Document Belgrade_doc_f395f0ec69

JOB NO. B16-048 GRE AT FA LLS , BO ZE MA N , K AL ISPE L L & S HE LB Y, MT I S POKA NE , W A I LEW IST ON , ID I W ATFO RD C IT Y, ND I ME D IA, PA FINAL 2017 [PHONE REDACTED] tdhengineering.com 234 East Babcock Street Suite 3 Bozeman, MT 59715 CLIENT ENGINEER City of Belgrade 91 East Central Avenue Belgrade, MT 59714 TD&H Engineering 234 East Babcock Street, Suite 3 Bozeman, MT 59715 Engineer: Keith Waring, PE BELGRADE, MONTANA 2017 WATER MASTER PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- i TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1- Executive Summary 1 1.1 Purpose 1 1.2 Population 1 1.3 System Water Demands 1 1.4 Water Supply 3 1.5 Treatment 3 1.6 Storage 4 1.7 Distribution 4 1.8 Recommendations 5 Chapter 2- Introduction 7 2.1 Purpose 7 2.2 Scope of Work 7 2.3 Historical Background 8 2.4 Reference Reports 8 Chapter 3- Planning Area 9 3.1 Location 9 3.2 Planning Area Boundary 9 3.3 Demographic Information 9 3.4 Environmental Conditions 12 Chapter 4- Planning Projections 21 4.1 Population Projection 21 4.2 Land Use and Growth Areas 22 Chapter 5- Water Demands 25 5.1 Introduction 25 5.2 Water Produced 27 5.3 Water Sales 28 5.4 Other Authorized Water Use 33 5.5 Water Loss 37 5.6 Summary of Water Component Volumes 39 5.7 System Demands 40 5.8 Fire Flow Demands 44 Chapter 6- Water Supply 47 6.1 Introduction 47 6.2 Existing Wells 47 ---PAGE BREAK--- ii 6.3 Water Rights 63 6.4 Water Quality 67 6.5 Source Capacity Development 74 6.6 Well Improvements 80 Chapter 7 - Distribution System 84 7.1 Introduction 84 7.2 Existing Distribution System 84 7.3 Design Parameters 85 7.4 Design Flows 86 7.5 Water Modeling 88 7.6 Recommended Improvements 93 7.7 Future System- 2028 and Beyond 111 7.8 WaterCAD Results 113 Chapter 8 - Water Storage 114 8.1 Introduction 114 8.2 Description of Existing Storage Facilities 114 8.3 Storage Requirements 114 8.4 Design Parameters 116 8.5 Storage Sizing 117 8.6 Storage Sizing Engineering Analysis 117 8.7 Recommended Storage Improvements 120 8.8 SCADA System 122 Chapter 9- Staffing Requirements 123 9.1 Introduction 123 9.2 Summary of Operation and Maintenance Tasks 123 9.3 Man Hour & Staffing Requirements for O&M Tasks 124 9.4 Summary of Man Hour Requirements 128 Chapter 10- Vulnerability Assessment & Wellhead Protection Plan 130 10.1 Vulnerability Assessment 130 10.2 Wellhead Protection Plan 130 10.3 Water Source Assessment 131 Chapter 11- Financial 132 11.1 History of Revenues and Expenditures 132 11.2 Rate Schedules 134 11.3 Residential and Commercial Users 134 11.4 Impact Fees 134 ---PAGE BREAK--- iii 11.5 Financial Plan 134 Chapter 12- Environmental Considerations of Proposed Improvements 135 12.1 135 12.2 Permits. 135 12.3 Air Quality 136 12.4 Hazardous Materials 136 12.5 Wetlands 137 12.6 Floodplains 137 12.7 Groundwater 137 12.8 Government Agency Notification and Comment 137 12.9 Historic and Cultural Issues 138 12.10 Fish and Wildlife 138 12.11 Environmental Assessment 138 Chapter 13- Summary of Recommendations 140 13.1 140 13.2 Other Recommendations 144 Chapter 14- References 146 APPENDICES Water Usage Records Appendix A Well Information Appendix B Wellhead Protection Plan Appendix C WaterCAD Information and Results Appendix D Fees and Ordinances Appendix E NHP Report Appendix F LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3-1: Vicinity Map 10 Figure 3-2: City Limits & Zoning Boundary 11 Figure 3-3: FEMA Map 15 Figure 3-4: Wetlands 17 Figure 3-5: Farmlands 18 Figure 4-1: Existing Land Use and Zoning 23 Figure 4-2: Future Land Use and Zoning 24 Figure 5-1: Water Volume Components 26 Figure 5-2: Average Per Capita Daily Water Use 30 ---PAGE BREAK--- iv Figure 5-3: Pumped Water vs. Authorized Water Use (gallons/year) 38 Figure 5-4: Average Water Production, Use, and Loss 40 Figure 6-1: Existing Well Locations 48 Figure 6-2: SCADA Flowrates 50 Figure 6-3: Broadway Well Log 52 Figure 6-4: Park Well Log 54 Figure 6-5: Stiles Well Log 56 Figure 6-6: Shop Well Log 58 Figure 6-7: Yukon Well Log 60 Figure 6-8: Airport Well Log 62 Figure 6-9: Belgrade Water Rights Place of Use Boundary 64 Figure 6-10: Nitrate History 70 Figure 6-11: Source Capacity 76 Figure 7-1: Diurnal Curve 92 Figure 7-2: Existing Water System 95 Figure 7-3: Typical Operating Pressures- Maximum Day 96 Figure 7-4: Available Fire Flows- Maximum Day 97 Figure 7-5: East Crossing Loop 98 Figure 7-6: West Central Avenue Main Upgrade 100 Figure 7-7 N.E. Loop Tie: 101 Figure 7-8 Well #7 Main Upgrade 102 Figure 7-9 S. Central Commercial District 103 Figure 7-10: West Crossing Loop 104 Figure 7-11: Prescott Subdivision Development 106 Figure 7-12: Spooner Road Main 119 Figure 7-13: Proposed Water System 2028 110 Figure 7-14: Proposed Water System 2038 112 ---PAGE BREAK--- v LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1: Hazardous Waste Handlers 19 Table 3-2: Threatened or Endangered Species in Gallatin County 20 Table 3-3: Montana Natural Heritage Program Species of Concern 20 Table 4-1: Population Projections 21 Table 5-1: Historic Pumped Water (gal/month) 27 Table 5-2: Metered Water (gal/month) 28 Table 5-3: Residential Water Sales (gal/month) 29 Table 5-4: Per Capita Water Usage 30 Table 5-5: Commercial Water Sales (gal/month) 32 Table 5-6: Large Commercial Water Sales (gal/month) 33 Table 5-7: Airport and School District Annual Water Sales (gal/year) 33 Table 5-8: Non-Revenue Domestic Water Use (gal/month) 34 Table 5-9: 2015 Average Annual Park Irrigation 35 Table 5-10: 2015 Average Annual Hydrant Flushing 36 Table 5-11: Estimated Water Loss (gallons/year) 37 Table 5-12: Existing (2018) Average Day Demands 41 Table 5-13: Future (2038) Average Day Demands 42 Table 5-14: Existing (2018) Maximum Day Demands 42 Table 5-15: Future (2038) Maximum Day Demands 43 Table 5-16: Existing (2018) Peak Hour Demands 44 Table 5-17: Future (2038) Peak Hour Demands 44 Table 5-18: Design Fire Flows 46 Table 6-1: Water Well Data Summary 49 Table 6-2: Water Right Summary 65 Table 6-3: Field Water Quality Data 68 Table 6-4: