Mendocino County Grand Jury
• 2007-2008
Saving for a Sunny Day City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise District: Water Supply, Treatment and Distribution System
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 34 findings
F1
Fort Bragg’s water comes from three sources: the Noyo River, Newman Gulch and Waterfall Gulch. Quality of the water source and permit restrictions govern when and how much water may be drawn from each location.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
The State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights, imposes seasonal limits on the amount of water that may be drawn from the Noyo. From 1 www.cdph.ca.gov 2 February 20, 2004 study by Tetra Tech to support NPDES application. June 1 to October 1, the river flow must be maintained at no less than 3 cfs (cubic feet per second) and pumping is only allowed when tides are at 2’ or higher.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Water from Newman Gulch is shut off in wet weather when it is affected by naturally occurring tannins that leach from forested land.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Water Use Permits are temporary and subject to renewal. Fort Bragg’s current permit for Noyo River water expires in 2009. The City is now seeking a permanent Water Use License in its place.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The District has contracted studies to explore other water sources. Test wells near the Noyo produced brackish water. The documented potential for wells at other sites was limited and costs would be high.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Access to water rights owned by GP will depend on future negotiations between the City and the owners of those rights. Historically, the GP Mill site had its own water rights for industrial purposes and had little impact on treated water or sewer services provided by the City.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
Fort Bragg water requires minimal treatment because source quality is high. Monthly water tests are reported to the California Department of Health Services and to the City Manager and City Council.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
All required tests have met or exceeded State water quality standards in the past year.3
No recommendations for this finding
F9
The capacity of existing pre-treatment storage ponds is approximately 3.0 million gallons. This would be insufficient in the event of drought or increased demand. The City has completed geotechnical studies and is preparing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for design of a 45 acre/foot storage reservoir in Newman Gulch.4 Project cost is estimated at $1.5 million. Additional raw water storage will still be needed.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
Treated water storage capacity is 3.3 million gallons. The Treatment Plant has a daily capacity of 2.2 million gallons.5 Summer demand peaks at 1.2 million to 1.4 million gallons/day; in winter, demand drops to .5 million to .8 million gallons/day.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
The pump station that serves the area known as the East Fort Bragg Pressure Zone has never operated as intended. It is also serving more connections than originally planned.6
Related Recommendations (2)
R2
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Authorize funding for development of a comprehensive water enterprise long- term plan, including interactive computer modeling of flow and pressure in areas where problems have been identified, and where development is anticipated; fully involve the Water Treatment and Distribution Superintendents in the planning process (Findings 11-13, 27 and 28.
R3
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Examine the East Fort Bragg Pressure Zone and recommend necessary upgrades to the system (Findings 11-13, 27 and 30).
F12
Some homes in the East Fort Bragg Pressure Zone experience water pressure in the range of 20-23 pounds per square inch (psi). “Substandard pressure” is defined as 10 psi or less. Pressure of 30 psi is desirable.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Authorize funding for development of a comprehensive water enterprise long- term plan, including interactive computer modeling of flow and pressure in areas where problems have been identified, and where development is anticipated; fully involve the Water Treatment and Distribution Superintendents in the planning process (Findings 11-13, 27 and 28.
R3
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Examine the East Fort Bragg Pressure Zone and recommend necessary upgrades to the system (Findings 11-13, 27 and 30).
F13
Low water pressure is an inconvenience to residents in the East Fort Bragg Pressure Zone and South of Chestnut. It could create a crisis at Mendocino Coast District Hospital in the event of a large fire or a water main break. The Fort Bragg Water Enterprise publishes an annual water quality report which is available on the City website at www.city.fortbragg.com 4 One acre-foot is equivalent to 325,850 gallons. Storage consists of two 1.5 million gallon tanks at the treatment plant and one 300,000 gallon tank located near Highway 20; treatment capacity is based on the plant operation manual. Boundaries of the East Fort Bragg Pressure Zone are: N-Sherwood; S-Noyo River; W-Lincoln; E-California _____________________________________
Related Recommendations (2)
R2
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Authorize funding for development of a comprehensive water enterprise long- term plan, including interactive computer modeling of flow and pressure in areas where problems have been identified, and where development is anticipated; fully involve the Water Treatment and Distribution Superintendents in the planning process (Findings 11-13, 27 and 28.
R3
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Examine the East Fort Bragg Pressure Zone and recommend necessary upgrades to the system (Findings 11-13, 27 and 30).
F14
Maintaining Fort Bragg’s 260 fire hydrants is a top priority. Temporary workers, including high school students, are hired and supervised for the summer job of exercising all hydrant valves, and cleaning and painting the hydrants.
No recommendations for this finding
F15
Water is metered as it is drawn from the source, when it enters clean water storage tanks, and again when it is delivered to end users.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Develop a management report to determine the difference between the amount of treated water leaving the plant and the amount delivered and billed to end users; include the amount and cost of this “lost” water in the City’s annual Water Quality Report (Findings 15-17, 19, 21, 25 and 26).
F16
Fort Bragg’s Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) Municipal Services Review states that 17% percent of the water treated by the City in 2005-06 was “lost” between the clean water storage tanks and the total water metered by end users.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Develop a management report to determine the difference between the amount of treated water leaving the plant and the amount delivered and billed to end users; include the amount and cost of this “lost” water in the City’s annual Water Quality Report (Findings 15-17, 19, 21, 25 and 26).
