water main break.

Delivery systems are often supplied by vast collection systems that capture and transport mountain runoff. Erie, for instance, gets most of its water from the upper Colo-rado River west of the Continental Divide, through the Northern Colorado Water Con-servancy District’s Colorado-Big Thompson Project. Erie’s water arrives each day, hav-ing originated as snowmelt on some of the tallest peaks in Rocky Mountain National Park, via a 13-mile tunnel beneath the Con-tinental Divide, many miles of additional tunnels, multiple reservoirs, and a 37-mile pipeline that comes down from Carter Lake. From there, the water is delivered into raw water storage and held for treatment.

Roughly half of the water Front Range resi-dents use comes from West Slope rivers. But dozens of communities, such as Castle Rock

and Parker, rely on groundwater pumped from deep in the ground. Regardless of the water’s source, it all must be treated, and treatment methods vary depending on water quality and the utility’s age.

A Growing InvestmentAs Chameroy and Crocfer go about the quiet, vital work of delivering water, hun-dreds of other water professionals repeat the same rituals across the state. Accord-ing to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, some 2,050 public water systems are in operation here, ensur-ing Coloradans have enough water to cook, clean, water lawns and manufacture every-thing from beer to shoes.

Erie is one of the smaller systems in Colo-rado, and it is dwarfed by giant water de-livery systems such as Denver Water. Once water reaches Erie, for instance, the town uses roughly 125 miles of pipeline to carry both raw and treated water for its 20,000 residents. Denver, at the opposite end of the scale, has about 3,000 miles of pipes for a system that serves 1.3 million people.

Whether the system is large or small, every foot of pipe must be monitored, maintained, repaired and replaced. It’s a massive invest-

Profile Ted Rott inghausTr i -Coun t y Wa te r Conse r vancy D i s t r i c t


If you live outside city limits in Montrose, Ouray or Delta counties, you are likely getting water that has Ted Rottinghaus’ stamp of approv-al. As assistant manager in charge of operations for Tri-County Water Conservancy District, Rottinghaus is responsible for the quality of wa-ter the district supplies across a service area covering 336 square miles in the Uncompahgre Valley.

Rottinghaus, who grew up on a farm outside Olathe, 10 miles north of Montrose, worked his way up

over a 40-year period from his entry level position as a member of Tri-County’s operations and maintenance crew, a job he got straight out of high school. During that time, he served for 30 years as field superintendent, before moving into his current position last year.

In addition to quality control, Rottinghaus also works on analysis and design for upgrades to the system. Though he spends more time in the office now, he still loves to work outside and tries to get out in the field most afternoons to check on his crews or attend to whatever else needs doing. That could include repairing water breaks, flushing the system to keep water from becoming stag-nant, or monitoring residual chlorine from the treatment process to make sure levels are within limits. The district does not have its own water treatment plant, but receives treated water from the Project 7 Water Authority, which has a plant east of Montrose.

Much has changed since Rottinghaus first came on at Tri-Coun-

ty in 1972. For one thing, the system had just been completed then, and served approximately 1,200 homes in mostly rural areas. Now, it serves 6,500 homes in rural areas and subdivisions.

The technology, too, has changed. Work that once required on-the-ground monitoring and paper maps has been replaced by a computerized supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system. Books and books of as-connected drawings are now col-lecting dust as field crews instead refer to laptop computers housed in every truck. “Now, it’s easier and faster,” says Rottinghaus, refer-ring to the task of locating and monitoring buried parts in the sys-tem. “I was leery about giving up my paper map, but I finally did.”

Most of Tri-County’s incoming personnel are hired as laborers, as Rottinghaus himself was. From there, they’re encouraged to take seminars and continue learning in order to advance to op-erators and supervisors. The crews must have a good working knowledge of the system they’re operating in order to keep the water flowing. They must also understand pumps and electrical systems and pressure-regulating valves. “There’s a 3,000-foot elevation difference from the low point to the high point in our system,” explains Rottinghaus. “Some of our system we have to pump, and the rest of it is gravity-fed. They have to know where all the pumps are at and which direction the water is supposed to be running. Most people don’t understand what it takes to maintain a pressurized system.”

At the end of the day, Rottinghaus finds satisfaction in knowing he is part of providing an essential service to people. And, the occasional phone call he receives from a customer here or there thanking him and his colleagues for a job well done is a small to-ken of recognition that hits home. —Jayla Poppleton

ment each utility must make every year, and the size of that investment is growing.

Denver Water, like other utilities, keeps careful track of its infrastructure. Water main breaks are major problems for utili-ties because they usually require extensive excavation to access and repair, are highly visible, and often disrupt traffic. Industry guidelines indicate that there should be no more than 15 main breaks annually per 100 miles of pipe, and Denver aims even lower, for no more than 13. The utility uses an ex-tensive set of matrices to determine—based on age, use and location—which mains are likely to break, then sets out to repair or re-place them ahead of time.

Nationwide, America’s aging water infra-structure is being eyed warily as govern-ments study how best to replace old sys-tems and make sure new water systems can meet the demands of a growing populace and ever-stricter water quality regulations. According to a new report by the American Water Works Association, “Buried No Lon-ger,” U.S. communities must spend more than $1 trillion over the next 25 years to re-place old water systems and install enough new storage and delivery capacity to cover additional growth.

Denver Water’s system is more than 100 years old. According to Greg Fisher, manager of Denver Water’s demand planning and bud-get, the expected lifetime of a traditional piece of water pipe is 60 years. So Denver, more than a young utility such as Erie, has larger maintenance costs to deal with aging pipes.

Denver Water will spend $100 million maintaining its system in 2013. That amount will rise dramatically, peaking at $150 million annually around 2016 when the utility begins construction on the proposed Gross Reser-voir expansion and replacement of its Moffat Treatment Facility, which was built in 1922.

Denver, like many utilities, will finance this work using the fees it collects from custom-ers. Because of its size, Denver typically goes to the bond markets to issue its own bonds, using the proceeds to fund capital projects. It then pays off those bonds using money generated by water rates and fees.

Smaller communities typically don’t have the ability to go to the bond markets for large sums of money. And that’s where agencies such as the Colorado Water Re-sources and Power Development Authority come in. Each year, communities can bor-row money from the authority to finance wa-ter delivery and treatment projects. In 2013,

the authority will have $40 million available for drinking water projects and about $74 million available for wastewater.

The authority created its loan pool in 1989, issuing bonds and loaning out the proceeds to water utilities at low interest rates. This year the rate is about 2 percent. The authority also obtains grant money from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In 2009, the authority received a one-time allotment of $56 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. So far, the authority has been able to provide loans to most of the communities that have request-ed them, but the need is increasing, says Keith McLaughlin, the authority’s assistant director of finance. According to McLaugh-lin, Colorado communities are projected to need roughly $8.2 billion over the next five years to repair and build drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities.

Some groups are advocating that Con-gress create a new finance authority to help fund infrastructure projects across the country. But many Colorado utility officials said they’re not interested in using federal money, in part because it comes with too many strings attached. “Our philosophy is that water should pay its own way,” says


Steve Ryken, assistant general manager of the Ute Water Conservancy District in Grand Junction. “So when a new subdivi-sion comes in, the infrastructure cost is paid for via tap fees.”

Each time a new home is built, Ute Water charges a one-time fee of $6,500. Ute Water, which serves 80,000 people in the Grand Val-ley, is adding roughly 20 to 30 taps a month. That rate is much easier to maintain, in terms of adding new pipes and treatment capac-ity, than it was just four years ago, when 80 to 100 new taps were going in every month. “Slow, steady growth is healthier, because you can keep up with your infrastructure needs easier,” explains Ryken.

Small utilities also find that banding to-gether gives them much-needed political clout and financial muscle to maintain and expand their systems. In southwestern Col-orado, several small communities and water districts linked up in 1980 to build a $14 mil-lion regional water treatment and distribu-tion system. Cooperation proved the only way to get funding.

The system, known as Project 7, serves 45,000 people in communities from Olathe to Montrose to Delta and beyond. By shar-ing overhead costs, the project ensures even the smallest community has a safe, reliable water supply that can meet increas-ingly stringent water quality rules. “We think we hit a home run with this,” says Project 7 director Adam Turner.

Keeping Costs Down, Service HighNo one doubts the effort it will take to fund water infrastructure projects in coming years, but utilities are finding ways to re-duce those costs using conservation and technology. Denver Water had planned to replace two aging 20-million-gallon treated water tanks and a pump substation. But because the utility is using less water due to improved operational efficiencies and customers’ water conservation efforts, it has scaled back its plans. By building two 10-million-gallon tanks instead, Denver Wa-ter expects to save as much as $15 million. It may be able to eliminate the pump station as well.