Coliform Positive Samples by 71 Table 6-5: Coliform Positive Samples by Month 71 Table 6-6: Water Level Sensor Cost Estimate 81 Table 6-7: Well #2 Testing and Pump Replacement Cost Estimate 81 Table 6-8: Well #3 Testing and Pump Replacement 82 Table 6-9: Well #1 Sand Content Testing Cost Estimate 82 Table 6-10: Construction and Completion of Wells #7 and #8 83 Table 7-1: Water Pipe Information 84 Table 7-2: Design Flows 86 ---PAGE BREAK--- vi Table 7-3: Design Fire Flows 88 Table 7-4: Roughness Coefficients 89 Table 7-5: Model Calibration 90 Table 7-6: Additional Testing Information 91 Table 7-7: Figures of Pressure And Fire Flow 113 Table 8-1: Storage Tank Information 114 Table 8-2: EPS Results in Appendix D 118 Table 11-1: History of Revenues and Expenditures 132 Table 11-2: History of Cash Flow 133 Table 11-3: Metered Water Rate Schedule per Month 134 Table 11-4: Average User Costs 134 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 1 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 1 2017 Chapter 1- Executive Summary 1.1 Purpose The City of Belgrade is an expanding community that needs a detailed and fully integrated plan to provide for its water needs and guide future development. This Water Master Plan examines the City of Belgrade’s water system, identifies system deficiencies, and recommends improvements that are needed to meet current and future demands and regulatory requirements between 2018 and 2038. 1.2 Population The 2010 population of Belgrade was 7,389 people as recorded by Montana Department of Commerce. The population is expected to grow to 19,360 people by 2038. This estimate was calculated by looking at the past growth rate; specifically from 2010 to 2014, during which the growth rate was 1.38%. However, there have been annual growth rates up to 7.87%. With all factors considered, an annual growth rate of 3.5% will provide a conservative basis for design with the following population estimates: Year 2020 10,423 Year 2030………14,703 Year 2038………19,360 Population growth may be lower than projected if economic conditions decline or significantly higher due to many unforeseeable and unpredictable reasons. Growth projections should be reviewed on an annual basis to determine when improvements recommended to serve population growth will actually be needed. 1.3 System Water Demands Water produced from each of the six existing wells is metered by the City of Belgrade. All known residential and commercial customers are also metered and their use is recorded to show consumption, which shows the amount of water sold. The difference between production and water sold represents “water loss”. The water loss in Belgrade represents an average of 30% of the water produced on an annual basis. This is unusually high for a city water system. In general, a water system in good condition can expect average water losses between 10 to 15 percent. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 1 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 2 2017 Water loss includes leakage, unmetered park irrigation, unmetered users, and meter calibration errors. Since the parks and public areas are not metered, it is difficult to tell with any certainty the actual amount of water being lost to leakage or other sources. Winter use records were utilized as an indicator of leakage since there is no irrigation during this period. Inconsistencies in the winter records suggest that some water is being lost to unmetered users or to metering errors. The following water demands were determined from meter records and SCADA system data: · Average annual daily water production is 1,702,679 gallons per day (gpd) from 2012-2016 · Average annual residential water use was 102 · Average annual commercial water use was 244,320 gallons per day · Water Loss is estimated at 364 gallons per minute (gpm). · Park irrigation is estimated at about 44,726,672 gallons per year. · The maximum day peaking factor (ratio between maximum day use and average annual day) is 2.31. · The peak hour demand factor (ratio between peak hour and average annual day use) is 3.19. The last Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating for Belgrade identified two locations with a 3,000 gpm needed fire flow (3 hour duration). Based on their location they appear to be the middle school and the high school. Other needed fire flows varied from 1,000 to 2,500 gpm (2 hour duration) depending on location. Under the 2012 International Fire Code (adopted by the State of Montana and subsequently the City of Belgrade), the City can reduce needed fire flows to as low as 1,000 gpm by requiring automatic fire sprinkler systems on all new structures with needed fire flows less than 4,000 gpm. Requiring automatic fire sprinkler systems on all new buildings other than single or two family dwellings less than 3,500 square feet in area is highly recommended. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 1 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 3 2017 1.4 Water Supply The City currently has six wells with a total permitted pumping capacity of approximately 4,075 gpm. A new well was approved for construction in the spring of 2017. Wells, pumps, and monitoring equipment improvement needs are discussed in depth in Chapter 6. More wells will be needed as the population expands. An additional well is proposed as the next needed improvement with a tentative location in the Mountain View Park. As property develops in the west, two additional wells will be needed within that location to support the increased residential water needs. Water rights are a key controlling issue for development. If sufficient water rights cannot be obtained, City growth will be limited accordingly. The City currently has standby power on three of the six existing wells. The City has successfully demonstrated to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) that standby power is not required on the three remaining wells in order to provide a reliable water supply and meet peak flow demands for the existing system. All new wells will likely need standby power. 