F17
This unexplained loss far exceeds an acceptable industry standard of 10-11% and costs ratepayers substantial sums annually. In 2005-06, the cost was estimated at $213,000.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Develop a management report to determine the difference between the amount of treated water leaving the plant and the amount delivered and billed to end users; include the amount and cost of this “lost” water in the City’s annual Water Quality Report (Findings 15-17, 19, 21, 25 and 26).
F18
The District has conducted leak studies three times in recent years and has undertaken major maintenance and upgrades on pumps, pipes, and meters.
No recommendations for this finding
F19
Some water is still lost due to leaks in the system. Because most pipes are shallow, leaks are identified and repaired quickly.
No recommendations for this finding
F20
Some of the apparent loss is explained by illegal connections. Other unmetered water is used to flush hydrants and mains, and by the Fire Department for drills and emergency response.
No recommendations for this finding
F21
Another likely explanation for the apparently excessive loss is that aging water meters were under-reporting the amount of water reaching end users.
No recommendations for this finding
F22
Operators now maintain all collection and treatment plant meters according to manufacturer recommendations.
No recommendations for this finding
F23
More than 2800 new water meters have been acquired through a ten-year lease- to-purchase contract with an annual payment of approximately $100,000.
No recommendations for this finding
F24
It takes three hours to read the new meters electronically from a vehicle compared to 160 man/hours to read the old meters on foot. The City plans to change the billing cycle from bi-monthly to monthly.
No recommendations for this finding
F25
The first full reading of the new meters in fall 2007 suggested that the old meters were recording less water than was actually reaching end users. The City has received complaints about increased bills, but this may be due to more accurate recording of the amount of water used.
No recommendations for this finding
F26
Data from multiple billing cycles will permit more accurate calculation of the amount of water lost between the treated water tanks and the end users.
No recommendations for this finding
F27
The existing Fort Bragg Water System Study and Master Plan was developed in 1986 and is no longer a viable management tool. Updating this report is a recognized priority. Interactive computer modeling of flows and pressures will be invaluable in planning for future development.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Authorize funding for development of a comprehensive water enterprise long- term plan, including interactive computer modeling of flow and pressure in areas where problems have been identified, and where development is anticipated; fully involve the Water Treatment and Distribution Superintendents in the planning process (Findings 11-13, 27 and 28.
F28
Those directly responsible for water treatment and distribution have not been full participants in long-term planning for the Water Enterprise, or in preparation of the City’s LAFCO Municipal Services Review, or in related aspects of a Fort Bragg City emergency response plan.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Authorize funding for development of a comprehensive water enterprise long- term plan, including interactive computer modeling of flow and pressure in areas where problems have been identified, and where development is anticipated; fully involve the Water Treatment and Distribution Superintendents in the planning process (Findings 11-13, 27 and 28.
R4
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Involve the Superintendents for water treatment and distribution in water-related aspects of emergency response planning (Finding 28).
F29
The current level of staffing is the minimum needed to monitor and maintain the water treatment and delivery systems. Any further reduction in the number of certified operators will result in deferred maintenance and system failures.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
The Grand Jury recommends that the City of Fort Bragg Water Enterprise:
Maintain the number of certified operator positions for maintenance of the water treatment and distribution systems at no less than 2006-07 levels (Finding 29). Comments Most of the concerns that surfaced during this inquiry can be attributed to scarce financial resources and deferred maintenance of an aging system. Providing an adequate supply of potable water will be an on-going challenge. End users can anticipate continuing pressure to conserve water. They would be well advised to plan for mandatory rationing during periods of drought. They may also expect periodic rate increases to cover the cost of maintaining and upgrading the system. The Fort Bragg Water Enterprise Treatment and Distribution Superintendents are to be commended for their professionalism and commitment to maintaining systems that are essential to the well-being of all who live, work, or visit in the area they serve.
F30
Priorities for capital investment include replacement of backup generators to ensure water delivery during power outages, and a second blower for the water treatment plant so original equipment can be shut down and serviced.
No recommendations for this finding
F31
Funding for system maintenance and upgrades comes from user rates, connection fees, loans and grants.
No recommendations for this finding
F32
In 2005, the District secured a zero-interest loan through the California Department of Health Services to upgrade the Madsen Hole pump station and to clean and rehabilitate the water storage ponds.
No recommendations for this finding
F33
Current rates became effective May 1, 2006.
No recommendations for this finding
F34
A rate study is required by law before any change can be implemented. In fall of 2007, the Fort Bragg City Council approved $47,000 for a grant-funded study of rates. A presentation of findings from this study is scheduled for the City Council Meeting on March 24, 2008.
No recommendations for this finding
Comments 1
-
CO1Most of the concerns that surfaced during this inquiry can be attributed to scarce financial resources and deferred maintenance of an aging system. Providing an adequate supply of potable water will be an on-going challenge. End users can anticipate continuing pressure to conserve water. They would be well advised to plan for mandatory rationing during periods of drought. They may also expect periodic rate increases to cover the cost of maintaining and upgrading the system. 5 of 7 The Fort Bragg Water Enterprise Treatment and Distribution Superintendents are to be commended for their professionalism and commitment to maintaining systems that are essential to the well-being of all who live, work, or visit in the area they serve.
No Responses Found 2
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Fort Bragg
City
Mendocino LAFCO
Lafco