Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 Water Meter Project Agenda Item # 12 Public Utility District WORKSHOP To: Board of Directors From: Neil Kaufman Date: July 21, 2010 Subject: Water Meter Project Progress Report &Water Usage Trends 1. WHY THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE BOARD This item is informational. Board action is not required. 2. HISTORY AB 2572 requires that the District begin reading the water meters installed since 1992 and commence billing on a volumetric basis by January 1, 2010. AB 2572 also requires that all connections be equipped with water meters and billed on a volumetric basis by January 1, 2025. In the late Summer of 2008, the District issued a request for proposals for the provision of an automated meter reading (AMR) system and the installation of water meters. In response to that RFP, the District received five proposals, three for drive- by systems and two for fixed-base systems. The District determined that implementation of a fixed based system would best serve its needs and the review was focused on those two proposals. • A proposal from Measurement Control Systems (MCS) for a system utilizing meters manufactured by Neptune and radios manufactured by Aclara. • A proposal from Vulcan Construction for a system utilizing meters manufactured by American Meter Company (AMCO) and radios manufactured by Datamatic. Eventually, the Board awarded a contract to MCS for implementation of a pilot program consisting of about 400 meters. In May of 2009, the Board awarded a contract to MCS to cover Phase 2 of the Water Meter Implementation program. This Phase 2 contract covers the installation of about 6,750 meters in total. This existing contract was structured to begin in May 2009 with the final installations to be performed in June 2010. The total value of the Phase 2 contract was $2,107,000 (not including sales tax). The Board also established a 10% change order authorization for a total amount not to exceed of$2,440,000 including sales tax. In May 2010, the Board awarded a contract to MCS to cover Phase 3 of the Water Meter Implementation program. This Phase 3 contract covers the installation of about 4,735 meters. 3. NEW INFORMATION As of July 12, 2010, a total of 7,416 meters have been installed (625 commercial & 6,791 residential). The Water Department's current goal is for end of 2010 is 650 commercial and 11,150 residential meters for a total of 11,800 meters. This would represent about 95 percent of the water system customers. In 2009, MCS encountered about 110 locations where a meter could not be installed. An additional 20 locations where an installation could not be performed have been identified in 2010. This total is noticeably lower than originally anticipated. The main factors preventing meter installation were: • Meter box was buried and/or could not be located • Meter box was located under a deck, large rocks, tree, fence or other obstruction • No meter box, only a curb stop • Meter box was too small, too deep or too damaged for a safe installation • Excessive groundwater • Broken/inoperable valves In terms of water usage, the Water Department has experienced a significant drop in water usage over the past few years while the overall number of customers has increased slightly. There has also been a shift towards commercial water usage comprising a larger percentage of the total usage. This data is summarized in Tables 1 and 2. It is expected that the downward trend in overall water usage will continue until meters are installed on all of the water system customers. Table 1. Overall Water Usage, 2007 - 2010 Year Average Day Maximum Day Number of Demand, m d Demand, mgd Customers 2003 6.05 11.50 11,205 2004 6.64 12.61 11,503 2005 6.11 12.66 11,917 2006 6.50 13.01 12,271 2007 6.67 14.84 12,442 2008 6.29 12.65 12,555 2009 5.71 12.71 12,586 Table 2. Breakdown of Water Usage by Customer Class, 2002 - 2010 Total Commercial Residential Year Average Commercial Sales, Residential Sales, Sales, m d Sales, mgd percentage Sales, mgd percentage 2003 6.05 0.95 15.7 5.10 84.3 2004 6.64 1.37 20.6 5.27 79.4 2005 6.11 1.48 24.2 4.63 75.8 2006 6.50 1.55 23.8 4.95 76.2 2007 6.67 1.89 28.3 4.78 71.7 2008 6.29 1.68 26.7 4.61 73.3 2009 5.63 1.56 27.7 4.07 72.3 With the implementation of AMR system, it is now possible to examine variations in water usage between different parts of the service area. Table 3 shows the variation in average winter and summer usage for the residential customers. Tables 4 & 5 show the ten largest residential water users for Winter and Summer of 2010. Table 6 shows the ten largest commercial water users for Summer of 2010. Most of the commercial customers were converted to the new AMR system until the Spring of 2010, so Winter 2010 data is not available. Table 3. Seasonal Variation in Water Usage for Residential Customers Current Average Average June Meter Count January Usage, Usage, Area gals/day als/day Armstrong 74 99 196 Coyote Run 20 93 80 Donner Lake 17178 99 188 Downtown 60 59 239 Gateway 