gallup water audit summary reportgallup water audit summary report 1. introduction on behalf of the...

Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc. 6020 Academy NE, Suite 100 • Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109

Gallup Water Audit Summary Report

Prepared for New Mexico Office of the State Engineer Water Use and Conservation Bureau City of Gallup, New Mexico

February 14, 2007

D a n i e l B . S t e p h e n s & A s s o c i a t e s , I n c .

Table of Contents

Section Page

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1

2. Water System Summary ......................................................................................................... 1

3. Estimate of Unmetered Water Use ......................................................................................... 6 3.1 Fire Department............................................................................................................... 6 3.2 Streets Department ......................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Parks Department............................................................................................................ 7

4. Water Reuse ........................................................................................................................... 8

5. Water Losses .......................................................................................................................... 8 5.1 Meter Error ...................................................................................................................... 9

5.1.1 Production Meter Error.......................................................................................... 9 5.1.2 Customer Meter Error ......................................................................................... 11 5.1.3 Low-Flow Accuracy............................................................................................. 13

5.2 Database Error .............................................................................................................. 16 5.3 Real Losses................................................................................................................... 17

6. Sector Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 17

7. Water Audit Summary ........................................................................................................... 28 7.1 International Standard Water Audit ............................................................................... 28 7.2 AWWA Performance Indicators..................................................................................... 31

8. Existing Conservation Measures........................................................................................... 33

9. Recommended Actions ......................................................................................................... 34

10. Summary............................................................................................................................... 35

References.................................................................................................................................. 36

P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.2-07\Final_214_TF.doc i


P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.2-07\Final_214_TF.doc ii

List of Figures Figure Page

1 Site Location Map ..............................................................................................................2

2 Billed Water Use by Sector, City of Gallup, 2005............................................................. 20

3 Billed Water Use for Commercial Sector, City of Gallup, 2005 ........................................ 21

4 Billed Water Use for Municipal Sector, City of Gallup, 2005 ............................................ 23

5 Billed Water Use for Commercial Sector, City of Gallup, 2005 ........................................ 24

6 Billed Water Use for Multi-Family Housing Sector, City of Gallup, 2005.......................... 25

7 Billed Water Use for Public Housing Authority Sector, City of Gallup, 2005 .................... 26

8 Average Water Use by Sector, City of Gallup, 2005 ........................................................ 27

9 Breakdown of Revenue and Non-Revenue Water, City of Gallup, 2005 ......................... 32


P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.2-07\Final_214_TF.doc iii

List of Tables Table Page

1 City of Gallup Water Production and Water Billed for 2005 ............................................... 4

2a Water Monthly Service Charges ........................................................................................ 4

2b Current Water Commodity Charges................................................................................... 5

3 Approximate Number and Size of Meters by Sector in 2003 ............................................. 5

4 Size, Type, and Number of City Production Well Meters ................................................... 9

5 Potential Impacts of Increased Production Well Meter Measurement Error .................... 11

6 Potential Non-Revenue Water Resulting from Low-Flow Accuracy Errors ...................... 15

7 City of Gallup Water Use Sectors .................................................................................... 18

8 Number of Accounts by Sector ........................................................................................ 18

9 Metered Water Use by Sector in 2005 ............................................................................. 19

10 Estimated Outdoor Water Use, Summer 2005................................................................. 22

11 International Standard Water Audit Format...................................................................... 28

12 Comprehensive Water Audit Balance, City of Gallup, New Mexico, January 1 through December 31, 2005 ............................................................................................ 29

List of Appendices

Appendix

A Completed Water Audit Questionnaires

B Gallup Population Data (U.S. Census, 2000)

C City of Gallup Water Conservation Ordinance

D AWWA Performance Indicators


P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.2-07\Final_214_TF.doc iv

Acknowledgements

Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc. would like to acknowledge Lance Allgood, Elizabeth

Barriga, Ernie Thompson, and Frank Mora with Gallup Joint Utilities for providing much of the

data used in this water audit. We also received information from the fire and streets

departments. Cheri Vogel, John Longworth, and Molly Magnuson with the Water Use and

Conservation Bureau of the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer have overseen all aspects

of the project and have assisted closely with the water audit interviews and data collection effort.


Gallup Water Audit Summary Report

1. Introduction

On behalf of the Water Use and Conservation Bureau of the New Mexico Office of the State

Engineer (OSE), Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc. (DBS&A) conducted a water audit using

City of Gallup (City) (Figure 1) data. The project objective was to help the City better estimate

revenue versus non-revenue water and to distinguish real and apparent losses using a water

accounting technique based on the International Water Association/American Water Works

Association (IWA/AWWA) water balance model. This report provides an accounting of

residential, municipal, and commercial water use in 2005, and breaks multi-family housing water

use out separately from commercial sector use where there was enough information available to

do so.

The scope of this project included developing two water audit questionnaires for completion by

City staff and coordinating and evaluating their responses to the questionnaires (completed

questionnaires are presented in Appendix A). Personnel from DBS&A and the OSE met with

Gallup Joint Utilities staff on April 11, 2006, after their initial response to the questionnaires, and

discussed the City water system and associated data needs. This report provides a summary

description of the Gallup water system, an analysis of water billing data for 2005, and estimates

for unmetered water use and meter error based on the completed questionnaires. Also included

is information on how estimates and breakdowns were calculated and an explanation of the

obstacles encountered. Finally, recommendations on possible additional approaches the City

can use to augment their existing efforts to minimize non-revenue water are provided.

2. Water System Summary

The City is supplied by groundwater from aquifers in the Gallup Sandstone, Dakota Sandstone,

and Westwater Canyon Member of the Morrison Formation. These aquifers are referred to by

the City as the Gallup Sandstone and Dakota Westwater aquifers. Both aquifers are confined,

P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.2-07\Final_214_TF.doc 1

264

Indian

666

40

32

566

400

Black Lake

Gallup

Zuni Pueblo CDP

Nutria Reservoir Number 2

Ramah Reservoir

Chuska Lake

Mariano Lake


Pescado Reservoir

Samson Lake

Natural LakeMcGaffey Lake

Nutria Diversion Reservoir

Lake McFerren

Prewitt Lake

Black Rock Reservoir

Vanderwagen Reservoirs


Puerco River

Rio Nutria

Coyote W

ash

Cebolla Creek

Pescado, Rio

Red Willow Wash

Rio Sa

n Jose

Zuñi

Rive

r

Pescado, Rio

Navajo

Gamerco

AllisonMentmore

McGaffey

Tohatchi

Rehoboth

Pinedale

Manuelito

Mexican Springs

264

Indian

666

40

32

566

400

Black Lake

Gallup

Zuni Pueblo CDP


Ramah Reservoir

Chuska Lake

Mariano Lake


Pescado Reservoir

Samson Lake

Natural LakeMcGaffey Lake

Nutria Diversion Reservoir

Lake McFerren

Prewitt Lake

Black Rock Reservoir

Vanderwagen Reservoirs


Puerco River

Rio Nutria

Coyote W

ash

Cebolla Creek

Pescado, Rio

Red Willow Wash

Rio Sa

n Jose

Zuñi

Rive

r

Pescado, Rio

Navajo

Gamerco

AllisonMentmore

McGaffey

Tohatchi

Rehoboth

Pinedale

Manuelito

Mexican Springs

N0 3 6 Miles

Explanation

StreamLakeCity

JN WR06.0016S:/PR

OJEC

TS/W

R06.0

016_

OSE_

WAT

ER_A

UDIT

S/GIS

/MXD

S/FIG

URE_

1_GA

LLUP

.MXD

7061

20

Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.

Highway

2/16/2007

Map area

New Mexico

Figure 1

GALLUP WATER AUDITSite Location Map


and receive no recharge from precipitation or infiltration (GJU, 2005a). The City has 17 supply

wells in two separate well fields. Wells are completed between 900 and 2,000 feet below

ground surface (bgs) in the Gallup Sandstone aquifer, and between 1,900 and 3,000 feet bgs in

the Dakota Westwater aquifer. The high producing wells are located in the Ya-Ta-Hay well field,

approximately 8 miles north of Gallup, which contains 10 wells: 8 completed in the Gallup

Sandstone aquifer and 2 completed in the Dakota Westwater aquifer. The Santa Fe well field is

located in Gallup and contains 7 wells, all completed in the Gallup Sandstone aquifer. These

wells produce less water than those in the Ya-Ta-Hay well field (GJU, 2006a).

The U.S. Census Bureau reported that 20,209 people lived in Gallup in 2000, a 5.5 percent

increase over the total population in 1990 (U.S. Census, 2000). The 2000 census listed

7,349 housing units in Gallup, with an average household size of 2.85 people (Appendix B).

The reported vacancy rate for housing units up for sale was 1.9 percent, while the reported

vacancy rate for housing units available for rent was 7.7 percent (U.S. Census, 2000).

Total metered production by the City system was 1,186,186,277 gallons in 2005 (Table 1), with

an average production of 3.250 million gallons per day (GJU, 2006b). In 2005 the City billed

customers for 966,547,850 gallons (Table 1), and per capita use for all sectors was 158 gallons

per day (based on adjusted production). The City sells water to the Township of Gamerco,

approximately 5 miles north of Gallup, and in 2005, Gamerco purchased 35,435,377 gallons,

bringing the total volume of revenue water to 1,001,983,227 gallons.

Water is supplied to at least three connections outside of the City, and total use by these three

users in 2005 was 1,695,445 gallons; this use is included in the total amount of revenue water.

Gallup Joint Utilities staff made reference to three additional connections outside of the City

limits; however, the account numbers for these connections were not identified, and so total use

by these connections is unknown. Any additional connections outside the City limits are

probably included in the total amount of revenue water, which introduces error into the per

capita water use calculations. A more accurate per capita use could be calculated if the total

use by connections outside the City limits were known. The Gallup Joint Utilities water rate

schedule lists water rates of one and a half times the City water rates for connections outside

the City (GJU, 2005b).



Table 1. City of Gallup Water Production and Water Billed for 2005

Month Total Production (gallons) Water Billed (gallons) January 92,174,143 84,457,226.04 February 89,223,525 67,504,202.48 March 85,996,865 74,299,819.88 April 94,413,604 78,948,078.88 May 102,689,732 69,829,674.64 June 114,444,933 94,380,126.72 July 126,518,887 100,488,661.24 August 105,245,649 89,825,277.96 September 97,346,675 86,699,071.80 October 99,119,642 74,338,454.08 November 88,368,996 71,919,160.28 December 90,643,626 73,858,095.96

Total 1,186,186,277 966,547,849.96

Source: GJU, 2006b

The City water rates reflect monthly service charges dependent on meter size (Table 2a) in

addition to commodity charges based on the quantity of water used (Table 2b). The

approximate number and size of meters by sector are listed in Table 3, which reflects data from

2003 (GJU, 2006a) (more current information was unavailable [Barriga, 2006a]). This

information is known to be out of date, under-reporting the total number of meters. Specifically,

the municipal sector is known to have both 4-inch and 6-inch meters in addition to the sizes

listed in Table 3 (Allgood, 2006).