Technology is also making water systems more efficient and less expensive to operate. Twenty years ago, water stored in open res-ervoirs often grew stale and cloudy as sun-light heated the top layers of the water and allowed algae to bloom. Traditionally, utilities would add chemicals to the water to control the algae. Now towns such as Erie use “Solar Bees,” devices that look like giant bumble-

bees. As their name implies, they’re solar-powered mixers that draw cool, high-quality water from the bottom of the storage reser-voirs and pump it to the top, creating a mixing cycle that improves water purity, clarity and taste without using chemicals or electricity.

Utilities are also improving their delivery systems to reduce water waste and loss due to evaporation. Erie is participating in a new pipeline project that will replace an open canal previously used for delivery. The new pipeline is expected to reduce evapo-ration losses by 10 percent.

As any water operator will tell you, a good day is when nothing goes wrong and a bad day can happen quickly. Because their work touches the lives of everyone in their com-munities, water operations staffers rely on constant testing and observation to keep their systems safe and running smoothly.

Small utilities such as Erie also rely on their neighbors. One day last summer, Cha-meroy saw a park maintenance crew spray-ing pesticide near one of Erie’s reservoirs. He knew immediately he would need to stop taking water from that storage facility.

Thanks to an emergency connect that Erie maintains with the towns of Louisville and Lafayette, Chameroy was able to shut down the intake from Erie’s reservoir, open the emergency interconnect, and use wa-ter from the partner towns to continue de-livering safe water to residents. Sampling quickly determined that the reservoir near the spraying operation had not been con-taminated. Without the help of its neighbors, Erie would have had to shut off water to res-idents while it was analyzing the water.

Back at the Lynn Morgan plant, Cham-eroy and Crocfer continue monitoring the pulse of their small, modern water facility, where big things are afoot. In 2013, Erie’s new recycled water plant will deliver its first water to the city’s parks and the golf course at Vista Ridge. The town’s homeowner as-sociations will be given access to a state-of-the-art rain and moisture system, so that their sprinklers know when trees and grass-es in common areas need water and when they don’t.

By the end of the day, Chameroy and his team are ready to set the system on auto-pilot for the night. They check their gauges and monitoring systems one more time, make sure their alarms are set in case something needs their attention before morning, and lock their office doors, know-ing the people who call Erie home will have all the water they need until the staff mem-bers return to their posts in the morning. q

Most utilities are responsible for their delivery systems up to the point where the customer’s service line taps into the utility-owned water main, where that responsibility is transferred to the customer. For troubleshooting advice related to in-home leaks, low water pressure or other problems, check your water provider’s website, which should be listed on your water bill. There you can also find a Consumer Confidence Report, letting you know how your utility’s water quality measures up.

Bar

ton

Gla

sser

Adam Turner oversees Project 7, a cooperative project implemented by a group of West Slope entities in the 1980s as an affordable route to clean water.

Evelyn Crocfer is a water treatment plant operator for Erie, a small community that has implemented a modern, automated system.

Kev

in M

olon

ey


Pueblo residents could purchase a 60-gal-lon barrel of Arkansas River water for 25 cents from the back of a wagon. Anything swimming or floating in it came as part of the deal. It might have seemed like a bar-gain for a cowboy looking to clean up be-fore a night on the town or seeking a cool drink on a hot summer day.

Today, both the treatment of Colorado’s water and the price structure are far more sophisticated. Just as there is a science to treating water to meet standards for health and safety, the pricing of water is closely studied. Water utilities across the state pro-vide water that is much cleaner now, meet-ing standards that measure contaminants in parts per million, billion or trillion. And that 60-gallon barrel? Today, it would cost just 13 cents to fill from a Pueblo tap.

The price of that same Arkansas River water varies as you travel up the road. In Colorado Springs, a growing city located farther from natural water sources, com-plicated systems transport water over long distances, affecting cost. Customers there would pay nearly twice as much as in Pueb-lo, given a minimum level of consumption,

and more than three times as much at the top of a tiered rate structure that increases the rate as more water is used.

To the north, Aurora Water moves Ar-kansas River water over mountain ranges into its system in the South Platte Basin to use and reuse until the water is techni-cally “used up.” The city charges customers who use lower amounts of water more than Colorado Springs does, but bills big users a little less.

Why the differences?

No Industry Rule of ThumbEvery system is unique, and every utility has some sort of rate structure that takes into account the cost to buy water, treat it, pump it and maintain the infrastructure that deliv-ers potable water to consumers’ taps.

Going back to the Old West example, some of the water might spill from the bar-rel and there is more wear and tear on the wagon and horses as you haul it further up the road.

The American Water Works Associa-tion provides guidelines for utilities in set-ting water rates, but more depends on the

boards that govern cities, utilities or water districts and the nature of water systems. A developed water system with few capital costs likely will be able to keep its rates on a steady plane, while growing communities have to develop strategies that avoid rate shock while paying the bills.

Costs for water might depend on source of supply and whether the water comes from a system owned and maintained by the utility or purchased from another pro-vider. If new, permanent water supplies must be acquired, the relative seniority and resulting dependability of the water rights also affects cost. In addition, some special districts rely more heavily on property taxes, particularly for capital improvements, which can offset the need for higher customer charges. But this diminishes flexibility—cer-tain constitutional limits apply to property taxes but not service fees. Water bills may also include sewer and stormwater charges.

Beyond those factors, a growing com-munity might require new users to foot the bills. “In simple terms, you’ve built it before they come,” says Rick Giardina of Red Oak Consulting, which assists hundreds of wa-

The Art and Scienceof Pricing Water

Rate setting is no simple task,

but there’s a reason

we pay what we do.

A water delivery wagon makes its

rounds in Colorado Springs circa 1895.

By Chris Woodka


ter utilities across the country with setting rates and other operational issues. Utilities build the cost of new service into one-time, up-front tap fees—virtually invisible charges included in the price of a new home or busi-ness. If those fees are set too low, existing customers could wind up footing a larger bill than necessary.

Social considerations also come into play when structuring rates. Some utilities might subsidize a minimum level of consumption to keep the price affordable for those least able to pay. Such an “essential use allow-ance” is typically based on the amount of water an average household would use for indoor use only. Similarly, a utility could del-egate a portion of its revenue toward a pay-ment assistance program.

A community might also use rates to at-tract large commercial users, charging them lower rates while asking residential custom-ers to make up the difference; the benefit could be realized through economic devel-opment and an increase in the local tax base.

The rate structure could also be used to promote other social goals such as low-impact development or green infrastructure that conserves water, says Giardina. “In the work we do, the first question we’re asked is ‘How do we compare with others?’ But without peeling back the layers of the onion, there are so many variables.”

Financial RealitiesElected boards often want to keep prices affordable to keep customers happy, but at the same time use rates to encourage con-servation. They must also strike the tricky balance between maintaining revenues to cover today’s costs, while at the same time planning ahead for capital improvements. The job takes leadership and political will—there can be pushback from customers for throttling up rates too quickly.

Old West advice: Avoid a lynch mob at all costs.

Aurora faced criticism from some ratepay-ers for increases to pay for the $638 million Prairie Waters Project, which recycles efflu-ent through a complicated well-field, pipe-line and treatment system. Its rates jumped 12 percent from 2006 to 2008, and then by 7 to 8 percent in the next two years.

The board of the Parker Water and Sanita-tion District narrowly escaped recall in 2009 when the costs of building the Reuter-Hess Reservoir hit home. And now the proposed $500 million Arkansas Valley Conduit has Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District representatives busy reminding of-ficials in 40 communities of the decade-long planning process that has gone into trying to make the project a reality.

Colorado Springs customers are now paying higher rates to cover the cost of the $986 million Southern Delivery System, currently being built. Beginning in 2011, Colorado Springs Utilities told customers to brace for six years of 12 percent annual increases in water rates before the new sys-tem is expected to come on-line in 2016. In 2013, the actual rate increase will be 10 per-cent, and smaller jumps are anticipated in 2014 and 2015.

Even little changes can cause big ripples. In Center, a small community in the Rio Grande Basin, a proposal to install meters got residents’ attention last summer be-cause it was feared rates would double.

“Public utility governing bodies are torn between public resistance to rate increase and the financial realities of operating and maintaining the system,” says financial con-sultant Joe Drew.

Utilities have about 80 percent fixed costs, while 80 to 90 percent of their operating reve-nue typically comes from customer charges. Yet they must maintain and replace parts in

the water system. “In tough economic times, you can’t say that you can’t afford to improve your water system the same way you can’t afford to put a playground in the park,” says Giardina. “A community can say, ‘We’re will-ing to accept lower levels of services.’ But you can’t deliver half-clean water.”