1.5 Treatment The water quality in Belgrade has consistently tested at a level that does not require disinfection or other treatment of its water. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently adjusted the groundwater rules; as of 2014, all ground water supplies must meet additional performance criteria which include testing procedures with required timeframes and additional testing requirements if there is a positive result. This rule does not necessarily require disinfection of water in systems utilizing groundwater, but Belgrade may be required to disinfect in the future if the system is deemed at risk or has a significant history of test samples with positive coliform bacteria results. Disinfection, if required, will be difficult and expensive to provide, since each well will have to have its own disinfection system that introduces chlorine and provides a minimum detention time before the water reaches the first user. Other methods could be implemented, but all with significant costs. Another approach would be to have all water piped to one water treatment facility and then distributed to the user. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 1 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 4 2017 1.6 Storage The City has two 500,000 gallon elevated storage tanks. One is located near the airport and the second is on Yukon Road south of the interstate. If an adequate number of new wells are constructed with standby power, these two tanks will provide adequate storage for the planning area north of the interstate plus that portion of the planning area south of the interstate that is in the lower pressure district. An upper pressure district is needed to extend water service south of the existing Yukon Tank. A new 750,000 gallon elevated tank is recommended for ultimate projected development of the upper pressure district. The tank should be deferred until development in the area makes it necessary. The upper pressure district tank will also help support the lower pressure district but would require pressure reducing valves on mains connecting the two pressure districts. 1.7 Distribution The distribution system has approximately 271,500 linear feet of mains consisting of 4-inch to 16-inch ductile iron, cast iron, steel, and PVC. Deteriorated water service lines are contributing to the leakage problem in various parts of town. Service lines should be replaced at least to the property line whenever water mains are being replaced. The remainder of the service line should be tested for leaks and replaced if leaking. Service lines are the responsibility of the property owner. The distribution system has been modeled using WaterCAD, an analytical hydraulic modeling software program by Bentley Systems, Inc. The model calculates pressures and available fire flow at all points throughout the system for the various flow demand conditions required by DEQ. Improvements are recommended as needed to correct areas with deficient fire flows or pressures. The vulnerability of the system to failure at key distribution points is also a concern. Two additional Interstate crossings are recommended to support the existing single main that currently links the well and tank on the south side of the Interstate to the distribution system on the north side of the Interstate. These additional crossings would also provide needed support to the eastern and western extremities of the system during high demand periods. Recommendations are also made for the completion of various major ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 1 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 5 2017 supply main loops that are currently discontinuous or terminate in inadequately sized An upper pressure district is needed to extend service south of Frank Road. A framework of basic supply mains, wells, and a tank is proposed to serve expected future development in the upper pressure district. Actual development may require some adjustment of individual components, but the basic grid concept should be maintained. The proposed upper district tank and wells would be able to help support the lower pressure district in times of emergency or high demand through connecting mains with pressure reducing valves. The connections between systems would significantly improve the reliability and flexibility of the lower district system. 1.8 Recommendations This Master Plan has identified the anticipated needs for the water distribution, supply, and storage system for the next 20 years. This plan should be reviewed on a regular basis to make sure that projections and design parameters are still applicable. A formal update is recommended in 10-years due to probable changes in regulatory requirements, population projections, water demands, and type of development or planning area boundaries. A list of recommended improvements is provided below. They are placed in order of priority as determined by need. Improvements to the existing system generally are given a higher priority than improvements needed for future development and expansion of the water system. Improvement Estimated Cost 1. New Well #7 (approved spring 2017) $958,000 2. New Well #8 $1,000,000 3. East Crossing Loop $3,304,000 4. West Central Avenue Main Upgrade $982,000 5. NE Loop Tie $1,227,000 6. Well #7 Main Upgrade $1,426,000 7. Broadway Well Improvements $1,000,000 8. S. Central Commercial District Main Upgrades $1,165,000 9. West Crossing Loop $5,103,000 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 1 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 6 2017 10. Prescott Subdivision Development 11. Spooner Road Main Completion $285,000 12. Well Water Level Sensors $38,000 13. Source Water Protection Planning $20,000 14. Well and Pump Performance Testing $65,000 15. Modification to Pump #5 $25,000 16. Irrigation Study $12,000 17. Upper Pressure Loop $18,306,000 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 2 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 7 2017 Chapter 2- Introduction 2.1 Purpose The purpose of this Water Master Plan is to evaluate the City of Belgrade’s existing water supply, distribution, and storage systems and identify improvements needed to meet current and future water demands and regulatory agency requirements. The planning period used for this report is from 2018 to 2038. 