Table 2a. Water Monthly Service Charges

Meter Size (inches) Charge

⅝ $7.22 1 $16.13

1½ $30.18 2 $44.52 3 $96.77 4 $154.83 6 $335.46 8 $598.68

Source: GJU, 2005b




Table 2b. Current Water Commodity Charges

Fee per cubic foot ($) Fee per gallon ($) Range

(cubic foot per month) Residential Nonresidential,

Commercial Residential Nonresidential,

Commercial

0 – 500 0.014830 --- 0.001983 --- 501 – 1,000 0.022000 --- 0.002941 ---

1,001 – 2,000 0.037000 --- 0.004947 --- 2,001 – 5,000 0.059000 --- 0.007888 ---

Over 5,000 0.068000 --- 0.009091 --- 1,001 – 2,000 --- 0.031519 --- 0.004214 2,001 – 4,000 --- 0.034714 --- 0.004641

4,001 – 100,000 --- 0.037500 --- 0.005013 > 100,000 --- 0.037538 --- 0.005018

Separately metered irrigation --- 0.053286 --- 0.007124

Source: City of Gallup, 2006

Table 3. Approximate Number and Size of Meters by Sector in 2003

Meter Size (inches) Residential Commercial a Municipal Total Number of Meters

⅝ 4,416 722 6 5,144 1 200 277 2 479

1½ 7 46 2 55 2 27 207 5 239 3 --- 20 1 21 4 --- 10 --- 10 6 --- 10 --- 10

Total 5,958

Source: GJU, 2006a a Includes sub-meter and commercial accounts with a special water price

A program is underway in Gallup to replace all customer meters with auto-read meters

(Section 8). All but 35 of the ⅝-inch meters in the residential sector had already been replaced

as of April 2006, and meter replacements in other sectors began in July 2006, with all meters

scheduled to be replaced by the end of 2007 (GJU, 2006a). However, the data used in this

analysis are from 2005, pre-dating meter replacement.


3. Estimate of Unmetered Water Use

Unmetered water use in the City includes water used by the fire department, the streets

department for street cleaning, and the parks department for irrigation. The estimated amount

of water used by each of these departments is discussed in Sections 3.1 through 3.3.

3.1 Fire Department

The fire department does not release any water from fire hydrants except in emergency or

testing situations. Fire hydrants are tested twice a year using a Pitot tube gage, and less than

2 gallons of water are unmeasured with each hydrant test (Garcia, 2006). The City has

approximately 15 structure fires per year, and while an average full house fire uses

approximately 1,500 to 2,000 gallons of water, full trailer fires use much less water, and many

fires use even less water because the fire is contained in one room. Large fires in Gallup have

included a motel fire in 2004 requiring 3 million gallons and a 1.5 million-gallon fire in March

2006. Brush fires use less than 500 gallons on average (Garcia, 2006). Water is used in the

event of a flow test; however, flow testing is extremely rare in Gallup, and flow tests are only

performed if required to show that existing infrastructure is adequate to protect additional

development (Garcia, 2006). Assuming that 1,500 gallons are used on 15 structure fires per

year and that there are no large fires, the fire department uses approximately 22,500 gallons of

water per year.

3.2 Streets Department

The streets department uses a total of approximately 3,000 gallons of water per day in four

street sweepers that each fill up with 250 gallons approximately 3 times per day (Tagai, 2006).

Assuming that 3,000 gallons per day are used 5 days a week for 50 weeks per year, the street

department uses approximately 750,000 gallons of water per year.



3.3 Parks Department

The City irrigates approximately 23 acres of city parks for 6 months out of the year, from April to

September. The parks department informed Elizabeth Barriga that they water each park twice a

day (morning and evening) for a total of approximately 30 minutes per day, 7 days a week,

using rotary spray heads (Barriga, 2006a). Because the application rate is unknown, this

information is insufficient to accurately quantify parks department water use, and so that use

was estimated. Three estimation methods were used:

• The Utah Division of Water Resources lists a rotary head application rate of 0.7 inch per

hour (UWR, 2006). Based on this application rate and the assumption that 23 acres are

watered for 30 minutes per day for a 150-day watering season, water use by the parks

department is estimated to be 32,793,688 gallons per irrigation season (April through

September). Comparison of this estimate to total production in 2005 indicates that the

parks department uses approximately 3 percent of total demand.

• The OSE has quantified landscape irrigation water requirements by vegetation and

irrigation type for each county in New Mexico, and their estimate of the landscape

irrigation water requirement using flood or sprinkler irrigation for Kentucky bluegrass in

McKinley County is 33.40 inches per year (Wilson, 1996). Kentucky bluegrass is a cool

season grass, and cool season grasses are planted much more frequently than warm

season grasses such as Bermuda grass, which turn brown in the winter. If the City

watered its 23 acres of parks at the Kentucky bluegrass irrigation water requirement,

water use would be 20,863,032 gallons per year.

• An agricultural irrigation expert from the region (Dan Smeal of the New Mexico State

University Agricultural Science Center in Farmington) estimated that cool-season

turfgrass needs approximately 40 inches of water per growing season. He further

indicated that grass is generally overwatered, possibly by as much as double the amount

necessary (Smeal, 2006). Water use would be 24,985,667 gallons per year if the City

applied 40 inches of water per year to its 23 acres of parks and 49,971,333 gallons if 80

inches were applied per year.



The estimate used in the comprehensive water audit balance (Section 7) is the one made using

the Utah Division of Water Resource irrigation application rate, which is greater than the

estimate made using the OSE-defined irrigation water requirement and falls in between the two

estimates made by the regional expert. This estimate of parks department water use could be

refined by either measuring the application rate or by metering use, as is recommended in

Section 9.

4. Water Reuse

In 2005, a total of approximately 8,193,400 gallons of treated wastewater was used to irrigate

the municipal golf course, soccer complex, and sports complex. Irrigation of these facilities is

separate from the 23 acres of City parks that are irrigated using potable water. Also,

approximately 5,198,700 gallons of non-potable water was used in 2005 for construction and to

irrigate medians and trees. Non-potable water is supplied from well 13, located in the center of

the City.

The City has a goal of eliminating wastewater discharge. A U.S. Bureau of Reclamation reverse

osmosis test plant arrived in May 2006, and the City has begun a pilot study treating wastewater

using this unit. The City is considering expanding reuse from the current municipal golf course,

soccer complex, sports complex, and median irrigation to possible direct or indirect potable

reuse as a source of future water supply. The City has selected DePauli Engineering and

Surveying to prepare a reuse master plan. Gallup is not considering aquifer storage and

recovery (ASR), as their aquifers are too deep and the aquifer transmissivities are extremely low

(GJU, 2006a).

5. Water Losses

Gallup Joint Utilities billed customers for a total of 966,547,850 gallons in 2005, leaving a total of

201,995,844 gallons of non-revenue water (based on adjusted production). Subtracting

estimates of unmetered use by the fire (22,500 gallons), streets (750,000 gallons), and parks

(32,793,688 gallons) departments yields an estimated 168,429,656 gallons that are either being

lost to leaks or are a result of metering inaccuracy or data handling error. The bulk of the error



is expected to result from metering inaccuracy or data handling error. Meter and database

errors are apparent losses and are discussed in Sections 5.1 and 5.2. Real losses are

discussed in Section 5.3.

5.1 Meter Error

Meter error cannot be estimated accurately without performing an actual system-specific field

survey, as is recommended in Section 9. Sections 5.1.1 through 5.1.3 provide an estimate of

production and customer meter error based on a meter study report from a different water

system in New Mexico, product specifications, and AWWA standards.

5.1.1 Production Meter Error

Flow from the City’s 17 production wells is measured by turbine and magnetic (mag) meters of

varying sizes (GJU, 2006a). The size, type, and number of meters used on the City’s wells are

shown on Table 4. All 10 wells in the Ya-Ta-Hay well field, where the highest-producing wells

are located, are metered using 4-inch mag meters, ranging in age from less than 1 to 13 years.

Wells in the Santa Fe well field are metered with 2-inch mag, 2-inch turbine, 4-inch turbine, and

6-inch turbine meters, ranging in age from 5 to 18 years (GJU, 2006a).

Table 4. Size, Type, and Number of City Production Well Meters

Meter Size (inches) Meter Type

Number of Meters

2 Turbine 2 4 Turbine 1 6 Turbine 3 2 Mag 1 4 Mag 10

Total 17

Source: GJU, 2006a

Turbine meters register flow proportionally to the spin of a rotor (Vickers, 2001). In mag meters,

water acts as a conductor as it flows through the pipe, inducing a voltage that is proportional to

the velocity of flow (Sparling, 2006). Turbine meters can under-register flows if their rotor



blades become coated or clogged with sediment (Vickers, 2001). Mag meters are free from

mechanical parts, and therefore require little maintenance (GJU, 2006a), although they must be

properly installed and calibrated to ensure accuracy. City production well meters are tested and

calibrated every 5 years and are checked when flow data appear to be in error, as determined

by Gallup Joint Utilities staff (GJU, 2006a).

Production meters must be level and need to be installed in a location with stable, full pipe flow

for accurate readings. Product specifications list the limit of acceptable accuracy for each type

and size of meter by model and were reviewed by brand name for all City production meters.

Product specifications for 2-inch and 4-inch mag meters cite operational accuracies of ±<1

percent (Sparling, 2006; Endress+Hauser, 2006; Krohne, 2006). Product specifications for

turbine meters listed a range of accuracies from ±0.2 percent to 2.0 percent; however, while the

brand of each City production meter is known, model number information was unavailable and

thus product specifications could not be linked to each meter.

AWWA standards (Neptune, 2006) require that turbine meters measure the following flows

within ±1.5 percent accuracy:

• 2-inch meters: 4 to 160 gallons per minute [gpm]

• 4-inch meters: 15 to 630 gpm

• 6-inch meters: 30 to 1,400 gpm

In order to meet product specification accuracies, the meters must be correctly installed.

Because correct installation has not been independently verified, City production meters cannot

be assumed to be meeting their product specifications.

Production meter error can be very large, primarily as a result of installation errors, and can be

either positive (over-reporting actual production) or negative (under-reporting actual production)

(NM OSE, 2006). For the purposes of this analysis, Gallup production was assumed to be

under-reported by 1.5 percent. Adjusted total production was calculated by adding the volume

assumed to be under-reported due to production meter measurement error to the measured

production and subtracting the volume of water exported to Gamerco from the resulting total



production. Total potential real water loss was calculated by subtracting authorized

consumption and apparent losses from adjusted production.

City production data received from Gallup Joint Utilities were in the form of monthly totals (GJU,

2006b) and are not broken down by meter, meter type, or size. Total production measured in

2005 was 1,186,186,277 gallons (GJU, 2006b). Based on the 1.5 percent assumed under-

reporting, the total production meter measurement error was 17,792,794 gallons in 2005. This

assumption leads to an adjusted total production of 1,168,543,694 gallons in 2005, total

potential real water loss of 97,655,059 gallons, and total non-revenue water of 17 percent

(Section 7). Total production meter measurement error, adjusted total production, total potential

real water loss, and total non-revenue water have also been calculated to show values that

would result if Gallup production were under-reporting by 0, 5, and 10 percent (Table 5).