Strategic Rate SettingNearly every community in Colorado uses water meters to track customers’ water use for monthly or quarterly billing. Some still charge a uniform rate for all customers, re-gardless of the amount of use. As popula-tions grow, many water providers have im-plemented tiered rate structures that charge more per gallon as use increases. A few have taken the next step, creating a water budget that reflects a homeowner’s likely needs and past use of water.

The Pueblo Board of Water Works is one utility that uses a one-size-fits-all water rate, which means customers pay the same price per 1,000 gallons whether they use 10,000 or 40,000 gallons per month.

The reason Pueblo is able to do that is be-cause it has acquired enough water to meet modest future growth needs and uses its excess supply to keep rates low. It also has some of the oldest water rights of any Front Range city, which insures its ability to use water from the Arkansas River that flows through town. Pueblo also strives for only moderate rate hikes by planning for capital improvements years in advance.

“My personal philosophy is to use small, steady rate increases,” says Seth Clayton, finance division manager for the Pueblo wa-ter board. “You want to keep rates as low as you possibly can, because it provides flex-ibility for the future.”

In the early 1980s, a time of national infla-tion and local water plant improvements, the Pueblo Board of Water Works upped its rates

Kev

in M

olon

ey

At Aurora Water, Steve Hellman (left) manages the finances, while Greg Baker (right) manages public relations. Communicating the variables behind water rates is a joint effort.


0 5000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000

Monthly Residential Water Use in Gallons55,000 60,000

Colorado Springs

Denver

Aurora

Eagle RiverWater and

Sanitation District

Greeley

Ute Water

$ Rat

e per

Thou

sand

Gal

lons

(201

2)

0

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

Pueblo

Colorado Residential Water Rate Comparison

Residential water users typically pay a flat monthly service fee plus a consumption charge based on a water rate multiplied by the volume of water used. Water utilities structure that combination of charges differently, aiming to cover the myriad ex-penses associated with delivering clean water to customers’ homes and to achieve certain social goals, such as affordability or sustainability of the resource. Water rates vary widely across the state depending on factors such as the rate of growth, the complexity of the system, or the strength of the water rights portfolio.

Source: Rate information on the respective utilities’ websites.

between 6 to 11 percent annually. Then, for nearly a decade there were few increases, but since 1995, the board has inched up its rates between 1.5 to 5 percent annually, but no more. Even during a $60 million supply-boosting acquisition of shares of the Bes-semer Ditch in 2009, the board found other ways to soften rate increases.

Pueblo routinely uses its water to create other revenue streams that offset the need for higher rates. The water board leases water to farmers, power companies and Au-rora to provide between 20 percent and 25 percent of its revenue. During the drought of the last two years, the water board started increasing the price for leasing water both through competitive bids and short- or long-term contracts.

After the drought of 2002, the increas-ing scarcity of Colorado water supplies hit home, and most cities and water districts along the Front Range adopted some sort of tiered rate structure to discourage waste-ful water use.

In Old West terms, the first barrel of water

still might cost 25 cents to cover the basic costs of bringing clean water to the custom-er. Under a tiered rate structure, the second barrel, perhaps for a really thirsty cowboy, would cost 50 cents. If the cowboy han-kered for a bath every night, the third barrel would cost a dollar.

According to Stella Chan, financial plan-ning manager for Colorado Springs Utilities, studies have shown that for every 10 per-cent increase in the price of water, residen-tial users reduce consumption by between 1 percent and 7 percent.

Some tiers are steeper than others, and in some cases have been set through trial and error. Aurora Water uses its rate struc-ture—its second attempt at tiered rates— to reflect a higher cost during the summer lawn-watering season. After decades of acquiring new water sources and building Prairie Waters, Aurora now has some of the highest water rates on the Front Range.

Still, Aurora Water’s chief financial offi-cer Steve Hellman believes the city of more than 335,000 people has positioned itself

well in terms of future rate increases. About 40 percent of the cost of Prairie Waters de-pends on new development—the tap fee for a single-family home is more than $40,000, compared to $4,000 in Pueblo.

But the city can’t afford to put costs on the backs of existing customers should the growth be slow in coming. Aurora has not had rate increases in the past two years, and does not expect to ask for more than a 2 percent increase through 2015. Like Pueblo, Aurora uses sales of leased water to offset costs and avoid rate increases.

“This year [a drought] was great for sales, and we’re using the money to pay off the ex-tra debt,” says Hellman. Aurora Water may also sell water to its neighbors in the South Metro area through the Water Infrastructure Supply Efficiency (WISE) partnership.

Colorado Springs, one of the first Colora-do cities to implement meter reading, start-ed its tiered system in the summer of 2003, during a drought where outdoor watering was restricted. The higher rates kick in at lower levels than under Aurora’s structure.

The typical Colorado household uses 12,000 gallons of water per month, when averaged over the course of a year, and paid anywhere between $32 and $87 for that water in 2012. Source: Greeley Water

Block or Tiered Rate

Uniform Rate

Legend

Many utilities keep rates low for base levels of consumption. Colorado Springs’ second tier kicks in just after 7,500 gallons, when

the utility assumes extravagant indoor water use or some degree of outdoor use.

Both Greeley and Pueblo have very old, reliable water rights to nearby streams that help them

keep rates low whereas some utilities, including Aurora Water, must go to great lengths to both

secure and transport water.

At 20,000 gallons per month, Denver Water customers paid $108.13 monthly in 2012. The second tier rate applied here is double that of the �rst tier to discourage wasteful

outdoor watering.

Pueblo has a uniform water rate; the charge per 1,000 gallons is the same no matter how much

customers use. At 20,000 gallons, customers paid a monthly bill of $51.20 in 2012.

Some utilities include a set volume of water with the monthly service charge. For Ute Water,

customers can use 3,000 gallons before consumption rates kick in.


“When we look at the average summer usage per residential customer in 2005—the last year that mandatory restrictions were in place—and the average between 2006 and 2011, the [per capita] usage hasn’t gone up,” says Chan. “So, one can conclude that the tiered rate structures and the price sig-nal do encourage conservation.”

Another conservation-minded pricing strategy, used in a few communities such as Boulder and Highlands Ranch, is to develop customized tiers based on each customer’s specific needs. These utilities create indi-vidual water budgets for each customer based on variables such as customer class, the number of people living in a household and a reasonable allotment for outdoor landscaping needs, plus past use on an ac-count’s record.

In Old West terms: “You used a barrel last week, so that’s all we’re bringing this week, partner. You want more? You’ll pay more.”

Customers in Boulder who stay within their budget pay a lower base rate. But penalty

rates for exceeding that budget can reach 500 percent of the base rate. Again, the idea is to send a price signal that makes people think twice about the way they use water.

In addition to billing through a water bud-get, the Centennial Water and Sanitation District, which serves Highlands Ranch, provides detailed information to its custom-ers about how much water outdoor land-scaping actually requires. Water bills each month clearly state the water usage goal for each customer.

For tiered rate structures or water bud-gets to be effective, customers must have the ability to track their use and make ad-justments. Infrequent billing cycles, for ex-ample, limit customers’ ability to course-correct in their water use.

Conservation ConundrumPricing strategies that reduce customer wa-ter use can also lessen the need to develop new water supplies or fund additional water treatment. But, Giardina cautions that “con-

servation pricing can lead to a permanent decline in water use, and you have to ask, ‘How much lower can we go?’”

The Alliance for Water Efficiency, in a pa-per presented at a 2012 national water rates summit in Racine, Wisconsin, outlined a di-lemma facing water utilities nationwide. As people use less water through conservation and efficiency measures, they inadvertently drive up rates. Utilities end up selling less of their product, but still have to cover fixed costs. To make up for decreased sales, they must raise rates further. Customers are ef-fectively penalized for their successes.

“The biggest risk for the industry may be building tomorrow’s water supply in-frastructure to meet yesterday’s water de-mand,” authors Janice Beecher and Thom-as Chestnutt contend.

For small utilities, the job of rate setting is simply a matter of keeping up.

La Junta, an Eastern Plains city of 7,000, has embarked on several $1 million-plus proj-ects since 1999, including a reverse osmosis

Some water providers also treat

their customers’ wastewater,

while others such as Denver

Water contract with a separate

wastewater treatment provider.

In Denver, customers pay sewer

charges according to the volume of

water used indoors only, which is

calculated based off their February

usage, when outdoor watering is

unlikely to occur.

Utilities charge different rates depending on the custome

r

class; most differentiate residential and commercial user

s,

while some also make additional distinctions between sin

gle-

family and multi-family residences.

Utility staff are

available 24 hours

a day to respond

to emergencies, such as main line

breaks, detected internally or reported by their

customers. Go online to contact

your utility at any

hour of the day.

Utilities use public messaging to promote a conservation

ethic and sustainable water use among their customers.