2.2 Scope of Work The scope of work for the Belgrade Water Master Plan includes the following: · Establish the planning area boundary for the 20-year planning period. · Analyze historical water production and sale records to establish unaccounted average water loss plus average day, maximum day, and peak hour water demands. · Project commercial and residential growth for the Design Years of 2018 and 2038. Establish future residential and commercial demands based on historical water use and population. · Identify current and proposed State and Federal regulations applicable to the Belgrade water system. · Evaluate the condition of the existing supply, distribution, and storage systems, and make recommendations for needed improvements. · Review water rights issues. · Assess vulnerability of key components of the supply and distribution systems for failure. · Develop a computer model using WaterCAD by Bentley Systems and perform a hydraulic analysis of the pumping, storage and distribution systems. · Evaluate the existing pressure district and determine if additional pressure districts are necessary or beneficial. · Determine sufficient staffing levels for the water system operation and maintenance. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 2 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 8 2017 2.3 Historical Background The original water system serving Belgrade was placed in service in the early 1900’s. There are currently six wells that provide water to the City of Belgrade. Belgrade’s first municipal well, the Broadway Well, was drilled in 1948. The remaining five wells were installed between 1978 and 2003. The total observed capacity of these wells is 4,250 gpm with the Broadway well restricted to minimize problems with sand. There are two existing water storage tanks in Belgrade. They are both 500,000 gallon elevated tanks. The first tank was constructed in 1976 and is located in the City Shop complex by the airport. The second was constructed in 2008 and is located on Yukon Road near the intersection of Juneau Drive and Alaska Frontage Road, on the south side of the interstate. 2.4 Reference Reports Reference documents utilized in preparation of this Master Plan include: · Belgrade Water Master Plan, 2008, by TD&H Engineering · Belgrade Water System Analysis dated December 2000 by Morrison Maierle Inc. · Belgrade Growth Policy adopted in 2006 by the City-County Planning Board, Belgrade City Council, and Gallatin County Commission. · Vulnerability Assessment and Emergency Response Plan, 2004 · Well Protection Plan, 1995 · Source Water Assessment Report, 2006 by Montana Department of Environmental Quality ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 3 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 9 2017 Chapter 3- Planning Area 3.1 Location The City of Belgrade is located in Gallatin County, Montana, along I-90 approximately 10 miles west of Bozeman, and 80 miles east of Butte. Refer to Figure 3-1 for a vicinity map. Belgrade was established in 1882 when an entrepreneur surveyed the land around the Northern Pacific Railway (NPR). Finding the area to his liking, Thomas B. Quaw applied for the area to become a town. As a tribute to Serbian investors of NPR, the area was named Belgrade after the capital of Serbia. The area saw steady growth both in agriculture and small businesses. The Great Depression affected Belgrade in a way that transformed it into a small farming community. In 1941, the once small airport was transformed into a training school for pilots. As the airport grew, the community grew, and as the community grew, the airport grew. Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport is now the 118th busiest airport in the nation with over a million people enplaning and deplaning each year in Belgrade. The side street congestion caused by the airport necessitated a new I-90 interchange that opened for use in 2015. Belgrade has become known as the ‘Gateway to the Outdoors’ as it welcomes people into Montana to explore Yellowstone National Park and many other nearby attractions. 3.2 Planning Area Boundary The existing City limits of Belgrade encompass approximately 2,405 acres of land in the following Townships and Ranges; 1N 4E, 1N 5E, 1S 4E, and 1S 5E. Figure 3-2 is a map showing the existing City limits, the current Belgrade zoning boundary and the selected planning area boundary. The planning area boundary shown was identified by City staff. The proposed boundary includes areas outside the current City limits which are not presently served by the water system. 3.3 Demographic Information The 2010 Census indicated the City of Belgrade had a population of 7,389, which makes Belgrade the eleventh largest city in the state. The total number of housing units in 2015 was estimated at 2,965 with an average household size of 2.6 people per unit. The Median Household Income for the residents of Belgrade in 2013 was $38,342 (“Department of Commerce” 2015). The population in the area is growing steadily. The population has grown from 5,728 people in 2000 to 7,389 people in 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: VICINITY MAP NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 VICINITY MAP 3-1 PROJECT LOCATION BELGRADE MANHATTAN BOZEMAN PROJECT LOCATION MONTANA ---PAGE BREAK--- SHEET DESIGNED BY: QUALITY CHECK: JOB NO. FIELDBOOK DRAWN BY: DATE: B16-048 XX APRIL 2017 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA REV DATE REVISION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 LEGEND FIGURE 3-2 CITY LIMITS, PLANNING AREA, AND ZONING BOUNDARY .DWG 3-2 JLB KW MM ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 3 