Table 5. Potential Impacts of Increased Production Well Meter Measurement Error

System Parameter Impact of Error (gallons a )

Production meter error 0 % 5 % 10 %

Production meter error 0 59,309,314 118,618,628 Adjusted production 1,150,750,900 1,210,060,214 1,269,369,528 Total potential real water loss 79,862,265 139,171,579 198,480,893 Total non-revenue water 184,625,894 243,935,208 303,244,522 Total non-revenue water (%) 16.04 20.16 23.89

a Unless otherwise noted

5.1.2 Customer Meter Error

Most customer meters are positive displacement meters, which have either an oscillating piston

or rotating disc that moves to allow water to pass through the meter, translating measurements

of volume into measurements of flow (Vickers, 2001). Positive displacement meters will give

inaccurate readings if the piston/disc is damaged or if they wear out by operating at high flows

for long periods of time (Vickers, 2001). The rate of decline in accuracy will depend on (1) the

sand content and quality of the water that flows through the meter and (2) changes in system

pressure. Customer meter accuracy also depends on whether the appropriate meter size is

used for a connection, based on the typical range of flow through the meter. Customer meter



error is not directly proportional to meter size or age and is most accurately quantified by

system-specific meter testing programs (Balliew, 2006).

Although the City is in the process of replacing all customer meters with auto-read meters

(Section 8), the City does not have a long-term customer meter testing program, although they

do respond to complaints, replacing broken meters as necessary (GJU, 2006a). A program of

regular customer meter testing needs to be implemented, and customer meters should be

replaced at least every 15 years to minimize error (Balliew, 2006). Almost all City ⅝-inch

meters have been replaced with Neptune brand T-10 positive displacement meters as a part of

the meter replacement program (Barriga, 2006a), but the available meter data that was used in

this analysis predate wide-scale meter replacement. Meters being replaced are assumed to be

old, no longer meeting the standards set forth by AWWA. Neptune meter specifications and

AWWA standards are provided below for use with future revisions of this analysis in which more

current data are used.

The normal operating range for Neptune T-10 ⅝-inch meters is 0.5 to 20 gpm with error of ±1.5

percent. This range exceeds the AWWA standard, which requires that ⅝-inch meters measure

flow between 1 and 20 gpm with this level of accuracy (Neptune, 2006). The normal operating

range of customer meters differs by size: the larger the meter, the higher the minimum normal

operating range flow. For example, AWWA standards require positive displacement meters to

measure the following flows within 1.5 percent accuracy (Neptune, 2006):

• ⅝-inch meters: 1 to 20 gpm

• ¾-inch meters: 2 to 30 gpm


• 1½-inch meters: 5 to 100 gpm


New meters are expected to perform better than these acceptance standards (Balliew, 2006).

AWWA standards are cited for 3-inch, 4-inch, and 6-inch meters by meter type (turbine or

otherwise). Because meter type for these sizes of meters in Gallup is unclear and standards



differ by meter type, standards for 3-inch, 4-inch, and 6-inch meters are not provided here. If

customer meters are sized correctly, flow will occur within the specified flow ranges for each

meter size, keeping total customer meter measurement error within ±1.5 percent (customer

meter measurement error is generally negative, under-reporting actual flow).

As no meter testing program results are available for the City, results of a meter accuracy

testing program for another system in New Mexico were examined. In this testing program, the

accuracy of meters more than 10 years old was tested. Results indicate that average

accuracies were 97 percent for ⅝-inch and 1-inch meters, 93 percent for 1½-inch and 2-inch

meters, and 99 percent for 3-inch, 4-inch, and 6-inch meters (NM OSE, 2006).

The approximate number and size of customer meters in Gallup was available for 2003

(Table 3), but meter error could not be broken out by meter size, as data reflecting the volume

of water billed by meter size was lacking (information on meter size by account was

unavailable). For the Gallup audit, customer meter accuracy was assumed to be 96 percent

(the average customer meter accuracy reported by the system testing program reviewed by the

OSE), resulting in a total customer meter measurement error of 40,634,899 gallons for 2005.

5.1.3 Low-Flow Accuracy

Because use of evaporative coolers is widespread in Gallup and evaporative coolers use water

steadily at low flow rates, low-flow accuracy could be important in Gallup. While evaporative

cooler demand is expected be completely measured by new meters, it is assumed to not

register completely on older meters (or by any of the meters in place in 2005), based on the

results of a recent study conducted by the City of El Paso to determine if meters registered low-

flow evaporative cooler demand. The study indicated that older meters did not register low

flows whereas new meters did (Balliew, 2006).

Evaporative cooler demand has been calculated for Gallup (based on Wilson, 1996) assuming

that Gallup has the same number of cooling hours per cooling season as Albuquerque (1130)

and that evaporative cooler units used in Gallup have recirculating bleed-off systems used to

prevent scale buildup. From this calculation, each evaporative cooler is estimated to use

10,957 gallons per year. Assuming that all 7,349 housing units have evaporative coolers, total



residential evaporative cooler demand would be 80,522,993 gallons per year (this estimate does

not include the number of evaporative coolers used in non-residential sectors). While meters in

place in 2005 were likely not capturing all of this demand, they would have caught some fraction

of it. Using calculated evaporative cooler demand therefore presents a high estimate for the

amount of water not billed for in 2005 as a result of meters failing to measure low flows. During

the peak summer months in El Paso, Texas, evaporative cooler demand resulting from ¼-inch

free-flowing lines can account for one-third of residential demand during a 24-hour period

(Balliew, 2006).

Error due to low-flow inaccuracies has also been calculated based on Neptune product

specifications, even though this method provides an underestimate of actual error because the

data used in this analysis were from older meters of different types. Neptune product

specifications were used because Gallup Joint Utilities is replacing existing meters with this

brand of meter and this range of error may be more relevant in the future as meters are

replaced. The Neptune T-10 meter has a low-flow accuracy of ⅛ gpm, meaning that it will

register flow of ⅛ gpm and greater; the low-flow accuracy of this meter is 95 percent. This

accuracy exceeds that required by the AWWA (¼ gpm low-flow accuracy standard for ⅝-inch

meters) (Neptune, 2006). AWWA low-flow accuracy standards vary by meter size, increasing

with larger meter sizes: ¼ gpm for ⅝-inch meters, ½ gpm for ¾-inch meters, ¾ gpm for 1-inch

meters, 1½ gpm for 1½-inch meters, and 2 gpm for 2-inch meters (Neptune, 2006). Flows less

than the AWWA low-flow accuracy standards are expected to occur at night, when demand is

minimized.

If low-flow accuracy standards are being met, meter reading error will be up to 5 percent on

flows of less than the standard for each meter size, with the unmetered flows resulting in non-

revenue water.

The maximum amount of non-revenue water that results from flows of less than ⅛ gpm through

City ⅝-inch Neptune T-10 meters when product specifications are being met has been

calculated. For an 8-hour period where flow through a ⅝-inch Neptune T-10 meter is less than

⅛ gpm, up to 60 gallons could be unmeasured for each meter per day (number of minutes in

8 hours multiplied by ⅛ gpm). The maximum amount of water not measured by all ⅝-inch



meters in Gallup due to flows less than ⅛ gpm not registering is 2,314,800 gallons per cooling

season (multiplying the total number of ⅝-inch meters by 60 gallons per day for the 150-day

cooling season, and multiplying by the meter reading error rate of 5 percent) (Table 6). This

unmeasured water compares to approximately 0.20 percent of total City production in 2005.

Low-flow accuracy errors were also estimated for 1-, 1½-, and 2-inch meters assuming that low-

flow accuracy standards are being met by these meters (the City does not report having any ¾-

inch meters [GJU, 2006a]). Low-flow accuracy errors were estimated for 3-, 4-, and 6-inch

meters assuming that low-flow accuracy standard for 2-inch meters (2 gpm) is being met by

these meters (Table 6). These estimates assume proper functioning of all meters, resulting in

an underestimate of actual error.

Table 6. Potential Non-Revenue Water Resulting from Low-Flow Accuracy Errors

Potential Unmeasured Water b

System-Wide

Meter Size (inch)

Total Number in Gallup a

Flow Rate (gpm)

Daily Total Per Meter c (gallons)

Season Total d (gal/yr)

Percentage of Total 2005 Adjusted

Production

⅝ 5,144 <⅛ 60 2,314,800 0.20 1 479 <¾ 360 1,293,300 0.11

1½ 55 <1½ 721 297,000 0.03 2 239 <2 960 1,720,800 0.15 3 21 <2 e 960 151,200 0.01 4 10 <2 e 960 72,000 0.01 6 10 <2 e 960 72,000 0.01

Total 5,921,100 0.52

a Data from 2003 b Meter reading error of 5% c Assuming low-flow errors occur

seasonally (5 summer months) and at night (8 hours)

d 150-day cooling season

e AWWA low-flow accuracy standards are not cited for 3-, 4-, and 6-inch meters because their meter types are not clear and AWWA standards differ by meter type; the volume of water lost due to these meters failing to register flows has been estimated using the low-flow accuracy standard for 2-inch meters (2 gpm). (This method under-estimates loss due to failure to register low flows for 3-inch, 4-inch and 6-inch meters, as the low-flow accuracy threshold is probably greater than 2 gpm.)



5.2 Database Error

City water billing data for 2005 seem to incorporate a large percentage of error; in fact,

approximately 4 percent of the 85,728 possible database entries are zero, and over 16 percent

of all possible entries are blank. As a result, approximately 16 percent of the billing data are

incorrect. This estimate does not take into account any inaccuracies in the non-zero values.

Some of the blank entries counted may represent inactive accounts, decreasing total error.

Additional inaccuracies may stem from problems with data collection, and some amount of

database error will stem from the lag between water consumption and the collection of meter

readings.

The number of database entries in error has been estimated for the entire database, including

all sectors. Blank entries that appeared to result from new accounts being added during 2005

were subtracted from the total number of blank entries, leaving 12 percent of all possible

database entries blank due to missing data. In the complete database, 10,328 entries are blank

due to missing data (as opposed to new accounts), and 3,711 entries are zero. In total, 14,039

of the database entries for all sectors are blank or zero due to flawed data. Of the 7,349

housing units in Gallup, 539 units are vacant (U.S. Census, 2000). If 539 accounts are inactive,

the number of monthly entries that are blank or zero due to housing vacancies should be 6,468

(539 accounts times 12 months). Subtracting the number of blank or zero entries due to

vacancies from the total leaves 7,571 entries that are in error.

The total number of gallons unbilled due to database error cannot be calculated because of the

difficulty in comparing water use between multiple sectors (i.e., commercial and residential).

However, the number of gallons unbilled due to database error has been estimated for the

residential, multi-family housing, and Gallup Public Housing Authority sectors combined. These

sectors have a total of 10,974 blank and/or zero entries due to missing data. Subtracting out

the 6,468 entries that are due to vacancies leaves 4,506 entries that are blank or zero due to

database error. A total of 376 accounts can be estimated to have error associated with them

(calculated by dividing 4,506 monthly entries by 12 months). The average water usage rate for

the residential, multi-family housing, and Public Housing Authority sectors combined is 63

gallons per capita per day (gpcd) (calculated based on the billed metered total for these three



sectors). The estimated number of gallons not measured in the residential, multi-family, and

Public Housing Authority sectors due to database error is 24,641,442 gallons (calculated by

multiplying the 376 accounts estimated to contain errors by the average household size [2.85

people], the 63-gpcd usage rate, and converting from gallons per day to gallons per year) or

2.11 percent of total production in 2005.