Customers pay a flat

monthly service charge to

receive water no matter how

much they use. This covers

administrative costs such as

meter reading and customer

service and constitutes the

most reliable portion of a

utility’s revenue.

Consumption charges are applied

to the volume of water used at

a customer address, based on

the water meter reading at the

end of the billing cycle. This is

typically calculated per 1,000

gallons and may increase as total

water usage goes up.

Utilities are beginning to offer

customers tools to

monitor their own

water usage in real-time.

Some utilities bill

monthly; others bill bi-

monthly or quarterly.

The shorter the billing

cycle, the more opportunity customers

have to react, adjusting

their water usage to

keep their bills lower.

Waterspeak 101Breaking down the water bill, Denver style

Profile Bryce EmersonC l i f t on Wa te r D i s t r i c t

On any given day, Bryce Emerson can be found somewhere in the Clifton Water District’s 16.75-square-mile service area monitoring water meters. Emerson is Clifton’s only meter reader, responsible for reading more than 11,000 meters each month in an accurate and timely fashion. He completes his task, alone, in just half the time it used to take two people working together.

That’s because Clifton Water, which serves the unincorporated communities of Clifton and Whitewater, is most of the way through a full conversion to automated meter reading technology. Of its 11,209 meters, which measure water use in both residential and commercial properties, it has only 1,438 left to go. Emerson spends much of his days performing drive-by readings in a van outfitted with an antenna. As he moves down the road, water use data au-tomatically transmits from the meters he passes and downloads to a computer.

Still, there are meters with faulty transmission signals, in addition to those not yet converted. Hopping out of his van, Emerson lo-cates the meter “pit,” and uses a probe to obtain a “touch read” sig-nal to a handheld computer—this is yesterday’s technology, already outdated. Long gone, it seems, are the days when meter readers had to regularly lift up the meter’s lid to visually take a reading.

Though he’s only been at it since February 2011, Emerson has become Clifton’s resident meter expert. Not only is he respon-

sible for monthly readings and re-pairing broken meters, he must also perform quality control on the new system. Emerson methodically works through sampling groups—about 120 meters per month—to make sure the radio read matches the actual read at the meter pit. He also regularly conducts bench tests on individual meters, removing them and bringing them into the shop. “The bench test makes sure the me-ter is registering the right amount of flow through it,” explains Emerson.

The Grand Junction native loves the nature of his work, especially working outdoors. He emphasizes good judgment, problem-solving skills, and the ability to work outside in all kinds of weather as pre-requisites for the job.

That, and accuracy, which is what meter reading is ultimately all about—ensuring people are billed correctly. “Installing the radio read meters allows us to provide better customer service,” says Emerson. “There’s less chance for human error. And the cost sav-ings are being passed on to the customer.” —Jayla Poppleton


treatment plant, new supply, expansion of the system, two new water tanks and partner-ships with nearby districts. “For a town our size, these have been huge projects,” says Joe Kelley, La Junta’s water superintendent.

Just as for other water utilities across the state, La Junta must also adjust rates to keep up with increasingly stringent regula-tory requirements. Rising energy costs—it takes a lot of power to pump water through a system—also drive up the need for revenue.

The charge for 11,000 gallons in La Junta has gone up to $51.71 in 2013 from $43.30 in 2009, a 19 percent jump. The rates are likely to continue to rise in the future, as the community is one of 40 participating in the $500 million Arkansas Valley Conduit. The conduit will provide clean drinking water to communities feeling the pinch of tighter water quality standards. “I think people here are pretty comfortable with the conduit, and realize it is the most economical alternative at this point,” says Kelley.

That comfort level might reflect a no-tion suggested by financial consultant Joe Drew: People in rural communities have a better understanding of where their water comes from.

Kelley isn’t so sure. “Even in La Junta, most people think water comes out of a tap,” he muses.

Better than from a barrel in the back of a wagon. q

Meter Reading Goes High TechUtilities across the state are converting to radio technology for read-ing meters, improving accuracy and eliminating the back-breaking and potentially dangerous job of manually reading meters.

Denver Water has converted all of its meters to a wireless system, says Don Logan, Denver Water meter shop foreman. Now, the util-ity can use drive-by readings for monthly billing. And, says Logan, “Some of our large metered customers have installed equipment specific to one manufacturer that provides a means for the customer to monitor their usage.”

Aurora Water also installed wireless meters in a project that began in 1996. And, for $30 customers get a WaterSmart Reader they can stick on their refrigerator, which provides real-time in-formation on water use. Customers are able to monitor their own use in creative ways, says Greg Baker, Aurora Water’s spokes-man. “We tell customers to zero it out before they go to bed. If just one gallon moves through there by morning, it could mean a

leaky toilet flap,” Baker says. Some customers with large lawns or pools use the household meters to avoid crossing into higher rate tiers, for instance filling a pool until the meter reads 19,999 gallons to avoid hitting the 20,000-gallon bracket.

The Pueblo Board of Water Works is in the middle of a 10-year project to convert all of its me-ters to wireless, and has installed relay stations on utility poles so meters can be read at a central location. Eventually, the information will be made available online to customers. More than half of Pueblo’s meters have been automated so far. Until the project is completed in 2017, the water board will continue spending about $900,000 annually to replace traditional meters with wireless signals.

Fort Collins is also in the process of installing water and electric meters which will allow two-way digital communication between the meters and the utility. “The new meters will transfer electricity and water use information more quickly and efficiently to utility distribution and billing systems,” says Steve Catanach, Fort Collins Light and Power operations manager. “This means we can pro-vide timelier customer service, including quicker service connection, early leak detection and better understanding of high electric or water usage.” —Chris Woodka

With Aurora’s WaterSmart Reader, customers can view their water use in real-time and zone in on specific household uses.


At night, you sleep, maybe get-ting up to go to the bathroom once or twice. In the morning, you take a shower, brush your teeth to the sound of running

water from the tap and make coffee. This daily rhythm of life is unremarkable unless you’re in the water treatment business, where it is known as “diurnal flow.” At the J.D. Phillips wastewater treatment plant in north Colorado Springs, the amount of dis-charge coming into the plant on a weekday morning can rise 600 percent within a few hours, which is where “water management” comes into play, says the plant’s superin-tendant William Hoyt.

Water management at the plant Hoyt oversees means choosing an appropri-ate number and size of detention tanks for incoming wastewater to go through first-stage treatment. During the detention peri-od, heavier solids settle to the bottom while oil, grease and lighter solids float to the surface. The number of tanks in use must be averaged to maintain treatment levels at both peak and off-peak hours. If the tanks fill too slowly, leaving some of the wastewa-ter in the tank for a longer period, they can become putrefied or “septic.”

To most of us, our public water systems—

drinking water, wastewater and stormwa-ter—are out of sight and out of mind. What the systems do for Colorado cities and towns, however, is vital, and those systems require vigilance, knowledge and ingenuity to ensure domestic water is safe to drink and that wastewater and stormwater don’t pose a threat to the environment.

Only in the past 100 to 150 years have scientists determined the importance of safe drinking water. For most of human his-tory, cities have been spawning grounds for disease, dependent on migration from the outside to replenish their populations.

In the United States, the introduction of water filtration and chlorination in major cit-ies between 1900 and 1940 accounted for approximately a 15 percent decline in urban death rates, according to research pub-lished in the journal Demography. Before the introduction of filtration and chlorination, city residents died at rates 30 percent high-er than rural residents. In the late 1800s, infant mortality was 140 percent higher in cities than in the countryside.

Drinking Water TreatmentIn the 1970s, a rising public awareness of environmental issues, discovery of chemical and organic contamination in public drinking

water, and the lack of enforceable, national standards led to the passage of several fed-eral environmental laws, including the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. That law, admin-istered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and its partners, is the cornerstone of modern drinking water treatment.

The Safe Drinking Water Act gave the EPA authority to delegate the primary re-sponsibility for enforcing drinking water regulations to states. Here, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environ-ment (CDPHE) adopts, implements and enforces the standards set by the federal drinking water program. The state agency has further delegated enforcement of stan-dards for private wells and campgrounds to county health departments.

Drinking water treatment plants use a se-ries of processes involving physical, chemi-cal and biological changes to remove sus-pended material and turn raw water into drinking water. Chlorine is typically used as a disinfectant, added either before the water enters the treatment process or just before it moves into the distribution system. In some Colorado systems such as the city of Thornton, a burgeoning Denver suburb, state-of-the-art technologies are appearing to replace or augment steps in the proce-

By Dan Gordon

Water Quality’s Front LineHow water treatment makes our water safe to drink and protects waterways

Bar

ton

Gla

sser


Terry Walker, plant operator, checks on one of the clarifiers at Project 7 Water Authority’s treatment plant in Montrose County.

dure. At Thornton’s renovated Wes Brown Water Treatment Plant, ultra filtration (UF) membranes remove suspended solids in the source water, and ultraviolet (UV) disin-fection technologies take the place of chlo-rine to remove pathogens.