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 12 2017 3.4 Environmental Conditions 3.4.1 Location and Land Use Belgrade is located in the Gallatin valley in southwest Montana near the confluence of the East and West Gallatin Rivers. Three mountain ranges surround Belgrade: the Gallatin, Bridger, and the Madison ranges. Interstate 90 runs through the southern edge of the City. Land use immediately adjacent to the City is generally agricultural, although commercial and residential development is rapidly replacing traditional agricultural uses. Significant development has occurred south of the Interstate, particularly along Jackrabbit Lane (Montana Highway 85). It is expected that the town will continue to grow on its southern side and to the west in the Prescott area. The Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport is located on the northeast border of the City. Although the airport has limited expansion of the town to the north and east in the past, the City of Belgrade has recently annexed subdivisions on the north side of the airport that are not physically contiguous with the city. The Prescott neighborhood on the northwest side of town is currently in the planning stages. 3.4.2 Transportation Interstate Highway 90 runs along the south side of the City. There is an I-90 Interchange with Montana Highway 85 (Jackrabbit Lane) on the south side of Belgrade. Highway 85 extends south from the existing interchange and merges with U.S. Highway 191 at the “census designated place” of Four Corners. Montana Highway 85 is the main highway access south from Belgrade to Big Sky and Yellowstone Park. A new interstate interchange was recently constructed just to the east of the I-90 and Highway 85 interchange, and directly south of the airport. The interchange began construction in 2014 and is located where I-90 and Alaska Road meet. As a result, it is expected that Alaska Road will be reclassified as a major arterial that provides direct access between I-90 and the Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport. Along with the interchange construction, a new signalized intersection was constructed at the intersection of Airway Boulevard and Frontage Road. Frontage Road parallels I-90 and is an extension of Belgrade’s Main Street. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 3 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 13 2017 A railroad track operated by Montana Rail Link and owned by Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad passes through the center of Belgrade. The community began as a ‘farm to market’ access point for the railroad in the early 1900’s. Agriculture has traditionally provided the economic base for Belgrade although there are indications that the service industry is becoming the predominant economic driver. The Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport borders the easterly side of Belgrade. The airport is the busiest in Montana. It is the primary airline access point to Big Sky and Yellowstone Park, as well as Bozeman and the rest of the Gallatin Valley. Services at the airport have been expanding for privately owned aircraft. 3.4.3 Gallatin River Basin Belgrade is located near the confluence of the East and West Gallatin Rivers. The basin south of Belgrade has deep alluvial deposits overlying bedrock. The underlying bedrock slopes up toward the north. The water bearing gravels are pinched off as the bedrock rises. This creates a shallow water table and wetland type conditions that begin a couple miles to the north and west of Belgrade. 3.4.4 Topography The City of Belgrade is located at a mean elevation of 4,454 feet above sea level. The topography within the City limits is generally flat and slopes from the south to the north at approximately a 0.7% grade. The total elevation change across the existing town site is approximately 70 feet. 3.4.5 Geology and Soils Geology and soils are described in detail in a report by Dr. Stephan G. Custer. A summary of Custer’s report follows: Soils are primarily Beaverell and Beavway. Bearverell is a highly permeable soil consisting of stratified very gravelly loamy sand and extremely gravelly course sand. Beavway is also highly permeable and consists of extremely cobbley loamy sand and very gravelly course sand. The valley floor is at an elevation of about 4,500 feet. The mountains adjacent to the valley rise to an elevation of as much as 10,300 feet. As much as 6,000 feet of sediment ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 3 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 14 2017 has been estimated to fill the faulted valley based on gravity evidence (Davis and others, 1965). The valley fringes are underlain by eroded Tertiary-age alluvial fill or by alluvial fan deposits of sand, gravel, silt, and clay which overlie tertiary-age sediment. In the Central part of the valley, the uppermost alluvium is Quaternary-sediment deposited principally by the Gallatin River. This material is composed of “…cobbles and gravel intermixed with sand, clay, and silt” (Hackett and others, 1960). 3.4.6 Climate In 2015 the climate in Belgrade ranged from an average daily temperature in the winter of 34.7 degrees F to an average of 83.0 degrees F in the summer months. The lowest temperature recorded was -12.89 degrees F and the highest recorded temperature was 99.00 degrees F. The annual precipitation in 2015 was 12.97 inches, and the snowfall was 17.48 inches, which was well below the historical average of 48.3 inches per year. 3.4.7 Groundwater Groundwater is typically found from 40 to 60 feet below the ground surface. Municipal water supply wells are generally 200+ feet in depth. A layer of cemented gravels and/or silty-clay is reported to exist, but is not necessarily identified in well logs. Where present, this material will help provide a barrier between surface water and groundwater used as the municipal water supply. 