5.3 Real Losses

There were no reported or identified water losses for the Gallup system in 2005. Total potential

real water loss can be calculated as the volume remaining after subtracting authorized

consumption and apparent losses from adjusted production. This method results in a calculated

total potential real water loss in the Gallup system of 97,655,059 gallons (Section 7.1).

Gallup Joint Utilities staff stressed that leaks in Gallup are found quickly because the clay

geology causes them to either come to the surface or flood basements (GJU, 2006a). The City

performs approximately 5 to 10 miles of acoustical leak surveys per year, targeting areas with

customer complaints, and has plans to expand this survey.

6. Sector Analysis

Gallup Joint Utilities divides their data into five sectors (Table 7). Multi-family housing accounts

fall in both the commercial and sub-meter sectors; however, an attempt has been made to split

these accounts out into their own separate sector. A total of 59 water accounts were identified

as multi-family housing accounts and were analyzed separately from the commercial and sub-

meter data; however, there may be additional multi-family accounts within the commercial

sector that have not been identified as multi-family housing.

The Gallup Public Housing Authority has 108 water accounts, and all Public Housing Authority

accounts are defined as commercial water accounts by the Gallup Joint Utilities. Approximately

50 of these accounts are for single-family homes, three are four-plexes, and the rest are

duplexes (Thornton, 2006). Information reflecting which accounts are single-family and/or multi-

family units was not available, and the accounts for multi-family and single-family units were not



separated from one another, although the Public Housing Authority accounts were analyzed

separately from commercial accounts. One of the Public Housing Authority accounts was

missing from the database, leaving data from 107 accounts that have been analyzed as part of

that sector.

Table 7. City of Gallup Water Use Sectors

Sector Abbreviation Types of Accounts by Sector

C Commercial C2 Municipal C3 Commercial with a special water price R Residential

SM Sub-meter (includes commercial accounts such as trailer parks and motels)

Monthly water billing data have been analyzed for a total of six sectors: (1) commercial,

(2) commercial 2 (municipal), (3) commercial 3 (commercial with a special water price),

(4) residential, (5) multi-family housing, and (6) Public Housing Authority. The sub-meter sector

was not analyzed, as all four of the accounts in this sector are for multi-family housing units, and

have been included in that sector analysis. The number of accounts analyzed for each of the

six sectors is listed in Table 8. The amount of water billed in 2005 by month for each sector is

provided in Table 9.

Table 8. Number of Accounts by Sector

Sector Number of Accounts

Commercial (C) 1,156 Municipal (C2) 84 Commercial with a special water price (C3)

1

Residential (R) 5,737 Multi-family housing 59 Public Housing Authority 107

Total 7,144



Table 9. Metered Water Use by Sector in 2005

Metered Water Use in 2005 (gallons)

Month Commercial Municipal

Commercial with Special

Price Residential Multi-Family

Housing

Public Housing

Authority a

January 38,686,642 1,228,560 41,791 27,819,788 15,376,397 1,304,048 February 35,514,546 921,476 43,758 21,572,118 8,427,948 1,024,356 March 39,250,978 924,132 40,115 22,148,617 10,858,514 1,077,464 April 39,761,533 1,481,332 53,377 26,548,779 9,940,105 1,162,953 May 35,226,858 1,801,229 8,258 22,665,552 9,213,782 913,996 June 45,003,757 3,016,003 24,834 34,322,122 10,898,053 1,115,358 July 45,416,959 4,250,278 55,427 37,893,762 11,531,594 1,340,640 August 42,368,493 3,159,305 58,396 31,484,741 11,697,000 1,057,343 September 41,904,127 2,817,970 13,412 29,955,149 10,773,003 1,235,412 October 36,938,514 2,287,900 27,302 24,305,617 9,861,991 917,130 November 36,266,002 2,028,075 37,176 23,445,948 9,246,492 895,468 December 37,860,110 1,430,415 18,999 23,566,772 10,089,114 892,686

Total 474,198,520 25,346,676 422,844 325,728,964 127,913,991 12,936,854 a Public Housing Authority accounts include accounts for both single-family and multi-family housing.

Figure 2 shows the breakdown of billed water by sector in 2005. This chart indicates that the

commercial sector used the majority of water in 2005, while use by the residential and multi-

family sectors was also significant. Figure 3 shows billed water totals by month for the

commercial sector; the commercial with a special water price account has been included with

the commercial sector on Figures 2 and 3. As shown in Figure 3, monthly water use by

commercial accounts stayed relatively constant in 2005.

In the original database provided by Gallup Joint Utilities, data for commercial account number

45105-02978 indicated that this customer was billed for 45,286,725 gallons more in December

compared to the 11-month average of 39,703,841 gallons in 2005, causing a large spike in

commercial use in that month. Subsequent discussion with Gallup Joint Utilities staff indicates

that the volume of water billed to this account in December 2005 was adjusted to 270,776

gallons (Barriga, 2006b), and data presented in this report reflect this revised amount.


Commercial49%

Residential34%

Multi-familyhousing

13%

Municipal3%

Public Housing Authority1%

GALLUP WATER AUDIT Billed Water Use by Sector

City of Gallup, 2005

Figure 2

2/16/07 Daniel B. Ste

P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.1-07\F02_WtrUse-Sctr.doc

phens & Associates, Inc.

0

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

30,000,000

35,000,000

40,000,000

45,000,000

50,000,000

Janu

aryFeb

ruary

March

April

May

June July

Augus

tSep

tembe

rOcto

ber

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Bill

ed w

ater

(gal

lons

)

GALLUP WATER AUDIT Billed Water Use for Commercial Sector


Figure 3


P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.1-07\F03_CmmrclUse.doc



Figures 4 and 5 show billed water totals by month for the municipal and residential sectors,

respectively. These figures indicate that water use peaked during the summer months in each

of these sectors. In contrast, monthly multi-family housing sector water use was relatively

constant throughout the year (Figure 6). This is because irrigation by multi-family housing units

tends to be less than for single-family homes.

Figure 7 shows billed water totals by month for the Public Housing Authority accounts. No real

trend can be discerned from this plot; this is expected, however, as some of the Public Housing

Authority accounts belong in the residential sector and others in the multi-family housing sector.

Water use by residential and multi-family Public Housing Authority accounts likely mimicked

trends seen by the other accounts in those sectors, and scramble each other when plotted

together.

Outdoor water use was estimated by subtracting the mean billed winter water use (January,

February, and December) from the mean billed summer water use (June, July, and August) for

each sector (Table 10). Figure 8 shows winter and summer average billed use by sector, as

well as outdoor water use (the difference between winter and summer use). As expected, the

residential sector uses the most water outdoors. The commercial account with a special water

price has again been included with the commercial sector on Figure 8. Use of unmetered water

is not shown on Figure 8, although it should be reiterated that the City uses a large amount of

unmetered water to irrigate parks.

Table 10. Estimated Outdoor Water Use, Summer 2005

Sector

Estimated Outdoor Water Use (gallons)

Commercial 6,920,673 Municipal 2,281,712 Residential 10,247,316 Multi-family housing 77,730 Public Housing Authority 97,417


0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

4,500,000

Janu

aryFeb

ruary

March

April

May

June July

Augus

tSep

tembe

r

Octobe

rNov

embe

rDec

embe

rB

illed

wat

er (g

allo

ns)

GALLUP WATER AUDIT Billed Water Use for Municipal Sector


Figure 4


P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.1-07\F04_MuncplUse.doc


0

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

30,000,000

35,000,000

40,000,000

Janu

aryFeb

ruary

March

April

May

June July

Augus

tSep

tembe

rOcto

ber

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Bill

ed w

ater

(gal

lons

)

GALLUP WATER AUDIT Billed Water Use for Residential Sector


Figure 5


P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.1-07\F05_RsdntlUse.doc


0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

16,000,000

18,000,000

Janu

aryFeb

ruary

March

April

May

June July

Augus

tSep

tembe

rOcto

ber

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Bill

ed w

ater

(gal

lons

)

GALLUP WATER AUDIT Billed Water Use for Multi-Family Housing Sector


Figure 6


P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.1-07\F06_MltiFmlyUse.doc


0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

Janu

aryFeb

ruary

March

April

May

June July

Augus

tSep

tembe

r

Octobe

rNov

embe

rDec

embe

rB

illed

wat

er (g

allo

ns)

GALLUP WATER AUDIT Billed Water Use for Public Housing Authority Sector


Figure 7


P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.1-07\F07_PblcHsngUse.doc


0

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

30,000,000

35,000,000

40,000,000

45,000,000

50,000,000

Commercial Municipal Residential Multi-family Housing Public HousingAuthority

Bill

ed w

ater

(gal

lons

)

Winter average

Summer average

Outdoor water use

GALLUP WATER AUDIT Average Water Use by Sector


Figure 8


P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.1-07\F08_AvgUse.doc



7. Water Audit Summary

7.1 International Standard Water Audit

The international standard water audit format is illustrated in Table 11.

Table 11. International Standard Water Audit Format

Billed water exported

Billed metered consumption

Billed authorized

consumption

Revenue water

Billed unmetered consumption Unbilled metered consumption

Own sources

Water exported

Authorized consumption

Unbilled authorized

consumption Unbilled unmetered consumption Unauthorized consumption

Apparent losses Customer metering inaccuracies

and data handling error Leakage on mains Leakage and overflows at storages

Water imported

System input

(allow for known errors)

Water supplied

Water losses

Real losses

Non-revenue

water

Leakage on service connections up to point of customer metering

Source: AWWA, 2003 (after Alegre et al., 2000)

Table 12 provides a breakdown of the comprehensive water audit balance for Gallup. Many of

the values that are presented in Table 12 (e.g., production meter error, customer meter error,

unmetered consumption, and database error) were estimated, as discussed in Section 5. As a

result, values presented in Table 12 for total potential real water loss and total non-revenue

water are also estimates. A list of recommended actions has been identified (Section 9) and

includes suggestions for collection of additional data that can provide values for those items that

have been estimated. Subsequent analyses should use these additional data to further refine

the values presented in Table 12.