Pathogenic microbes are the contami-nants of biggest concern for water treat-ment systems, according to Denver Water spokeswoman Stacy Chesney. These in-clude bacteria, viruses, giardia and cryp-tosporidium, which can cause a range of acute sicknesses or even death from dis-eases like typhoid, cholera or giardiasis.

State drinking water standards are the same for all localities, but each system faces its own set of challenges. As a headwaters state, many of Colorado’s drinking water pro-viders are fortunate to draw water upstream from almost all other users. “Colorado has great source water,” says Diane Johnson, communications and public affairs manager for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation Dis-trict, headquartered in Vail. The Eagle River district derives its surface water from wa-tersheds that feed the Eagle River and Gore Creek. But even high country watersheds like these may contain small amounts of im-purities from human and natural sources.

The Eagle Mine is an abandoned mine in

the EPA’s Superfund program—that cleans up hazardous waste sites—located about 10 miles upstream of the district’s water treatment facility in Avon. Although the re-mediation plan for the site includes its own wastewater treatment plant—which removes about 175 pounds of zinc daily—district technicians must still be vigilant for metals in the river downstream of the old mine.

The community of Las Animas, on the lower Arkansas River in the southeastern quarter of the state, takes its drinking water from wells that tap the river’s alluvial aqui-fer. Folks there have complained about the region’s hard water since cowboys first dug wells in the canyon lands south of town. In 1997, after an engineering study determined the best way to remove minerals from the water supply was to use reverse osmosis (RO), Las Animas built an RO water filtra-tion plant. The technology is much the same as that of a desalination plant: Pressurized water is pushed through a fine membrane, filtering out contaminants. In a desalination plant, the process yields a salty byproduct, brine. In Las Animas, the result is a “con-centrate” of metals and salts that is sent to the city’s waste lagoon to settle before being processed in the wastewater plant. The water tastes much better and doesn’t

play havoc with visitors’ digestive systems, but the system was expensive and caused water rates to rise. Many residents could no longer afford to turn on outdoor spigots, leading to weeds replacing grass and gar-dens on almost every street.

The new technology had another draw-back: “After RO, we began having problems with water main breaks,” says plant opera-tor Roy Davis. “A good clean course of wa-ter” was at fault, resulting in the collapse of century-old pipes that had previously been supported by mineral deposits that formed on the pipes’ insides.

Not all water systems are able to make needed upgrades. For the South Swink Wa-ter District, which serves 610 customers in the Arkansas Valley from a 700-foot well, a radioactive contaminant, radium, presents problems that are seemingly insurmount-able for an entity with so few customers and scant financial resources. To remove enough radium to meet EPA standards would be prohibitively expensive, according to Norman Noe, the district’s plant opera-tor and secretary-treasurer. And once the radium is removed, there’s the problem of what to do with it.

The South Swink district is “under en-forcement,” Noe says, meaning customers


get a notice each month with their bills “more or less” telling them not to drink the water. The district and similar small rural districts are frequently privately owned, nonprofit en-tities, making them ineligible for grants open to larger water systems. “The CDPHE hasn’t pushed us to install treatment, but we have our backs to the wall,” says Noe.

The community’s best hope for a solution is the Arkansas Valley Conduit, Noe says. The pipeline, originally authorized 48 years ago by the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project Act, would bring water to 42 communities in the Arkansas Valley and could be completed in 10 years if all goes well.

The Eagle River district has its own prob-lems—and solutions—that stem from its high country location. With few discharg-ers upstream, the Eagle River district’s raw water is of high quality, says director of operations Todd Fessenden. However, during spring runoff, the river carries water that is difficult to treat because it contains a heavier dose of organic materials. Its low temperature also makes it resistant to trav-eling through filtration membranes, because water gets more viscous as it gets colder. Because the district is consolidated from many predecessor entities, it has, in addi-tion to a variety of water rights, three sets of drinking and wastewater treatment plants, plus 18 groundwater wells. So, during the spring runoff, the district chooses to draw

water from its wells instead. The ground-water can be cheaper to treat than surface water because it is “essentially already fil-tered,” Fessenden says. Additionally, de-mand for water in the district is low during the runoff in late spring, making reliance on the wells easier.

Beyond that, the unique setup of three back-to-back-to-back sets of water and wastewater treatment plants permits the district, whose service area runs roughly from Vail to Cordillera—30 miles downriv-er—to do things other entities can’t. If the river is running low, the district can optimize its operations to enhance streamflows by pumping finished drinking water up-valley so it can be used, treated at an upstream wastewater treatment plant, and returned to the river as outflow upstream of where it was originally taken out.

Reuse SystemsAs the state’s population grows—and it’s expected to nearly double by 2050—utilities are innovating in other ways. Recycling has become a major concern for water provid-ers seeking to reduce the need for new wa-ter sources.

One method for using water to the last drop is a “purple pipe” system. Purple pipes denote a water system that provides nonpo-table water. Denver Water’s recycled water system, which is about halfway to build-out,

Mat

thew

Sta

ver

Todd Fessenden is director of operations at Eagle River Water and Sanitation District in Vail.

is the state’s largest. The system’s recycling plant takes effluent from a Metro Wastewa-ter Reclamation District treatment facility and gives it additional treatment before it is pumped through 18 miles of purple pipe to customers, including Xcel Energy, the Den-ver Zoo, city parks and golf courses. Once the system is complete, it will offset enough drinking water to serve almost 45,000 homes—and save the unneeded cost of bringing water destined for irrigation or in-dustrial use up to drinking water standards.

The state has other purple pipe systems of note: In Colorado Springs, 26 miles of pipe carry nonpotable water—in this case, a combination of raw water and treated waste-water plant effluent—for industrial uses and irrigation. The Colorado Springs system was one of the first reclaimed water systems built in the western United States. In Boulder County, Superior’s reuse system features a combination of treated wastewater and raw water to irrigate 390 acres, including all com-

mercial and multi-family landscaping in the town, as well as parks, medians and some open space, according to Superior Utilities superintendent Dmitry Tepo.

Northeast of Denver, a different type of project “recaptures” water to be turned into drinking water. Aurora Water’s Prairie Wa-ters project retrieves wastewater effluent that has been treated and discharged into the South Platte River. Near Brighton, an amount of water equal to Aurora’s waste-water discharge is pumped from riverbank wells, piped to a man-made basin where it percolates through sand and gravel much as it would in a natural aquifer, and pumped back to Aurora to undergo state-of-the-art purification. The project increases Aurora’s water supply by 20 percent—about 3.3 bil-lion gallons of water each year.

Prairie Waters wouldn’t be possible if Au-rora didn’t import much of its source water from other basins, most notably the Colora-do River, but also the Arkansas. If all its wa-

ter were native to Aurora’s watershed, the city could only legally use it one time before sending it downstream to other water rights holders. Having purchased water rights from other basins, Aurora is allowed to use 95 percent of its water “to extinction.”

“In a perfect system, you could get almost 2 gallons per every gallon. Now we get 1.6 gallons per every gallon,” says Greg Baker, Aurora Water’s manager of public relations.

The cost of treating water can vary dra-matically, depending on the system. Den-ver, which relies on mountain watersheds, pays about 18 cents per 1,000 gallons to treat water, while Las Animas, with its RO system, has costs of between 80 cents and $1 per 1,000 gallons for treatment.

In Aurora, Baker says the cost of drink-ing water is too variable and his depart-ment doesn’t have a number for it. “[In] wet years like 2009, our treatment costs were low, since we didn’t have to use as many chemicals and pump as much water around

Marty Tiffany is an environmental-ist on the front line. At the Metro Wastewater Reclamation District in Denver, where he is one of 22 operators staffing the Robert W. Hite Treatment Facility 24 hours a day, he is ultimately responsible for maintaining water quality in the South Platte River. That’s where the treated wastewater Metro collects via 236 miles of buried interceptor pipes is discharged—after being screened, settled, de-gritted, aer-

ated and disinfected. Metro is a wholesale provider of wastewater treatment, presently

contracted by 59 local governments, stretching from Golden out to Denver International Airport, to process water that has been used by 1.7 million people to clean dishes, bathe bodies and flush toilets. Ninety-five percent of the wastewater Metro processes is residen-tial; the rest is commercial and industrial.

Tiffany didn’t set out to work in wastewater treatment. But 25 years ago, after a stint at a now-decommissioned Denver primary treatment plant, he started at Metro and has been there ever since. His science-based background—he has a biology degree—made the job, which includes elements of chemistry, biology and physics, a good fit. Tiffany recognizes that for new operators, “the biggest challenge is learning to be cross-trained in every area.” To enter the field, he recommends a good mechanical aptitude, inquisitive nature about how things work, and desire to do something good for the environment.