3.4.8 Surface Water The Belgrade planning area is surrounded by surface waters. The Gallatin and East Gallatin Rivers flow past Belgrade along with several tributaries such as Cottonwood, Gibson, and Bostwick Creeks. There are also numerous ditches that supply irrigation water to the agricultural lands surrounding Belgrade, some of which flow through the city limits. 3.4.9 Floodplains The City of Belgrade is located near both the East and West Gallatin Rivers. The area has many year round streams. A FEMA map of the City of Belgrade and the surrounding area can be seen in Figure 3-3. The north east area of Belgrade is within a FEMA declared floodplain. ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 3-3 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 3 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 16 2017 3.4.10 Wetlands From the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the only wetlands within the planning boundary are several freshwater ponds. Figure 3-4 shows designated wetlands. 3.4.11 Agriculture The City of Belgrade and surrounding area is nearly all agricultural land. Per the National Resources Conservation Survey (NRCS) website, the majority of the farmland classification within the proposed planning area is ‘Farmland of local importance’. Figure 3-5 provides a map of the Belgrade area with the farmland classifications. The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 (regulation 7 CFR Part 658) states that federal programs will minimize the extent to which they contribute to the unnecessary conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses. It is not anticipated that any of the recommended system improvements will affect any designated farmland. If further project development reveals that farmland could be impacted, mitigation measures would be necessary. 3.4.12 Hazardous Waste Sites A query was run on the www.DEQDataSearch.mt.gov website for all hazardous waste handlers within the City of Belgrade. The search returned six active facilities that handle hazardous waste. The results are listed below in Table 3-1. It is not anticipated that any of the recommended improvements will be affected by the hazardous waste facilities. For all alternatives, regulations must be met that ensure minimum separation requirements and prevention of contamination to the water system. ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Wetlands Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Freshwater Pond Lake Other Riverine August 4, 2016 0 1.5 3 0.75 mi 0 3 6 1.5 km 1:110,097 This page was produced by the NWI mapper National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Figure 3-4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 3-5: Farmland Classification Gallatin County Area, Montana (Belgrade Land Classifications) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 9/26/2016 5066000 5067000 5068000 5069000 5070000 5071000 5072000 5066000 5067000 5068000 5069000 5070000 5071000 5072000 480000 481000 482000 483000 484000 485000 486000 487000 488000 489000 490000 491000 492000 480000 481000 482000 483000 484000 485000 486000 487000 488000 489000 490000 491000 492000 45° 48' 30'' N 111° 15' 59'' W 45° 48' 30'' N 111° 5' 29'' W 45° 44' 25'' N 111° 15' 59'' W 45° 44' 25'' N 111° 5' 29'' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84 0 1500 3000 6000 9000 Feet 0 500 1000 2000 3000 Meters Map Scale: 1:36,700 if printed on B landscape (17" x 11") sheet. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 3 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 19 2017 TABLE 3-1: HAZARDOUS WASTE HANDLERS Facility Name Generator Classification Last Reporting Year Waste Generated (Tons) Corebond Corporation Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator 2013 0 DP Doors & Millwork Inc Small Quantity Generator 2015 2.85 DS Insulation Belgrade Large Quantity Generator 2014 2.575 MT ARNG OMS 5 Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator 1997 0 Pine Tree Timber Facility Large Quantity Generator 2003 0 US FAA Bozeman Sector Field OFC Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator 1988 0 3.4.13 Historic Sites The City of Belgrade has one building that is recognized by the National Register of Historic Places: · Belgrade City Hall and Jail None of the recommended improvements are anticipated to have any impact or adverse effects on the historical sites identified during the environmental consultation. The proposed improvements will primarily be replacing existing water main infrastructure in its current location. If alternatives are selected that will result in new construction within undisturbed areas, a more in-depth cultural investigation will be required to ensure that historical or culturally sensitive areas are avoided and protected. 3.4.14 Endangered Animal and Plant Species A list of threatened or endangered species within Park County was generated from the U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service website (http://www.fws.gov/montanafieldoffice/Endangered_Species/Listed_Species.html). These threatened or endangered species, including those that are candidates or proposed for the list, are provided in Table 3-2. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 3 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 20 2017 TABLE 3-2: THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES IN GALLATIN COUNTY Scientific Name Common Name Status Spiranthes diluvialis Ute Ladies’ Tresses Listed Threatened Lynx canadensis Canada Lynx Listed Threatened, Designated Critical Habitat Gulo gulo luscus Wolverine Proposed Pinus albicaulis Whitebark Pine Candidate A query of the Montana Natural Heritage Program website provided a list of plant and animal “Species of Concern”, “Potential Species of Concern”, and “Special Status Species” within Gallatin County. The species of concern and potential species of concern are plants or animals that are native to Montana and are currently, or potentially, at risk for local extinction. The special status species are species that have some legal protection in place, but are no longer recognized as federally listed under the