Table 12. Comprehensive Water Audit Balance

City of Gallup, New Mexico January 1 through December 31, 2005

Page 1 of 2

P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.2-07\T12_WtrAudit-2005.doc 29

Amount Item Gallons % of Total

Water Production 1a. Metered production 1,186,186,277 1b. Production meter error a 17,792,794 1c. Exported water (Township of Gamerco) 35,435,377 1d. Adjusted production 1,168,543,694 100 Authorized Consumption 2a. Billed metered, commercial 474,198,519.52 40.58 2b. Billed metered, municipal 25,346,675.64 2.17 2c. Billed metered, residential 325,728,964.44 27.87 2d. Billed metered, multi-family housing 127,913,991.48 10.95 2e. Billed metered, Public Housing Authority 12,936,854.48 1.11 2f. Total billed metered 966,125,005.56 82.68 3. Total billed unmetered 0 0.00 4. Total unbilled metered 0 0.00 5a. Unbilled unmetered, Fire Department 22,500 0.00 5b. Unbilled unmetered, Streets Department 750,000 0.06 5c. Unbilled unmetered, Parks Department b 32,793,688 2.81 5d. Total unbilled unmetered 33,566,188 2.87 6. Total authorized consumption 999,691,194 85.55 Apparent Losses 7. Estimated customer meter error c 40,634,899 3.48 8. Additional loss to low-flow inaccuracies

⅝-inch meters 2,314,800 0.20 1-inch meters 1,293,300 0.11 1½-inch meters 297,000 0.03 2-inch meters 1,720,800 0.15 3-inch meters d 151,200 0.01 4-inch meters d 72,000 0.01 6-inch meters d 72,000 0.01 Total low-flow inaccuracies 5,921,100 0.52

9. Illegal connections and theft 0 0.00 10. Database errors e 24,641,442 2.11 11. Total apparent losses 71,197,441 6.11


Table 12. Comprehensive Water Audit Balance

City of Gallup, New Mexico January 1 through December 31, 2005

Page 2 of 2

P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.2-07\T12_WtrAudit-2005.doc 30

Amount Item Gallons % of Total

Real Water Loss Potential 12a. Reported water loss NA 0.00 12b. Identified water loss NA 0.00 12c. Total potential real water loss f 97,655,059 8.36 Non-Revenue Water 5d. Total authorized unbilled unmetered 33,566,188 2.87 11. Total apparent losses 71,197,441 6.11 12c. Total potential real water loss 97,655,059 8.36 13. Total non-revenue water 202,418,688 17.34 a The production total has been adjusted upward to account for production meter error, based on the assumption that

production meters are underreporting by 1.5%. b Estimate based on Utah Water Conservation irrigation calculator method. c Estimates that customer meters are underreporting by 4%. d Under-estimate of low-flow error, assuming a low-flow measuring threshold of 2 gpm e Database errors estimated for residential sector only f Value calculated by subtracting authorized consumption and apparent losses from adjusted production.


Figure 9a shows the breakdown between revenue and non-revenue water in Gallup in 2005.

Revenue water consists of billed water by sector (Figure 2); non-revenue categories include

total authorized unbilled unmetered use (i.e., by the fire, streets, and parks departments), total

apparent losses (estimated customer meter error, total low flow inaccuracies, illegal connections

and theft, and database errors), and total potential real water loss (calculated by subtracting

authorized consumption and apparent losses from adjusted production) (Figure 9b).

7.2 AWWA Performance Indicators

System and financial information were obtained from Gallup Joint Utilities staff (Barriga, 2007)

and input into water audit software developed by the AWWA Water Loss Control Committee

(AWWA, 2005) to evaluate performance indicators for Gallup. The results of that analysis are

provided in Appendix D and discussed below.

The total operational cost for 2005 (the sum of operating and maintenance costs, employee

salaries and benefits, and the department service on the City bonds) was calculated to be

$3,079,734. Total annual water system variable cost (the sum of all treatment and power costs)

was calculated to be $734,868. The cost to produce and supply the next million gallons of water

(total annual water system variable cost divided by City adjusted production for 2005), termed

the variable production cost by AWWA, was calculated to be approximately $630.

Customer retail unit cost in Gallup during 2005 was calculated to be $3.01 per 100 cubic feet.

This value is a weighted average between the fee per cubic foot for average residential and

commercial water uses, with total use reflecting 48 percent residential and 52 percent

commercial use. For this calculation the residential, multi-family housing, and Public Housing

Authority sectors were lumped together under the residential category, and commercial,

commercial with a special water price, and municipal use were lumped together under the

commercial category.

The AWWA water audit software estimates that in 2005, the annual cost of apparent losses in

Gallup was $286,364 and the annual cost of real losses was $61,452. Apparent losses were


a. Revenue vs. Non-Revenue Water in 2005

Revenue water83%

Non-revenue water17%

b. Non-Revenue Water in 2005

Total authorizedunbilled unmetered

17%Total potential real

water loss48%

Total apparent losses35%

Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.

GALLUP WATER AUDITBreakdown of Revenue and Non-Revenue Water


P:\_

WR

06-0

16\G

allu

pWtrA

dt.1

-07\

F09_

Rev

_vs.

_Non

-Rev

.doc

2/16/07

Note: Breakdown of revenue water provided in Figure 2

Figure 9


calculated to be 32.72 gallons per connection per day, while real losses were calculated to be

44.93 gallons per connection per day.

The infrastructure leak index (ILI) is an AWWA performance indicator used to compare utility

performance in operational management of real losses. The lower the amount of leakage and

real losses in a system, the lower the ILI will be. AWWA lists a target ILI range of 1.0 to 3.0 as

appropriate for systems operating where water resources are limited (Appendix D; AWWA,

2005), as is the case for Gallup. With a calculated ILI value of 2.34, Gallup is within this range,

although because the calculations that lead to this ILI value rely on multiple estimates, this

number should be viewed as an estimate.

8. Existing Conservation Measures

The City has changed billing systems this year, and is in the process of replacing water meters

for all water accounts in order to implement an automatic meter reading program. (The City

plans to mount the reader on solid waste collection trucks, eliminating the need for technicians

to collect water use data in the field.) As of April 2006 all but 35 of the ⅝-inch meters in the

residential sector had already been replaced (although data used in this analysis predates wide-

scale meter replacement). While ⅝-inch meters in the residential sector are the only

replacements that have been made so far, meter replacements in other sectors began in July

2006, with all meters to be replaced by the end of 2007 (GJU, 2006a). The City Joint Utilities

Office does not have a long-range meter replacement program.

The City passed a new water conservation ordinance that went into effect on April 25, 2006

(Appendix C). In addition to prohibiting water waste with multiple provisions, this new ordinance

prohibits new non-recirculating conveyor car wash systems, sets new indoor plumbing

equipment requirements, establishes time and day restrictions for irrigation, and gives the City

Manager authority to adopt emergency water use restrictions as necessary.

In 2005, 156,317 square feet of turf at two Ford Canyon Park baseball fields were converted

from irrigated turf to AstroTurf. In 2006, an additional 106,568 square feet (two more baseball

fields) were also converted.



9. Recommended Actions

The actions summarized below are recommended in order to improve water use accounting:

• Gallup Joint Utilities should meter the remaining unmetered uses (fire hydrants, streets,

parks).

• Gallup Joint Utilities should improve record keeping.

• After the current meter replacement program has been completed, the Gallup Joint

Utilities Office should consider starting a long-range program of testing meters on a

1-year or other appropriate time cycle and replacing customer meters at least every

15 years to minimize error (Balliew, 2006). Bench-top meter testing should be

performed on replaced meters, in order to quantify how accurate those meters have

been.

• Each time production meters are calibrated (every five years), the calibration data should

be kept and compared to production data for the last five years to evaluate the accuracy

of production data.

• All meters greater than 2 inches in diameter should be checked yearly, both for accuracy

and mineralization, along with a random sample of 50 to 100 smaller meters (AWWA,

1999). Gallup Joint Utilities also needs to evaluate demand for accounts with large

meters, identifying meters that should be downsized and replacing them with smaller

meters.

• There has been a lot of estimation in the past, and while automation should put an end

to estimated residential readings, this is the only sector that has been automated so far.

Gallup Joint Utilities does plan to expand its automation to the other sectors (GJU,

2005a). As the commercial water sector uses the largest amount of water, this sector

should be the next one to be automated.



• While geology near Gallup makes leaks much easier to find than in many other New

Mexico communities, Gallup Joint Utilities should expand the leak detection survey

program, evaluating more of the aging system each year.

• Gallup Joint Utilities should consider breaking multi-family housing accounts out as a

separate water use sector and should work with the Gallup Public Housing Authority to

split their accounts between the residential (single-family) and multi-family housing

sectors.

• A column for meter size needs to be added in the billing database to make that data

easily accessible. Water account monthly service charges depend on meter size, so this

information should be readily available; however, it does need to be checked for

accuracy. A review of the number and size of meters by sector could be used to

minimize the number of large meters where unnecessary.

• City data for 2006 are expected to be better than the 2005 data, and Gallup Joint Utilities

should consider updating this water audit when the new data become available. This

study and its future updates can be used as a tool to evaluate the effectiveness of

Gallup Joint Utilities accounting and water conservation strategies.

10. Summary

Gallup Joint Utilities has been proactive in planning for future water supply for the City. They

have begun a water reuse program and are currently conducting a wastewater treatment pilot

project. In addition, the City adopted a new water conservation ordinance in April 2006, and will

benefit from the enforcement of this ordinance. These projects should be continued and

expanded to include other water conservation initiatives.

The information that has been collected and analyzed for this study will be useful for the City’s

planning and may be used in developing a statewide methodology for water demand and

conservation planning. In developing a statewide methodology, it will be necessary to

determine what data are needed to perform a complete analysis, as not all necessary data are



currently collected by Gallup or many other New Mexico communities. The most difficult part of

this study was the coordination required to obtain all the necessary data. This is expected to be

a hurdle for similar projects requiring data from other New Mexico communities.

References

Alegre, H., W. Hirner, J. Baptista, and R. Parena. 2000. Manual of best practice: Performance

indicators for water supply services. IWA Publishing, London.

Allgood, L. 2006. Personal communication between Lance Allgood, Gallup Joint Utilities

Executive Director, and Amy Ewing, Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc. (DBS&A). April

11, 2006.

American Water Works Association (AWWA) Water Loss Control Committee. 1999. Water

audits and leak detection: Manual of water supply practices M36, Second edition.

AWWA. 2003. Committee report: Applying worldwide BMPs in water loss control. Journal of the

American Water Works Association 95(8):65-79.

AWWA. 2005. AWWA Water Audit Software Version 2.0. October 2005.

Balliew, J. 2006. Personal communication between John Balliew, Water System Division

Manager for the City of El Paso, and Amy Ewing, DBS&A. August 23, 2006.

Barriga, E. 2006a. Personal communication between Elizabeth Barriga, Gallup Joint Utilities

Water Conservation Coordinator, and Amy Ewing, DBS&A. August 30, 2006.

Barriga, E. 2006b. Personal communication between Elizabeth Barriga, Gallup Joint Utilities

Water Conservation Coordinator, and Amy Ewing, DBS&A. December 5, 2006.

Barriga, E. 2007. Personal communication between Elizabeth Barriga, Gallup Joint Utilities

Water Conservation Coordinator, and Amy Ewing, DBS&A. February 7, 2007.



City of Gallup. 2006. Gallup, New Mexico City Code. Last updated by City ordinance C2005-10

passed January 10, 2006. <http://66.113.195.234/NM/Gallup/00000000000000000.htm>

Accessed January 17, 2007.

Endress+Hauser. 2006. Proline Promag technical information. <http://www.uk.endress.com>.

Accessed August 24, 2006.

Gallup Joint Utilities Water Systems (GJU). 2005a. Annual water quality report, Water testing

performed in 2004. Copyright Gemini Group LLC.