Over the past three decades, Tiffany has seen water treatment progress from simple screening of trash plus primary treatment, in which solids are settled out and removed, to highly technical sec-ondary treatment and soon-to-be-implemented tertiary treatment. Anymore, there are very few wastewater treatment facilities in this

country—none in Colorado—that can get by with primary treatment alone, and only then with a big dilution factor, says Tiffany. Tertiary treatment will be added at the current Hite facility, as well as Metro’s new North Plant which will be under construction soon in Brighton, in order to comply with new state regulations requiring removal of nitrogen and phosphorous from wastewater.

“In the West, where water is gold, you have to get to a much higher standard,” says Tiffany. To do that, Tiffany and Metro’s other operators must maintain the right mix of air, oxygen, micro-organ-isms, wastewater and time in the aeration basins that constitute secondary treatment. Much of this is done by instrumentation. Still, says Tiffany, “You have to know what the instruments are telling you.” Operators also use manual probes to verify that the instru-mentation is accurate.

Tiffany spends his days moving from the control room, where screens show what is happening at 20,000 data points across the plant and throughout the collection system, out through the 170-acre plant site. He could be weighing in chemical deliveries, sam-pling the treated outfall entering the South Platte to ensure com-pliance with regulations, or monitoring and adjusting the level of oxygen in the aeration basins or chlorine in the disinfection holding area. Operators must also separate and treat biosolids through heat and disinfection. That process yields methane gas, which is cap-tured and re-purposed to provide 40 percent of the plant’s electric-ity, as well as 80 tons of fertilizer marketed as “MetroGro” per day.

As Tiffany works to keep the system running smoothly, the pay-off is evident. The South Platte wouldn’t have become the vibrant waterway it is now if it weren’t for Metro—its effluent makes up 85 percent of the river during the winter months. Considered a dead river in the 1970s, the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife now characterizes the South Platte as one of the best warmwater fisher-ies in the state. That’s a source of pride for Tiffany: “The best part at the end of the day is feeling you’ve done something good for the environment, and that you’re protecting public health.”

—Jayla Poppleton


Profile Marty Ti f fanyMet ro Was tewa te r Rec l ama t i on D i s t r i c t


our system,” he says. “Fast forward to 2012 and our costs will be much higher. Higher use of Prairie Water exacerbates this—it’s a more energy-intensive system than is our mountain water system.”

Wastewater TreatmentIf the thought of drinking water from a source that is downstream from another system’s wastewater effluent bothers you, consider this: There is no new water in the world. The Earth got its one and only delivery of water 4.4 billion years ago. There is disagreement about how that came to be, but no water is being created or destroyed, only recycled through the eons. Your next glass of water may contain molecules of water that were in the pee of a Columbian mammoth that roamed the Front Range during the Pleis-tocene Era.

Fortunately, Colorado’s public wastewa-ter systems, which collect wastewater from

homes and industries, provide an effective layer of treatment between dirty water and the stream—and downstream water users.

These systems also owe their genesis to heightened environmental awareness in the late 1960s and 1970s. Passed in 1972, the Clean Water Act was established to elimi-nate releases of high amounts of toxic sub-stances into rivers and lakes and ensure that water would meet standards neces-sary for human recreation as well as aquatic life. Wastewater systems must receive a permit—granted by CDPHE following EPA rules—to build and operate plants.

A wastewater plant has a variety of tanks of different shapes and sizes, as well as rect-angular aeration basins. Solid waste is sepa-rated from the water and becomes treated biosolids, suitable for use in landscaping and agriculture. A combination of aeration, gunk-eating microorganisms, gravity and a variety of chemicals is used to cleanse the waste-

water so it is safe to return to a waterway. Wastewater treatment standards for some

contaminants can be harder to achieve than drinking water standards because they take into account the uses of a waterway where outflow is discharged. The bar is set high for Eagle River’s wastewater plants because of the aquatic life in the river—it turns out fish are more sensitive to some contaminants than humans. Across the state, localized standards for discharges are set in consid-eration of downstream recreational, agricul-tural or environmental uses.

Back at the J.D. Phillips plant in Colorado Springs, UV light replaces the addition of the disinfectant chlorine for a final cleansing. The UV system, rare for a wastewater plant, “just uses light, so there are no chemical byprod-ucts,” plant superintendent Hoyt says. “[The UV light] alters the DNA of the bugs so they can’t reproduce,” he explains. “What makes people sick isn’t the bacteria in the water, but

BAR SCREENING

SETTLINGTANK

12

AERATION &SEDIMENTATION TANKS3

FILTRATION4DISINFECTIONCHLORINE OR UV

Clean water is returned to the lake, river

or stream.

5Solids removed during the treatment process can be further treated and safely used for other applications, such as fertilizer.

What happens after you take a shower or flush the toilet? Here, we follow the path of waste-water as it flows through a typical course of treatment. All wastewater is eventually reclaimed, either to provide for nonpotable water uses or to be returned to the stream.

Follow Your Flush

1 Preliminary Treatment: Screens remove larger debris such as sticks or trash as it enters the wastewater treatment plant, and the grit chamber slows water down long enough for sand and gravel to drop to the bottom.

2 Primary Treatment: Also called clarifiers, these large basins hold water for several hours, allowing suspended solids to sink and be pumped out, while grease and oils can be skimmed off the top.

3 Secondary Treatment: A combination of aeration and agitation facilitates microorganisms in coverting dissolved solids into suspended solids, which can then be settled out as in step 2.

4 Tertiary Treatment: Additional processes must be employed to remove nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorous. In addition, granular filters, such as sand or gravel, or membrane filters can be used to achieve an even higher level of suspended solids removal than is possible in primary and secondary treatment.

5 Disinfection: Chlorine or ultraviolet light is used to remove any remaining pathogenic bacteria in order to protect public health.

the growth of bacteria later.” What really makes the plant unusual, Hoyt

says, is its use of recycled whey to add car-bon to the treatment process. Because the plant largely processes wastewater from homes rather than industry, it took in too little of the carbon needed to feed the “bugs”—a water-treatment professional’s term for pathogen-munching microorganisms—that do the work of removing nitrates in one of the plant’s cleansing processes. Additional chemical inputs had to be purchased to compensate for the lower carbon levels until a local dairy approached the utility to deter-mine how it could reduce its cost for dis-charging whey, a byproduct of making cot-tage cheese, into the wastewater stream.

Industries are often required to pretreat wastewater to remove contaminants spe-cific to their processes before putting it into a utility’s collection pipes. Whey, it turns out, is a good source of carbon. Soon, the plant

was taking delivery of whey from the dairy. “Here’s the innovative part,” Hoyt says. “We discovered fermented whey works even better.” Whey had been left in a tank long enough to ferment, and when it was used, its heightened powers were noticed. Total savings on reduced chemical inputs in the first year of whey usage: $80,000.

Other wastewater systems have also found ways to achieve savings. Metro Wastewater Reclamation District, which serves about 1.7 million people in a service area that includes Denver, Arvada, Aurora, Brighton, Lakewood, Thornton, and West-minster, uses methane produced during biosolids treatment to fuel its plant, free-ing up enough electricity to power almost 5,000 homes. The potential here is signifi-cant: Three percent of electricity generated in the United States is currently used to power water treatment facilities. According to Barbara Biggs, Metro’s governmental af-

fairs officer, the single largest demand for energy in wastewater treatment comes from the blowers that force air into the secondary treatment process.

Stormwater RegulationThe third segment of the public water sys-tem triad, stormwater, had to wait until the late 1980s for a federal makeover. Research during the late 1970s and 1980s indi-cated that stormwater runoff from industrial sources, municipal storm drains and con-struction sites significantly degraded water quality. Passed in 1987, the Water Quality Act requires industrial plants, municipal separate storm sewer systems—often called “MS4s”—and construction sites to obtain permits to discharge stormwater.

In EPA parlance, those discharges come from “point sources”—specific outlets such as pipes, ditches and concentrated animal feeding operations.


Some contaminants in personal care products, known as endocrine disruptors, are not regulated or treated for in water supplies. Read labels and be aware of what’s in your cabinet that could be entering the wastewater stream. You can choose to use alternative products, use less of a given product, and properly dispose of unused products in order to help protect water quality. Visit the Consortium for Research and Education on Emerging Contaminants to learn more: www.creec.net.

The Southeast Metro Stormwater Authority used a unique drop structure to prevent the banks of Cottonwood Creek in Arapahoe County from eroding after storm events. Excessive bank erosion can nega-tively impact riparian vegetation and aquatic life as well as nearby human activities. Stormwater management also aims to minimize pollutants in runoff entering streams from adjacent land surfaces.