Endangered Species Act. Table 3-3 provides the number of species of concern, potential species of concern and special status species. A full list of the NHP query is provided in Appendix F. TABLE 3-3: MONTANA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM SPECIES OF CONCERN Category Number Species Plant Species of Concern 19 Refer to Appendix F Plant Potential Species of Concern 5 Animal Species of Concern 52 Animal Special Status Species 1 Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 4 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 21 2017 Chapter 4- Planning Projections 4.1 Population Projection The most recent Census estimate for Belgrade gave a population of 7,389 in 2010. Since 1890, Gallatin County has experienced annual growth rates varying between 1.33% (1930-1940) to 5.29% (1890-1900). With the exception of 1980 to 1990, the Gallatin County annual growth rate remained above 2.45% from 1960 to 2010. The annual growth rate from 2010 to 2014 is estimated to have dropped to 2.18%. Because both Gallatin County and the City of Belgrade have consistently experienced elevated growth rates over the years, it is believed this trend will continue. Annual growth rates as high as 7.87% have been recorded for the City of Belgrade. In more recent years, however, the population growth has slowed to around 2.00% annually. For these reasons, it is believed that an annual growth rate of 3.50% will provide a conservative basis of design. With this growth factor, the predicted population for the City of Belgrade is 19,360 people in 2038. Detailed population projections are provided in Table 4-1 below. TABLE 4-1: POPULATION PROJECTIONS Year Projected Population Year Projected Population Year Projected Population 2010 7,389 2020 10,423 2030 14,703 2011 7,648 2021 10,788 2031 15,217 2012 7,915 2022 11,165 2032 15,750 2013 8,192 2023 11,556 2033 16,301 2014 8,479 2024 11,961 2034 16,872 2015 8,776 2025 12,379 2035 17,462 2016 9,083 2026 12,812 2036 18,073 2017 9,401 2027 13,261 2037 18,706 2018 9,730 2028 13,725 2038 19,360 2019 10,070 2029 14,205 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 4 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 22 2017 4.2 Land Use and Growth Areas The Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport is located at the northeast border of Belgrade and has limited City growth in this direction in the past. However, there have been areas of annexation north of the airport in recent years, although these areas are not continuous with the main portion of the city limits. Planning area boundaries, future land use, and anticipated zoning area growth projections for both residential and commercial areas of the City were provided by the Belgrade Planning Department. Figure 4-1 and 4-2 provides maps of the existing and future land use and zoning. ---PAGE BREAK--- PROPOSED PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY BELGRADE ZONING BOUNDARY CITY LIMITS B-2 R-3 M-1 M-1 M-1 B-2 R-3 R-2 R-4 PL-1 R-3 R-2 R-2 R-3 R-3 R-4 R-1 PL-1 R-3 SINGLE FAMILY B-2 R-2-M R-4 B-2B-3 M-1 B-3 M-1 PL-1 R-3 R-3 R-2 PL-1 R-4 B-2 R4-T PL-1 R-2 PL-1 R-1 R-4 R-2-D R-4 R-2 R-2-D M-1 AS R-4 R-2-M R-2 R-2 R-1 R-1-T P-L-1 R-3 R-4 R-2-D R-3 BP M-1 BP-10 M-1 RS-M M-1 M-2 R-3 MULTI B-2 B-2 M-1 M-2 R-4 AS PL-1 B-2 SHEET DESIGNED BY: QUALITY CHECK: JOB NO. FIELDBOOK DRAWN BY: DATE: B16-048 XX APRIL 2017 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA REV DATE REVISION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 ZONING INDEX LEGEND FIGURE 4-1 EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING .DWG 4-1 JLB KW MM ---PAGE BREAK--- PROPOSED PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY BELGRADE ZONING BOUNDARY CITY LIMITS B-2 R-3 M-1 M-1 M-1 B-2 R-3 R-2 R-4 PL-1 R-3 R-2 R-2 R-3 R-3 R-4 R-1 PL-1 R-3 SINGLE FAMILY B-2 R-2-M R-4 B-2B-3 M-1 B-3 M-1 PL-1 R-3 R-3 R-2 PL-1 R-4 B-2 R4-T PL-1 R-2 PL-1 R-1 R-4 R-2-D R-4 R-2 R-2-D M-1 AS R-4 R-2-M R-2 R-2 R-1 R-1-T P-L-1 R-3 R-4 R-2-D R-3 BP M-1 BP-10 M-1 RS-M M-1 M-2 R-3 MULTI B-2 B-2 M-1 M-1 B-2 R-2 R-2 R-3 R-1 B-2 R-2 M-1 R-2 R-2 R-2 R-3 R-2 R-1 B-2 R-1, PUD M-2 R-4 AS R-1 RS-M PL-1 B-2 SHEET DESIGNED BY: QUALITY CHECK: JOB NO. FIELDBOOK DRAWN BY: DATE: B16-048 XX APRIL 2017 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA REV DATE REVISION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 LEGEND FIGURE 4-2 FUTURE LAND USE AND ZONING .DWG 4-2 JLB KW MM ZONING INDEX ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 25 2017 Chapter 5- Water Demands 5.1 Introduction To evaluate the City of Belgrade water demands, this Master Plan analyzes the City’s water production volume as a whole and then breaks it down into its different volume components. Water demands are first calculated based on water records, current population, and water system infrastructure. Future demands are then determined by applying growth factors based on planning area projections and population trends, which were previously discussed in Chapter 4. Assuming the well pumping meters and recordkeeping are accurate, the total volume of water that enters the City’s water system is represented by the well production (pumping) records. Once in the system, the water is either sold for domestic and irrigation use (residential and commercial), put to other beneficial use (some tracked and some not tracked), or is physically lost through leaks. The sold water is accounted for by the City’s usage records for metered water. The sold water makes up the largest component of the authorized water use. The remaining authorized water use consists of non-revenue, and often un-metered, water use. This can include domestic water for City owned properties, irrigation for parks and cemeteries, water for fire-fighting efforts, and authorized hydrant flushing. The volume of water that is left after subtracting the authorized water use is harder to evaluate. Different practices exist for defining and calculating components of this water volume, with past practices referring to it as “unaccounted for” water. However, as