GJU. 2005b. City of Gallup electric, water, wastewater & solid waste rate schedule. July 1,

2005.

GJU. 2006a. OSE pre-water audit questionnaire. Completed questionnaire dated April 5, 2006.

GJU. 2006b. OSE water audit questionnaire. Completed questionnaire dated April 13, 2006.

Garcia, R. 2006. Personal communication between Robert Garcia, City of Gallup Fire Chief, and

Amy Ewing, DBS&A. April 28, 2006.

Krohne. 2006. Optiflux 4040 C. Technical information available at <http://www.krohne-mar.com/

index.php?id=6427>. Accessed August 24, 2006.

Neptune Technology Group (Neptune). 2006. Condensed water catalog. Available at

<http://www.neptunetg.com/uploadedFiles/CondWtrCatalog3_06.pdf>. Accessed August 21,

2006.

New Mexico Office of the State Engineer (NM OSE). 2006. Personal communication between

John Longworth and Cheri Vogel, Water Use and Conservation Bureau, and Amy Ewing,

Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc. October 5 and 10, 2006.

Smeal, D. 2006. Personal communication between Dan Smeal, New Mexico State University

Agricultural Science Center-Farmington, and Amy Ewing, DBS&A. July 19, 2006.



Sparling Instruments (Sparling). 2006. About flow meters. <http://www.sparlinginstruments.

com/products.htm>. Last modified July 21, 2006. Accessed August 22, 2006.

Tagai, G. 2006. Personal communication between Gloria Tagai, City of Gallup Streets

Department, and Amy Ewing, DBS&A. April 28, 2006.

Thornton, D. 2006. Personal communication between Doug Thornton, Public Housing Authority,

and Elizabeth Barriga, Gallup Joint Utilities. May 26, 2006.

Utah Division of Water Resources (UWR). 2006. Customized guide. Available at

<http://www.conservewater.utah.gov/Customized>. Accessed October 12, 2006.

United States Census Bureau (U. S. Census). 2000. Census 2000 data tables and information.

<http://www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html>.

Vickers, A. 2001. Handbook of water use and conservation. WaterPlow Press, Amherst,

Massachusetts.

Wilson, B.C. 1996. Water conservation and quantification of water demands in subdivisions: A

guidance manual for public officials and developers. Technical Report 48, New Mexico State

Engineer Office. May 1996.


Appendix A

Completed Water Audit Questionnaires

P:\_WR06-016\GallupWtrAdt.1-07\AppxA\Pre-Audit_Quest.doc 1

OSE Pre-Water Audit Questionnaire City of Gallup

Person completing questionnaire: Name: Ernest Thompson Address: City of Gallup - Gallup Joint Utilities PO Box 1270, Gallup, New Mexico 87305 Phone: (505) 863-1207 E-mail: [email protected]

1. Define the City’s water sources: Wells (number of wells, OSE permit numbers, and source) 17 WELLS TOTAL - WELL NO. 10,G-96-S-11/G-97-S-6,Gallup Sandstone. WELL NO. 11,G-96-S-12/G-97-S-7,Gallup Sandstone. WELL NO. 12,G-96-S-13,Gallup Sandstone. WELL NO. 13,G-96-S-2 ,Unknown. WELL NO. 15, G-96-S-15,Gallup Sandstone. WELL NO. 16, G-96-S-16,Gallup Sandstone. WELL NO. 17,G-96-S-9/G-97-S-4,Gallup Sandstone. ALLAN WELL,G-97-S-9,Dakota Westwater COLAIANNI WELL,G-96-S-22,Gallup Sandstone. GALANIS WELL,G-96-S-21,Gallup Sandstone. JUNKER 1 WELL,SJ-113 ,Gallup Sandstone. JUNKER 2 WELL,G-96-S-20,Gallup Sandstone. LEWIS WELL,G-97-S-8, Dakota Westwater. MUNOZ WELL,G-96-S-17,Gallup Sandstone. PENA WELL,G-96-S-23,Gallup Sandstone. RAY WELL,G-96-S-19,Gallup Sandstone. ERWIN WELL,G-96-S-18,Gallup Sandstone. Surface water (name of waterbody) n/a Imported water (from where) n/a Water reuse (describe) Municipal Golf Course, Soccer complex, Sports Complex (8,193,400 gallons) Other sources (describe) n/a

2. Describe the type, size, and age of meters on each source. Well #10 - Turbine, 4" Sparling, 18 yrs, Well #11 - Turbine, 2" Neptune, 9 yrs, Well #12 - Turbine, 6" Neptune, 9 yrs, Well #13 - Turbine, 2" Neptune, 5 yrs, Well #15 - Turbine, 6" Sparling, 18 yrs, Well #16 - Turbine, 6" Sparling, 18 yrs, Well #17 - Mag Meter, 2" Krohne, 5 yrs, Junker I - Mag Meter, 4" Krohne, 13 yrs, Junker II - Mag Meter, 4" Pro-Line ProMag, 4 yrs, Allen Well - Mag Meter, 4" Krohne, 13 yrs. Pena Well - Mag Meter, 4" Water Specialties, 3 yrs, Lewis Well - Mag Meter, 4" Krohne, 13 yrs, Ray Well - Mag Meter, 4" Krohne, 13 yrs. Erwin Well - Mag Meter, 4" Endress-Huaser, <1 yr. Munoz Well - Mag Meter, 4" Krohne, 13 yrs, Galanis Well - Mag Meter, 4" Sparling, 11 yrs, Colaianni Well - Mag Meter, 4" Krohne, 13 yrs.

3. How are meter readings taken? (e.g., by staff, remote receiver, estimates [based on what?]) Production meters are read monthly by staff and recorded manually, consumer meters are read by staff using touch read meters (presently going through a conversion to AMR remote radio read meters, completion date December of 2007).

4. Is accuracy testing routinely conducted at the source water metering location? Tested and Calibrated every 5 years

5. Is any water exported/sold to other systems? Yes No If so, which system(s)? Township of Gamerco

City of Gallup Questionnaire


typical amount Single meter commercial.

6. Provide the number and size of service connections for each sector, describing specifically what is included in each sector (e.g., are schools listed as a separate educational sector or included with another sector?). Include multiple entries for the various sizes for each sector, to account for the number of connections of each size.

Service Connections Sector Includes Number Size (inches) Residential Single Family Residence 4416 5/8" Residential Single Family Residence 200 1" Residential Single Family Residence 7 1 1/2" Residentail Single Family Residence 27 2" Commercial Small Commercial 722 5/8" Commercial Small Commercial 277 1" Commercial Small Commercial 207 2" Commercial Small Commercial 46 1 1/2" Commercial Small Commercial 20 3" Commercial Commercial Commercial 2 Commercial 2 Commercial 2 Municipal Municipal Municipal Municipal

Small Commercial Small Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial Municipal Facilities Municipal Facilities Municipal Facilities Municipal Facilities

10 10 2 2 1 4 2 3 2

4" 6"

5/8" 2" 3"

5/8" 1" 2"

1 1/2"

7. How are data collected in the field and transferred to a billing database (e.g., estimates when readings are zero, calculations based on reading data, some other method)? Current meter, customer and location data are downloaded over our ethernet/TCP network in a coordinated fashion into a dedicated off-site PC and then transferred to manual/wand or manual/radio read hand held devices and then read. The device data are then transferred back to the same PC and uploaded to our billing system. Exception reports are generated, reviewed and work orders issued for re-reads of un-read or mis-read meters. If mitigating factors preclude reading then, as a last resort, estimates are made. Consecutive estimates are strenously avoided. Our system allows complete control of how estimates are calculated and are in an almost constant state of refinement.

8. What is the length of each billing cycle (e.g., one month, 28 days, other)? Our billing cycles vary but average about 30.428 or 365.25/12.

9. What software is used for the water demand and billing databases? iSeries DB2 data base and the HTE corporation integrated application software suite.



10. List all available fields in these databases, including any calculation fields. A text file containing specifications of virtually all data base files used by our utility billing application is attached named "Utility Billing File Layouts.txt" It is 723KB.

11. Does the system serve customers outside the city limits? Yes No If so, please list the number of connections. 498 outside water meter locations

12. Are there any unbilled connections? Yes No If so, explain and list or estimate the number of connections by sector. some parks

13. Are public demand locations (parks, city golf courses, airport, medians, cemeteries, etc.) all metered? Yes No If not, list what is not metered. Some of the Parks are not metered

14. Are there any unmetered private demand locations? Yes No If so, list what is not metered.

15. Are multi-family and single family residential demands distinguishable? Yes No If so, how are they distinguishable? multi-family demands are listed as commercial meters

16. For multi-family housing, are there separate meters for each unit (or some other method to determine occupancy)? Yes No

If not all multi-family housing units have separate meters for each unit, what percentage do?

17. What sizes and brands of meters are used for residential and commercial service customers? 5/8", 1", 1 1/2", 2" , different brands but converting to Neptune as a standard

18. Are there any large industrial users that use non-standard metering methods? Yes No If so, how are they metered?

19. Provide the number of residential sewer accounts. 5,332 but some water/sewer users in, for example, some apartments are not in the count or seperatly billed. The number of residential locations having electric service and maybe water/sewer is 7,139.

20. Does the wastewater treatment plant only treat wastewater from service area accounts? Yes No

If wastewater from outside the service area is treated, specify the amount and source of water. Area septic tank pumpers use faciltiy also, some storm drains

21. Provide the amount of wastewater discharged from the wastewater treatment plant by month for the calendar year January 1 to December 31, 2005 (complete the following table or attach your own).

Wastewater Discharge (gal/mo or specify: Million Gallons) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

81.3200 75.6200 81.6660 68.9270 58.9950 59.2280 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

81.3887 78.5623 77.3269 86.5799 76.0457 80.6500



22. What quantity (if any) of treated effluent is reused by the City? 10.9% How is this metered? magnetic flow meters

23. Describe any meter accuracy testing or replacement programs that take place, including the frequency that meters are replaced. As needed for repairs

24. Describe the methods for how individual meters are calibrated, repaired, or replaced. When flows become questionable or are not registering the sensors and/or heads are checked and replaced as needed. The magnetic flow meters have no mechanical parts and are almost maintenance free.

25. Is there a leak detection program, project, and/or report? Yes No If so, please describe.

26. How many pressure zones are there in the water system? 4 distribution pressure zones How are the pressures controlled between zones? Storage tanks and pressure control and pressure reducing valves What are the ranges of pressures in each zone? 20-100 PSI Is low water pressure a problem anywhere in the system? Yes No If so, please describe. Higher elevation areas, all areas maintain at least a 20 PSI minimum

27. Quantify any known water loss (e.g., due to leakage on mains, main breaks, leakage or overflow at storage sites, leakage on service connections, customer metering inaccuracies). 14 % on average

28. Is the billing system automated? Yes No If so, does it have a mechanism for identifying anomalies in customer use data? For example, if a customer’s use during 2 to 3 days is greater than typical monthly use, is there a way to track that? Yes our exception report identifies meter readings that are too high or to low above or below the selected or seasonal average period and trackable work orders are issued. Is the customer informed of this anomaly? Yes No

OSE Water Audit Questionnaire City of Gallup

Person completing questionnaire: Name: Ernest Thompson Address: Gallup Joint Utiltities PO Box 1270 , Gallup, NM 87305 Phone: 505-863-1207 E-mail: [email protected]

1. Quantify the total amount of water entering the system by month for the calendar year January 1 to December 31, 2005 (complete following table or attach your own):

Amount (gal/mo or specify: Gallons/Month) Type of Source Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Production wells 92,174,143 89,223,525 85,996,865 94,413,604 102,689,732 114,444,933 Surface water sources

Booster stations Other metering locations

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Production wells 126,518,887 105,245,649 97,346,675 99,119,642 88,368,996 90,643,626 Surface water sources

Booster stations Other metering locations

2. Provide electronic monthly customer demand meter reading data, by account, for the calendar year January 1 to December 31, 2005. For each entry please include the following information: Sector Account number Meter type Size Date installed.