Josh

Dun

can

Follow Your Flush


Stormwater pollution also comes from “nonpoint sources,” including excess fer-tilizers on lawns, motor oil and other toxic chemicals lingering on paved surfaces, and bacteria and nutrients from livestock and pet wastes. Nonpoint-source pollution is carried by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground. As the runoff moves, it picks up natural and man-made pollutants that then flow into waterways.

Urbanization has exacerbated the issue because runoff moves at a faster rate over impermeable surfaces, such as parking lots, and can’t be absorbed by the soil for return to waterways as groundwater recharge. Fast-moving water from storm events can also cause waterways’ banks to erode. Sev-eral measures are used to slow the water’s unseemly rush to rivers and lakes, including retention basins and wetlands, as well as screens to block trash. If you’ve ever been to a big-box store with an improbable pond in a corner of the parking lot, it is probably a retention basin—likely dry most of the time, with a drain from the parking lot to chan-nel stormwater. The basin allows water to be absorbed into the ground or evaporate.

In Colorado, as in most states, stormwa-ter is managed but not treated before it is discharged into waterways. “People don’t realize that if they over-fertilize, don’t pick up dog doo-doo, it ends up in the river,”

says Kristen Winn, Grand Junction’s public information coordinator and spokeswoman for the region’s 5-2-1 Drainage Authority, which handles stormwater for the entities of Grand Junction, Mesa County, Fruita, Pali-sade and the Grand Valley Drainage District.

Jeff Besse, stormwater specialist for the city of Colorado Springs, spends much of his time educating residents, education be-ing one of the key directives given to MS4s by the EPA. Besse says the effort “focuses primarily on K-8 students, trying to get them to understand early on.” Beyond targeting behavioral change, Colorado Springs relies on citizens to help identify illicit discharges, Besse says. Potential sources of pollution include carpet cleaning services, spray washing, landscaping industries, and cook-ing grease from restaurants.

So what does the future of water treatment hold? What’s certain is that the technology of water purification won’t stand still and that standards and permitting processes will continue to evolve. As technology advances and our understanding of the impacts of chemical and biological agents on human and aquatic health grows, so do our expec-tations. As Aurora Water’s Baker reminds us, “Agencies are now concerned about con-taminants measured in parts per trillion.”

Although the EPA has a list of 90 contami-nants that must be controlled, it is required

to periodically post a Contaminant Candi-date List and then determine whether five or more of the candidates should be regu-lated. The agency is now calling for nomina-tions for its fourth list, and there should be no dearth of candidates.

As advanced as our regulations and water treatment capabilities have become, there remains a personal level of responsibility in keeping contaminants out of streams and water supplies. “Prescription medication, ingredients in personal care products, some of that stuff we are never going to be able to take out. Triclosan used in antibacterial hand soap, for example, is incredibly resis-tant to treatment and unnecessary,” says Biggs. “Residents need to be aware.”

Whether it’s picking up after a pet to pre-vent stormwater pollution, locating the dish-washer detergent on the shelf that doesn’t contain phosphorous, disposing of medi-cations properly, or buying the hand soap sans triclosan, we all have a role to play in keeping our water clean. q

Learn how to prevent stormwater pollution by connecting with Keep It Clean, a partnership between a half-dozen northern Front Range

communities. Consider labeling storm drains to alert people to their connection to rivers, form a StreamTeam to clean up a local creek, or find and share ideas for keeping stormwater clean: www.keepitcleanpartnership.org.


Individual Supporters ($50+) Steven Acquafresca • Bill Alt • Kenneth Anderson • Susan Andrews • Frank Anesi • Jade Arocha • Carl Bachhuber • Bruce Bacon • David Bailey • Jeffrey Bandy • Patrick & Victoria Barney • Jill Baron • William Battaglin • Bear Creek Water and Sanitation District • Laura Belanger • David Berry • Mike Berry • Chris Bieker • Rhonda Birdnow • Tillie Bishop • Linda Bledsoe • Sharon Bokan • Lacey Books • David Bower • James Boynton • Peter Butler • Josephine Carpenter • Robert Case • Gretchen Cerveny • Sean Chambers • Clay and Dodson, P.C. • Dave Colvin • Amy Conklin • Pete Crabb • Tim Craft • Chris Crosby • Rita Crumpton • Paul Dannels • Lisa Darling • Ray Derr • William E. DeWolfe • Deere & Ault Consultants, Inc. • Gary Dickerman • Kelly DiNatale • DiNatale Water Consultants • Sarah Dominick • East Grand Water Quality Board • Rodney Eisenbraun • Lewis Entz • ERO Resources Corp. • Megan Estep • Randy Fischer • Thomas Flanagan, Jr. • Forsgren Associates, Inc. • Jennifer Fuller • Subhrendu Gangopadhyay • Marilyn Gary • Geo-Smith Engineering, LLC • Trevor Giles • Margaret Hagenbuch • David Hallford • Hillary Hamann • Wendy Hanophy • Benjamin Harding • Paul Harms • Raymond Harriman • Christine Hartman • Catherine Hayes • Alan Heath • Sue Helm • Callie Hendrickson • Carla Hendrickson • William Hendrickson • Marilyn Hennessy • Mark & Sara Hermundstad • Margaret Herzog • Kyle Hill • John Holdren • Constance Holland • Hannah Holm • Christine Honnen • Barbara Horn • The Hudson Gardens • Terry Huffington • Emily Hunt • Holly Huyck • Nancy Jackson • Robert Jackson • Erin Jerant • Lynn and Joan Johnson • Dawson Jordan • Julie Kallenberger • Keep It Clean Partnership • Russell Kemp • Greg Kernohan • Mike Kiley • Steven Koeckeritz • Betty Konarski • Chris Kraft • Krage Manufacturing, LLC • Krassa and Miller, LLC • Bruce Kroeker • Rod Kuharich • Stephen LaBonde • Lambert Realty • Paul Lander • Katie Leone • Richard Lichtenheld • Joan Lippis • Patricia Locke • Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District • James Luey • Kent Mace • Joe Mahoney • Laura Makar • Steve Malers • Mary Marchun • Zach Margolis • Timothy Martin • Martin and Wood Water Consultants • Donald Martinusen • Murray McCaig • Bryan McCarty • McCarty Land and Water Valuation • John McCutchan • Charles McKay • Bill McKee • Julie McKenna • Patricia Meakins • Mike Mechau • Matt Metcalf • Jim Miller • Minion Hydrologic • Joy Minke • Erin Minks • Harold Miskel • Larry Morgan • Andrew Mueller • David Nelson • Patricia Nichols • Peter Nichols • John Norton • NWCCOG • Stevan O Brian • Dick Parachini • Lindsey Parlin • Jennifer Patterson • William & Donna Patterson • James Patton • Jack Perrin • Drew Peternell • Stan Peters • Pikes Peak Library • Jim Pokrandt • Jayla Poppleton • Rodney Preisser • John Redifer • Chris Reichard • David Reinertsen • Mel Rettig • Rachel Richards • Steve Rogers • Curry Rosato • Kathy Rosenkrans • Ray Ryan • George Saum • Carla Schnitker • Gail Schwartz • Don Schwindt • Security Title Guaranty Co. • Stephen Seltzer • Karla Shriver • George Sibley • Lisa Sigler • Kevin Sjursen • Del Smith • States West Water • Jon Stavney • Faith Sternlieb • Gordon Stonington • Bill Swan • Jim Taylor • Sarah Thorston • Paul Tigan • Andrew Todd • Town of Breckenridge—Water Division • Town of Firestone • Town of Windsor • Bill Trampe • Tri-County Water Conservancy District • Carl Trick • TST Infrastructure, LLC • Meghan Trubee • Paul van der Heijde • Wayne Vanderschuere • Hayes Veeneman • Tom Verquer • Richard Vidmar • Volition Strategies • Marc Waage • Wangnild Real Estate Co. • Russell Waring • Tom Waymire • Robert Weaver • Michael Welsh • Western State Colorado University: Colorado Water Workshop • Richard White • Robert Wigington • Jody Williams • Geoff Withers • Lois Witte • Fred Wolf • Connie Woodhouse • Edith Zagona • Patti Zink