223 80 180 Glenshire 606 144 778 Gray's Crossing 46 66 244 Hirschdale 1 90 139 Martiswoods 29 112 773 Old Greenwood 148 88 334 Olympic Heights 32 105 466 Pine Forest 28 106 398 Pinyon Creek 40 21 36 Ponderosa Palisades 124 113 737 Prosser Heights 25 564 1,204 Prosser Lakeview 247 104 377 Sierra Meadows 249 113 507 Southside 150 104 219 Spring Creek 18 103 122 Tahoe Donner 3,427 78 175 Winter Creek 66 73 124 6,791 93 278 Table 4. Ten Largest Residential Water Users, January 2010 Rank Usage, Location gals/day Notes 1 Prosser Heights 6,224 Constant Leak 2 Glenshire 4,399 Constant Leak from Jan 4 to Jan 25 3 Prosser Heights 2,893 Constant Leak 4 Prosser Heights 11721 Constant Leak 5 Glenshire 1,647 Intermittent Leak 6 Tahoe Donner 1,581 Constant Leak 7 Tahoe Donner 1,535 Constant Leak 8 Glenshire 1,312 Constant Leak 9 Donner Lake 1,207 Constant Leak from Jan 20 to Jan 23 10 Sierra Meadows 1,173 Constant Leak Table 5. Ten Lar est Residential Water Users, June 2010 Rank Usage, Location gals/day Notes 1 Prosser Heights 9,984 Constant Leak 2 Prosser Lakeview 9,677 Constant Leak 3 Prosser Heights 8,178 Constant Leak 4 Tahoe Donner 6,699 Constant Leak 5 Glenshire 6,445 Constant Leak 6 Donner Lake 6,292 Constant Leak from Jun 15 to Jun 25 7 Sierra Meadows 4,969 Constant Leak from Jun 1 to Jun 22 8 Ponderosa Palisades 4,446 Intermittent Leak 9 Glenshire 4,212 No Leak 10 Glenshire 4,042 Constant Leak Table 6. Ten Largest Commercial Water Users — Potable Water System, June 2010 Rank Usage, Customer Type gals/day Notes 1 Park 66,367 No leak alarm — Likely leak/constant flow 2 School 35,869 Has leak/constant flow 3 Mobile Home Park 327777 Has leak/constant flow 4 Cemetery 29,833 Has leak/constant flow 5 School 22,882 Has leak/constant flow 6 HOA Common Property 20,906 Has leak/constant flow 7 Park 16,104 Has leak/constant flow 8 School 14,071 Has leak/constant flow 4 9 Apartment Building 12,730 Has leak/constant flow 10 Commercial Business 12,001 Has leak/constant flow The AMR system is equipped with automated leak detection capabilities. Currently about 755 customers appear to have a leak of some size. These leaks range from barely detectable (20 — 30 gallons per day) up to seven gallons per minute (almost 10,000 gals per day). It is estimated that between 500,000 and one million gallons per day is lost due to leaks on customer-owned piping. The main areas of leakage are improper operation of shutoff and stop and drain valves, and broken irrigation systems. It should be noted that there has not yet been a rate impact (price signal) to most customers associated with these leaks. For those residential customers where a meter was installed in 2009, they are currently in the one year transition to volume-based billing. Water usage by these customers appears on their bill along with a dual calculation of the water bill. One calculation is based upon the flat rate structure and the second calculation is based upon the metered rate structure. These customers are paying the flat rate for calendar 2010 and will move to the metered rate in 2011. For those customers where a meter is installed in 2010, this transition period will begin in January of 2011 and they will move to the metered rate in 2012. One unforeseen issue has arisen that has required significant staff effort. There are about 900 single-family residential accounts located in multi-unit buildings such as townhomes and condominiums. It has been determined that the original builder/developer often provided incorrect information to the District regarding which meter serves which unit in these multi-unit buildings. Using a four unit building as an example, there are four separate meters feeding into the building. The meters are attached to a single supply manifold in a common meter box. The developer may have told the District that the leftmost meter serves Unit 1, the next meter to the right serves Unit 2, the next meter to the right serves Unit 3 and the rightmost meter serves Unit 4. However, the physical reality can be quite different. Resolving this issue involves lengthy telephone conversations with property owners and field verification. It is likely that this verification effort will continue into 2011. 4. FISCAL IMPACT As noted above, the Board awarded the Phase 3 contract to MCS in May 2010. The overall project finances were reviewed at that time. Table 7 gives the overall costs as discussed in May. Currently, the 2010 work is on schedule and on-budget. Table 7. Cost Estimate for Metering Installation Project MCS District Costs Outside Contracts Total Phase 1 $232,000 $38,000 $0 $270,000 Phase 2 — $1,545,000 $296,000 $0 $1,841,000 2009 Phase 2 — $655,000 $205,000 $0 $860,000 2010 Phase 3 — $1,475,000 $185,000 $0 $1,660,000 2010 Phase 4 — $112,500 $112,500 $900,000 $1,125,000 2011 Phase 4 — $112,500 $112,500 $900,000 $1,125,000 2012 Phase 4 — $50,000 $50,000 $400,000 $500,000 2013 Total $4,182,000 $999,000 $2,200,000 $7,381,000 5. RECOMMENDATION: Receive this report and provide comment. Michael D. Holley, General Manager