3. Provide electronic billing records for the calendar year January 1 to December 31, 2005, divided out by sector.

Appendix B

Average Household Size 2000 Census Data

Detailed Tables - American FactFinder

Detailed Tables You are here: Main Data Sets Data Sets with Detailed Tables Geography Tables Results

H12. AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE OF OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS BY TENURE [3] - Universe: Occupied housing units Data Set: Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100-Percent Data NOTE: For information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, definitions, and count corrections see http://factfinder.census.gov/home/en/datanotes/expsf1u.htm.

Gallup city, New MexicoAverage household size--

Total 2.85Owner occupied 2.95Renter occupied 2.71

U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000 Standard Error/Variance documentation for this dataset: Accuracy of the Data: Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF 1) 100-Percent Data (PDF 44KB) The letters PDF or symbol indicate a document is in the Portable Document Format (PDF). To view the file you will need the Adobe® Acrobat® Reader, which is available for free from the Adobe web site.

Main Search Feedback FAQs Glossary Site Map Help

file:///P|/_WR06-016/GallupWtrAdt.O-06/Gallup%20census%20table.htm10/23/2006 2:18:05 PM

http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/doc/sf1chap8.pdf

http://www.census.gov/main/www/pdf.html

http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep.html

http://www.census.gov/

Appendix C

City of Gallup Water Conservation

Ordinance

ORDINANCE C-2006-08 AN ORDINANCE ENACTING WATER CONSERVATION ENFORCEMENT MEASURES REPLACING TITLE VIII,

CHAPTER 6: WATER CONSERVATION OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF GALLUP, NEW MEXICO

WHEREAS, the City of Gallup, having a limited water supply, finds that in

order to conserve and protect its water supply, and that the enactment of this Ordinance is necessary to protect the health and welfare of its citizens and minimize the greater effects of a water shortage, and;

WHEREAS, this Ordinance is made applicable to all properties within the municipal limits and/or those served by the domestic supply, and; WHEREAS, compliance with this Ordinance is a condition of service, and;

WHEREAS, conservation can extend the City’s water supply at a fraction of

the cost of other alternatives, and;

WHEREAS, protection of limited ground water resources is a regional issue, and;

WHEREAS, the enactment of this Ordinance accomplishes the Long-Range

Water Conservation Strategy for the City of Gallup Goal of “reviewing existing water waste and conservation ordinances” to create a more effective water conservation strategy, and;

WHEREAS, the enactment of this Ordinance is to conserve Gallup’s limited

water supply, prohibit water waste, and provide effective ordinance violation enforcement, and;

WHEREAS, the City of Gallup Water Board endorses Water Conservation

through enforcement, and providing water saving incentives such as the new Xeriscape and Rain Barrel Rebates, and; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Governing Body of the City of Gallup, New Mexico, that; Title VIII, Chapter 6: Water Conservation of the Municipal Code of the City of Gallup shall be amended to read:

2

CHAPTER 6

WATER CONSERVATION SECTION: 8-6-1: Water Waste Prohibitions 8-6-2: Fire Hydrant Use Restricted 8-6-3: Plumbing Equipment Requirements 8-6-4: Car Washing 8-6-5: Time and Day of Irrigation 8-6-6: Ordinance Violation Enforcement 8-6-7: Emergency Water Use Restrictions 8-6-1: WATER WASTE PROHIBITIONS: It is unlawful for any person to use water

from the domestic supply in a non-beneficial or wasteful manner. Non-beneficial and/or wasteful uses shall include, but are not limited to:

(A) The use or application of water in such a manner, rate and/or quantity that

it flows and/or sprays onto adjacent property or the public right-of-way sufficient to cause ponding or flow;

(B) The escape of water through breaks or leaks for any period of time within

which such break or leak should reasonably have been discovered and corrected. It shall be deemed that a period of twenty-four (24) hours after discovery of such a break or leak and/or notice from the City of Gallup is a reasonable time within which to correct such break or leak or, as a minimum, to stop the flow of water from the break or leak;

(C) The washing of any street, sidewalk, parking lot, driveway or other hard

surfaced area, where excess water from such activity is not beneficially used and/or is wasted or when such excess water flows and/or sprays onto adjacent property or the public right-of-way sufficient to cause ponding or flow. Exceptions may be granted for reasons of public health or safety by the Executive Director of Gallup Joint Utilities or designee. All such exceptions shall be subject to restrictions as set forth by the Director. Exceptions shall be granted in writing and be valid for only one (1) application and location;

(D) The use of water for non-recirculating decorative water fountains and/or

ponds; (E) Use of water for all new, replacement and/or renovated single pass or

once-through cooling systems installed and/or renovated after August 29, 2000. A relatively simple and inexpensive recirculation loop, or a more technically sophisticated ozonation treatment system can be installed to reuse this otherwise wasted water. All cooling and/or process water shall be metered and billed;

3

(F) The use of water for new non-recirculating conveyor car wash systems;

(G) The use of water for construction activities, such as soil compaction, dust control, except when the water is used for the testing of domestic waterlines or as authorized by the Gallup Joint Utilities Executive Director or his designee for reasons of public health or safety.

8-6-2: FIRE HYDRANT USE RESTRICTED: It is unlawful for any person except an

authorized agent of the City of Gallup to connect to, operate or use water from any City fire hydrant, except as authorized by the Gallup Joint Utilities Executive Director or their designee, for reasons of public health or safety.

8-6-3: PLUMBING EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS: Any new or replacement

plumbing fixtures shall comply with standards contained in the Uniform Plumbing Code as adopted by the City of Gallup and or as modified herein.

(A) Leaking Plumbing Fixtures Prohibited: The continued use of leaky pipes

and taps, leaking toilets or lavatories, or other appliances which waste water is prohibited.

(B) Minimum Standards for Plumbing Fixtures: Any new plumbing fixture or

replacement-plumbing fixture shall comply with following standards of water use:

1) Water closet tank, whether flush tank, flushometer tank, or flushometer

valve operated, shall have an average consumption of not more than 1.6 gallons (6.1 liters) per flush. Water closets that use a “quick closing” flapper to limit the flush to 1.6 gallons shall not be used to satisfy this requirement.

2) Urinal flushometers, shall not exceed a maximum of 1.0 gallon (3.8

liters) per flush. If approved in writing by Executive Director of Gallup Joint Utilities or their designee, blowout urinals may be installed for public use in stadiums, fairgrounds and in other like structures, used for outdoor assembly and similar uses.

3) Showerheads shall not exceed a maximum flow of 2.5 gallons (9.5

liters) per minute. Emergency safety showers are exempted from this provision.

4) Lavatory and kitchen faucets shall be equipped with aerators and shall

be designed and manufactured so that they will not exceed a water flow rate of 2.0 gallons (7.6 liters) per minute. Self-closing, metering, or self-closing faucets shall be installed on lavatories intended to serve the transient public, such as those in, but not limited to, service stations, train stations, airports, restaurants, and convention halls. These faucets shall deliver no more than a maximum flow of 0.25 gallons (1.0 liters) per use.

5) Residential water softeners – shall not use more than 75 gallons (295

liters) during the entire regeneration cycle and shall be sized to cycle no more than three (3) times per week. (Ord. 66-207, 3-22-83).

4

6) Water-conserving fixtures shall be installed and maintained in strict

accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions to maintain their rated performance.

7) For all new construction, all of the requirements regarding water-

conserving devices shall be certified by a certificate of compliance by a licensed mechanical contractor or plumbing permittee before or at the time of the final plumbing inspection. The City of Gallup is to receive a copy prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.

8-6-4: CAR WASHING:

A) All Self-Service Car Wash wand nozzles shall not use more than 3.0 gallons of water per minute and be equipped with a positive shut-off nozzle. Such nozzle shall stop the flow of water through the hose when released by the operator.

B) For new construction of commercial car wash business issued building permits after the date of this ordinance passing, certification shall be provided to a designated Gallup Joint Utilities official that the car wash uses no more than (40) gallons of water per vehicle washed. Absent such certification, no water service will be provided. New car wash fixtures shall not exceed the flow described below:

(1) In-bay, hand-held spray wash equipment, including a spray wand or foaming brush, shall not use more than 3.0 gallons of water a minute and has a trigger shutoff;

(2) Portable pressure wash equipment with a spray nozzle shall not use more than 3.5 gallons of water a minute and has a trigger shutoff;

(3) A conveyor friction system shall not use more than 30 gallons for each

vehicle, excluding reclaimed water; (4) A conveyor touchless system shall not use more than 40 gallons for

each vehicle, excluding reclaimed water; (5) An In-bay automatic system shall not use more than 40 gallons for

each vehicle, excluding reclaimed water; (6) Each chamois wringer shall have self-closing valves on their faucets; (7) Systems using reverse osmosis rinse water shall use no more than

40 gallons for each vehicle and must reclaim and reuse the reject water. Reject water discharge shall be allowed only if no net increase of salinity enters the waste water system;

(8) The use of garden hoses of any type for vehicle washing at

commercial facilities is not considered an approved method; and

5

(9) Charity carwashes are prohibited, except when in compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance, Section 8-6-1.

This subsection does not apply if washing the vehicle is necessary to protect the health, safety, or welfare of the public.

8-6-5: TIME AND DAY OF IRRIGATION: Residences, commercial and industrial

properties, along with institutional and public residences and facilities will have irrigation restricted during the months of April, May, June, July, August and September:

(A) Residences, commercial and industrial properties, along with institutional

and public residences and facilities will be allowed to irrigate as follows:

1) When the property has an odd-numbered address, that property will irrigate on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays.

2) When the property has an even-numbered address, that property will irrigate on Wednesdays, Fridays, and Sundays.

3) No one is to irrigate on Mondays.

(B) No irrigation will be allowed between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.

(C) EXCEPTIONS:

1) Facilities irrigating with treated effluent. 2) Upon petition to the City Council, a majority of the Council may

provide a waiver to entities that prove the above section this Ordinance poses a hardship.

3) The odd-even irrigation restrictions including time and day do not

apply to City parks or athletic fields.

4) The Water Systems Superintendent may issue site-specific waivers to the irrigation restrictions to allow for irrigation of new sod/seed areas for a period not to exceed 14 calendar days.

8-6-6: ORDINANCE VIOLATION ENFORCEMENT: Any act or omission by any

person who knowingly, negligently or recklessly acts or omits to act in violation of the provision(s) or restrictions of this Chapter can be penalized by: A) payment of administrative fees; B) discontinuance of water service as described below.