Stream Supporters ($100+) Tom Acre • Don Ament • Anadarko Petroleum Corporation • Anderson and Chapin, P.C. • Dan Ault • Ayres Associates • Paula Belcher • Richard Belt • Bikis Water Consultants • Rob Buirgy • Nancy Burke • Sara Duncan • Harold Evans • Farmers Grain Co. • Fort Collins Utilities • Paul Frohardt • Charles Garcia • Russell George • Toni Gonzales • Taylor Hawes • Polly Hays • High Line Canal Preservation Association • Diane Hoppe • Patricia Horoschak • Scott Hummer • Glen Jammaron • Greg Johnson • Pete Kasper • Stan Kloberdanz • Bill Kluth • Ray Kogovsek • Dave Koop • Ramsey Kropf • La Plata West Water Authority • Greg Larson • Dan Law • Mark Levorsen • Rick Lofaro • Mancos Conservation District • John & Susan Maus • John McClow • Jack McCormick • Sharon McCormick • Rebecca Mitchell • James Montgomery • Overland Park Neighborhood Assoc. • Chris Piper • John & Nancy Porter • RETTEW Associates, Inc. • Robert Rich • Rocky Mountain Farmers Union • Chris Rowe • Rick Sackbauer • Tom Sharp • Charlie Smith • MaryLou Smith • Karn Stiegelmeier • St. Vrain and Left Hand Water Conservancy District • Jean Townsend • Larry Traubel • Barbara Vasquez • The Western Rivers Institute • Tom Williamsen • Dick Wolfe

Tributary Supporters ($250+) Arkansas River Outfitters Association • Stuart Brown • The Canyons • Donna Colville • Colorado Livestock Association • Colorado Municipal League • Conejos Water Conservancy District • Cutthroat Anglers, LLC • Delta Conservation District • Delta County • Environmental Process Control • GBSM • Grand County • Greg Hobbs • Kennedy/Jenks Consultants • Lawrence Jones Custer Grasmick LLP • Reed Morris • North Sterling Irrigation District • Jonathon Perlmutter • Petros and White, LLC • Pitkin County Healthy Rivers Board • Platte Canyon Water and Sanitation District • Porzak Browning and Bushong • Renew Strategies • Rocky Mountain Agribusiness Association • Roxborough Water and Sanitation District • San Luis Valley Irrigation District • San Luis Valley Water Conservancy District • Spronk Water Engineers • Summit Global Management • Daniel Tyler • Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority • Reagan Waskom • White and Jankowski

Aquifer Supporters ($1,000+) Adaptive Resources, Inc. • Agland, Inc. • CH2M HILL • City of Greeley Water Conservation • City of Longmont • Colorado College State of the Rockies Project • Colorado Corn • Colorado Springs Utilities • The Consolidated Mutual Water Company • Dolores Water Conservancy District • Harris Water Engineering, Inc. • Maynes Bradford Shipps and Sheftel • Metro Wastewater Reclamation District • Nestle Waters North America • Patrick, Miller, and Kropf • Regenesis Management Group • SAIC • South Metro Water Supply Authority • Southern Ute Tribe Water Resources Division • Vranesh and Raisch, LLP • Ruth & Ken Wright

River Supporters ($500+) AECOM • Animas-La Plata Water Conservancy District • Applegate Group, Inc. • Bishop-Brogden Associates • Black and Veatch • Brown and Caldwell • Carollo Engineers • CDM Smith • City of Grand Junction • City of Greeley • City of Thornton • Collins, Cockrel and Cole, PC • Colorado Farm Bureau • Colorado Potato Administrative Committee • Colorado Trout Unlimited • Colorado Water Trust • Colorado Watershed Assembly • DCP Midstream • Douglas County Water Resource Authority • Stephen Fearn • Florida Water Conservancy District • George K Baum and Company • HDR Engineering, Inc. • Headwaters Corporation • High Country Hydrology, Inc. • Greg & Dot Hoskin • Left Hand Water District • Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District • Norwood Water Commission • Pine River Irrigation District • Roggen Farmers Elevator Assoc. • San Juan Water Commission • San Juan Water Conservancy District • San Miguel Water Conservancy District • Stanek Constructors, Inc. • Trout, Raley, Montano, Witwer, & Freeman, P.C. • Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District • URS Corporation • Ute Farm & Ranch Enterprise • Ute Mountain Ute Tribe • The Water Information Program • Weld County • Weld County Farm Bureau • West Greeley Conservation District

Headwaters Supporters ($5,000+) Meridian Metropolitan District • MillerCoors • Water for the West Foundation

Basin Supporters ($2,000+) Aurora Water • Board of Water Works of Pueblo • Bureau of Reclamation—Western Colorado Office • Central Colorado Water Conservancy District • Colorado Bar Association • Colorado River Water Conservation District • Colorado Water Resources & Power Development Authority • Denver Water • Eagle River Water and Sanitation District • Guaranty Bank • La Plata Archuleta Water District • Leonard Rice Engineers, Inc. • Metro State College • New Belgium Brewing Co. • Northern Water • Rio Grande Water Conservation District • Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association • Ute Water Conservancy District

Endowing Partners ($20,000+)

Colorado Water Conservation Board | Southwestern Water Conservation District | Valerie Gates

The Colorado Foundation for Water Education would like to express its sincere gratitude to all those who have expressed their passion for our most precious of resources, and whose donations between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012 (fiscal year 2012) have made the work of the Foundation possible.


empty the water. Carefully remove the old toilet, setting it on towels or newspapers. Follow installation directions to be sure the wax ring is seated and sealed, and that no water leaks when you turn on the valve. Wow, a new toilet! Marvel at your work.

>4<Finally, replacing your faucet will be slightly more complicated. Ensure all parts are present, and that you understand the steps for installation. Make sure the water is off! Before removing the old faucet, confirm your new model will fit. Place towels on the floor and along the cabinet edge to protect your back. Carefully remove the old faucet, clean off the countertop, and install the new one. Check and fix any leaks, and clean up. Bravo!

You now have an updated, efficient bathroom that looks great, works great, and saves you money. Now recycle the old products (check with your local utility or recycling program), share your story with others, and continue the conservation in other areas of your home. Congratulations on your Wa-terSense Weekend!

Frank Kinder is a senior water conservation specialist with Colorado Springs Utilities. Recent successes include assisting with the first WaterSense-labeled home in Colorado. Colorado Springs Utilities was also recently awarded the 2012 EPA WaterSense Promotional Partner of the Year award.

Similar to Energy Star, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s WaterSense label launched in 2006 to help consumers identify high-efficiency, engineer-tested products that save. WaterSense-labeled toi-lets, showerheads and faucets are at least 20 percent more efficient than standard models and are guaranteed to work.

Depending upon the age, toilets can use 15 to 25 percent of water in the home, while showers and faucets use another 9 percent each. Updating all three may save significantly. For a family of four, the range of water savings for this retrofit is about 500 to 2,000 gallons per month. The older and less efficient your current fixtures, the better the payoff will be.

All major brands and suppliers offer WaterSense products, which are available in a range of prices, finishes and models. Many utilities also provide rebates for WaterSense products; check with your local utility for options. Let’s get started!

>1<Plan to replace a full bath’s products—showerhead, toilet and faucet—with WaterSense models. Before shopping, take photos and measurements of ex-isting models so staff can help you find new mod-els that fit. At your plumbing supplier, look for the WaterSense symbol on products. Most manufac-turers offer coordinating fixtures so you can com-plete a look for your bathroom. Read packaging instructions to identify needed tools and supplies. Beginners might look for “complete” toilets, which come with riser bolts, toilet seats, wax rings and water supply lines, to avoid additional trips to the store. For showerheads, be sure to have PTFE or “thread tape” to make it leak-free.

First rule in plumbing: Shut the water off, and make sure it’s off! Master shut-off valves are usually located in the utility room near a water heater, or in a base-ment near other utility items. To gain confidence, start with the showerhead. Unscrew the old one, being careful not to mar the surface of the shower arm. Ensure the threads are clean. Next, apply new tape, and attach the showerhead per directions. Check for leaks. Voila!

>3<For toilets, you’ll have to assemble the tank and bowl and possibly other parts; these can be heavy, so you might need a hand. Again, be sure the water is off! Now flush to

Looking for ways to save water inside the home? Replacing older, inefficient bathroom fixtures with WaterSense-labeled products is easy and affordable for most homeowners. You can spend as little as $200 to get started, and within a few hours you’ll have an up-graded bathroom that saves both water and energy. It’s a win-win!—Frank Kinder

iSto

ck.c

om (3

)


>2<

DIY

Publication of the Colorado Foundation for Water Education’s Headwaters

magazine is made possible by the generous support of sponsors and advertisers. We would like to extend our appreciation

and thanks to the following organizations for contributing financially to this issue of Headwaters:

Board of Water Worksof Pueblo, Colorado


Along with your help, the League of Water Savers is working hard to make up for what Mother Nature didn’t provide. See what you can do to help conserve water at ThorntonWater.com and find us on Facebook.

Do your part to save water.

© Worldways, Inc.

Conservation works.Snow dances don’t.

1580 Logan St., Suite 410 • Denver, CO 80203

NONPROFIT ORGU.S. POSTAGE

PAIDDENVER, CO

PERmIT NO 178

Headwaters Winter 2013: Utilities

Documents

Transcript of Headwaters Winter 2013: Utilities