(A) Administrative fees. Fees shall be assessed on the user's utility bill. Each day (24-hour period) of continued violation(s) shall constitute a separate offense at a given user address. The fines shall be added to the water user’s account. Failure to pay any portion of a water user’s account, including any fines imposed pursuant to this Chapter, shall subject said

6

account to termination of water service in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.

1) First observed violation – The offender will receive a verbal and / or written warning, and then will be provided with a copy of the pertinent sections of the Municipal Code relative to water conservation.

2) Second observed violation - ($20.00)

3) Third observed violation - ($50.00)

4) Fourth observed violation - ($100.00)

5) Fifth observed violation - at the same user address, the City shall impose a fine equal to twice the average monthly billing for the immediately preceding two-month period for the meter through which the wasted water was supplied or $200, whichever is greater. The fine shall be added to the water user’s account. Failure to pay any portion of a water user’s account, including fines imposed pursuant to this Chapter, shall subject said account to an installation of a flow restriction device at meter at the user’s expense.

(B) When any further violation of this Chapter occurs, and the Executive Director of Gallup Joint Utilities or his/her designee determines that the specific circumstances of the violation are of such a serious nature as to require immediate measures and abatement, the Executive Director of Gallup Joint Utilities or their designee may take steps to temporarily shut off the water source or discontinue the water service as a means of compelling compliance with this Chapter. The city may affect such measures by entry upon private premises if the water service or city water meter is located on private premises. Any violation which depletes the water system during water emergency management shall be deemed to deplete water essential to the maintenance of fire flows and shall be cause for discontinuance of water service following a twenty-four (24) hour notice. The City shall not restore service until the Executive Director of Gallup Joint Utilities or designee has determined that the water user has provided reasonable assurances that future violations of this Chapter by such user will not occur.

(C) Any administrative fee assessed in part (A) of this subsection may be appealed by a customer to the Executive Director of Gallup Joint Utilities and then to the City Manager whose decision will be final.

(D) If part (B) in this subsection applies - any aggrieved customer whose water service is to be discontinued shall be given twenty four hour (24) notice and said customer may immediately appeal the decision of the Executive Director of Gallup Joint Utilities to the City Manager, who may, in his/her sole discretion allow continued temporary service to the customer. If service is continued, it shall continue only until the next scheduled City Council meeting, at which time the City Council will hold a hearing to determine if service should be discontinued, or in the case where the City Manager has upheld the decision that it be discontinued,

7

determine if it should be restored. The City Council may also decide on what conditions water service will be maintained to a customer who is still receiving service or restored to a customer whose service has been discontinued.

8-6-7: EMERGENCY WATER USE RESTRICTIONS: For the reasons of public welfare, health, and safety, the City Manager may, upon notification by the Executive Director of Gallup Joint Utilities of pending or probable water shortages due to the effects of drought, equipment failures or catastrophic events which decrease the availability and/or delivery capability or due to increased water use, may impose emergency water use restrictions. Emergency water use restrictions may include, but are not limited to, one or any combination of the following:

(A) Restrict irrigation of City facilities to certain days of the week and

certain hours of the day; (B) Prohibit all irrigation at City facilities;

(C) Impose water restrictions & surcharges;

(D) Impose a temporary moratorium on any or all new development, including lawn and garden installations;

(E) Prohibit all irrigation and outdoor water use;

(F) Prohibit the washing of automobiles, trucks, trailers, boats, airplanes, or other mobile equipment at other than a commercial carwash.

(G) Other restrictions as deemed necessary by the Executive Director of Gallup Joint Utilities and approved by the City Manager.

PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 25th day of April, 2006 CITY OF GALLUP By: __________________________________ Bob Rosebrough, Mayor

__________________________________ Pat Butler, City Councilor

___________________________________ Bill Nechero, City Councilor

___________________________________

8

Mary Ann Armijo, City Councilor ___________________________________ Frank Gonzales, City Councilor

ATTEST: ________________________________ Patty Holland, City Clerk

Appendix D

AWWA Performance Indicators

Water Audit Report for: Gallup Joint UtiltiesReporting Year:

ALL VOLUMES TO BE ENTERED AS ANNUAL QUANTITIES

WATER SUPPLIEDVolume from own sources: M 1,186.2 million gallons (US) per year

Master meter error adjustment: E 17.8 million gallons (US) per yearWater Imported: M 0.0 million gallons (US) per yearWater Exported: M 35.4 million gallons (US) per year

.WATER SUPPLIED: . 1,168.5 million gallons (US) per year.

.AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION .

Billed metered: M 966.1 million gallons (US) per yearBilled unmetered: M 0.0 million gallons (US) per yearUnbilled metered: M 0.0 million gallons (US) per year

Unbilled unmetered: E 33.6 million gallons (US) per year.

AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION: . 999.7 million gallons (US) per year

.WATER LOSSES (Water Supplied - Authorized Consumption) . 168.9 million gallons (US) per year.Apparent Losses .

Unauthorized consumption: M 0.0 million gallons (US) per yearCustomer metering inaccuracies: E 46.6 million gallons (US) per year

Data handling errors: E 24.6 million gallons (US) per year

Apparent Losses: . 71.2 million gallons (US) per year

Real Losses .Real Losses (Water Losses - Apparent Losses): . 97.7 million gallons (US) per year

.WATER LOSSES: . 168.9 million gallons (US) per year.

.NON_REVENUE WATER .

NON-REVENUE WATER: . 202.4 million gallons (US) per year

.

SYSTEM DATA ..Length of mains: M 144.0 miles

Number of active AND inactive service connections: M 5,958Connection density: . 41 conn./mile main

Average length of private pipe: E 10.0 ft

.Average operating pressure: E 65.0 psi

.COST DATA ..

Total annual cost of operating water system: C $3,079,734 $/Year

Customer retail unit cost (applied to apparent losses): E $3.01Variable production cost (applied to real losses): C $628.90 $/million gallons (US)

DATA REVIEW - Please review the following information and make changes above if necessary:

- Input values should be indicated as either measured or estimated. You have entered:

9 as measured values 7 as estimated values 0 without specifying measured or estimated

- It is important to accurately measure the master meter - you have entered the measurement type as: measured

- Cost Data: No problems identified

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Financial IndicatorsNon-revenue water as percent by volume: 17.3%Non-revenue water as percent by cost: 12.0%

Annual cost of Apparent losses: $286,364Annual cost of Real Losses: $61,452

Operational Efficiency Indicators

Apparent losses per service connection per day: 32.72 gallons/connection/day

Real losses per service connection per day*: 44.93 gallons/connection/day

Real losses per length of main per day*: N/A

Real losses per service connection per day per psi pressure: 0.69 gallons/connection/day/psi

Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL): 0.11 million gallons/day

2.34

* only the most applicable of these two indicators will be calculated

AWWA WLCC Water Audit Software: Reporting Worksheet

Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) [Real Losses/UARL]:

2005

under-registered

$/100 cubic feet (ccf)

?

?

?

?

?

? Click to access definition

?

?

?

?

?

?

Back to Instructions

Please enter data in the white cells below. Where possible, metered values should be used; if metered values are unavailable please estimate a value. Indicate this by selecting a choice from the gray box to the left, where M = measured (or accurately known value) and E = estimated.

?

?

?

???

?

?

?

(pipe length between curbstop and customer meter or property boundary)

Copyright © 2006, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved.

AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Reporting Worksheet 1

Target ILI Range Financial Considerations Operational Considerations

1

1.0 - 3.0

Water resources are costly to develop or purchase; ability to increase revenues via water rates is greatly limited because of regulation or low ratepayer affordability.

Operating with system leakage above this level would require expansion of existing infrastructure and/or additional water resources to meet the demand.

2

>3.0 -5.0

Water resources can be developed or purchased at reasonable expense; periodic water rate increases can be feasibly imposed and are tolerated by the customer population.

Existing water supply infrastructure capability is sufficient to meet long-term demand as long as reasonable leakage management controls are in place.

3

>5.0 - 8.0

Cost to purchase or obtain/treat water is low, as are rates charged to customers.

Superior reliability, capacity and intregrity of the water supply infrastructure make it relatively immune to supply shortages.

Greater than 8.0

4

Less than 1.0

AWWA WLCC Water Audit Software: Determining Water Loss Standing?

Once data has been entered into the Reporting Worksheet, the performance indcators are automatically calculated.How does a water utility operator know how well his or her system is performing? The AWWA Water Loss ControlCommittee provided the following table to assist water utilities is gauging an approximate Infrastructure LeakageIndex (ILI) that is appropriate for their water system and local conditions. The lower the amount of leakage andreal losses that exist in the system, then the lower the ILI value will be. Note: this table offers an approximate guideline for leakage reduction target-setting. The best means of settingsuch targets include performing an economic assessment of various loss control methods. However, this table isuseful if such an assessment is not possible.

General Guidelines for Setting a Target ILI (without doing a full economic analysis of leakage control options)

Water Resources Considerations

If the calculated Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) value for your system is 1.0 or less, two possibilities exist. a) you are maintaining your leakage at low levels in a class with the top worldwide performers in leakage control. b) A portion of your data may be flawed, causing your losses to be greatly understated. This is likely if you calculate a low ILI value but do not employ extensive leakage control practices in your operations. In such cases it is beneficial to validate the data by performing field measurements to confirm the accuracy of production and customer meters, or to identify any other potential sources of error in the data.

Available resources are greatly limited and are very difficult and/or environmentally unsound to develop.

Water resources are believed to be sufficient to meet long-term needs, but demand management interventions (leakage management, water conservation) are included in the long-term planning.

Water resources are plentiful, reliable, and easily extracted.

Although operational and financial considerations may allow a long-term ILI greater than 8.0, such a level of leakage is not an effective utilization of water as a resource. Setting a target level greater than 8.0 - other than as an incremental goal to a smaller long-term target - is discouraged.

Back to InstructionsCopyright © 2006, American Water Works Association. All Rights Reserved.

AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Water Loss Standing 2

DEVELOPED BY: ANDREW CHASTAIN-HOWLEY, Water Prospecting and Resource ConsultingANDREW DAY, Water Prospecting and Resource ConsultingDAVID GOFF, P.E. Goff Water Audits & EngineeringGEORGE KUNKEL, P.E. Philadelphia Water DepartmentALAIN LALONDE, Veritec ConsultingDAVID SAYERS, Delaware River Basin Commission

REFERENCES:

AWWA Water Audit Software Version 2.0 Developed by the Water Loss Control Committee of the American Water Works Association October 2005

- Alegre, H., Hirner, W., Baptista, J. and Parena, R. Performance Indicators for Water Supply Services. IWA Publishing ‘Manual of Best Practice’ Series, 2000. ISBN 1 900222 272- Kunkel, G. et al, 2003. Water Loss Control Committee Report: Applying Worldwide Best Management Practices in Water Loss Control. Journal AWWA, 95:8:65

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

AWWA Water Loss Control Committee Water Loss Standing 3

gallup water audit summary reportgallup water audit summary report 1. introduction on behalf of the...

Documents