stated in AWWA Standard G200-04, this term can be very misleading and does not provide a clear picture about water volumes and costs. AWWA maintains that all water can technically be accounted for, via metering or estimation, as either a form of consumption or a loss. Because of this, it is recommended that water utilities avoid using the term “unaccounted for” water and instead refer to the water volume difference between water produced and authorized water use as the water loss. AWWA further breaks down the water loss into apparent loss and real loss. The apparent loss is the water use that is untracked yet still of beneficial use, and includes such losses as unauthorized use, meter inaccuracies, and accounting or bookkeeping errors. Apparent losses include all non-physical water loss where water is put to use, but is not properly measured, accounted or paid for. The real loss is the physical loss of water from the distribution system ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 26 2017 and includes leakage and storage tank overflows. Together, the apparent losses and real losses make up the total water loss of the system. Figure 5-1 illustrates how this Master Plan breaks down the City of Belgrade’s water system into the different water volume components. The following sections provide further discussion and evaluation of these components based on the City’s production records, sold water records, park irrigation and hydrant flushing data, and estimated leakage. The evaluation is the basis for establishing water demands for existing conditions and for the 20-year planning period. FIGURE 5-1: WATER VOLUME COMPONENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 27 2017 5.2 Water Produced The total water volume that enters Belgrade’s water system is represented by the water produced from the City’s six ground water wells. The City utilizes the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system to obtain and record well water production. The system records the time and rate of pumping for each well and also provides the daily water production, rounded to the nearest 1,000 gallons. Daily records were obtained for all six wells for the years 2012 to 2015 and are provided in Appendix A. The combined production of all six wells is summarized in Table 5-1. TABLE 5-1: HISTORIC PUMPED WATER (GAL/MONTH) 2012 2013 2014 2015 Jan 19,398,000 32,480,000 38,950,000 40,670,000 Feb 17,396,000 29,032,000 38,409,000 39,041,000 Mar 21,156,000 32,769,000 42,586,000 42,472,000 Apr 36,851,000 32,821,000 40,162,000 37,132,000 May 50,255,000 57,422,000 54,277,000 43,641,000 Jun 81,146,000 64,300,000 69,253,000 75,159,000 Jul 114,805,000 108,305,000 103,443,000 96,163,000 Aug 105,854,000 101,578,000 88,766,000 99,209,000 Sep 72,447,000 66,635,000 54,848,000 69,118,000 Oct 39,559,000 38,687,000 41,687,000 41,988,000 Nov 31,077,000 34,360,000 39,291,000 34,216,000 Dec 31,534,000 38,031,000 41,584,000 37,224,000 Total (gal/year) 621,478,000 636,420,000 653,256,000 656,033,000 Annual Average 641,796,750 Production volumes during the winter months of 2012 and 2013 were notably lower than winter months of 2014 and 2015. This anomaly remains unexplained and may be better explained by the City. Overall, the total annual production has increased each year, which is consistent with the population growth. The average annual production from the six wells is 641,797,750 gallons per year. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 28 2017 5.3 Water Sales 5.3.1 Total Water Sales The Belgrade water system provides water to most of the City residents and businesses. A few exceptions are four properties that are served by private wells: the Belgrade Trailer Court (18 trailers); a car wash; the Belgrade Christian Assembly Church; and a commercial property at 401 E. Main Street. As of 2015, the total number of water accounts per City records, including non-revenue, was 2,757. Each of these service lines is metered for record keeping and/or billing purposes. City records for water use were obtained for the years 2012 to 2015. Although the services are metered, the City records are rounded to the nearest thousand gallons to coincide with their billing rate structure. The recorded water use for each year is provided in Table 5-2 and detailed City records are included in Appendix A. TABLE 5-2: METERED WATER (GAL/MONTH) 2012 2013 2014 2015 Jan 16,207,000 21,837,000 18,207,000 16,297,000 Feb 17,316,000 15,741,000 16,526,000 16,700,000 Mar 14,989,000 16,555,000 15,591,000 17,006,000 Apr 15,870,000 16,484,000 20,025,000 20,524,000 May 26,170,000 38,696,000 24,307,000 21,937,000 Jun 53,251,000 38,229,000 47,320,000 49,624,000 Jul 85,957,000 77,199,000 73,759,000 80,863,000 Aug 80,429,000 83,385,000 67,537,000 65,162,000 Sep 51,725,000 50,824,000 36,619,000 53,112,000 Oct 23,124,000 20,287,000 22,804,000 27,415,000 Nov 15,008,000 15,664,000 15,836,000 16,468,000 Dec 12,349,000 17,870,000 20,093,000 21,467,000 Total (gal/year) 412,395,000 412,771,000 378,624,000 406,575,000 Annual Average 402,591,250 Although the City of Belgrade population increased from 2012 to 2015, the volume of water sold dropped between 2013 to 2014. This may be due to annual differences in weather and irrigation demand, increased use of low flow plumbing fixtures, or other water conservation measures. The average annual water volume sold from 2012 to 2015 is 402,591,250 gallons. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 29 2017 The sold water is broken out into three main user types: residential, commercial, and large commercial. The large commercial users include the airport and schools. Each of these user types and their water demands are discussed further in the following sections. 5.3.2 Residential Water Sales The City billing records delineate several categories of residential use;  Single family residential, including City owned single family residences.  Multi-family residential– includes duplexes, triplexes etc. up to complexes with 24 units.  Trailer Parks– there are three trailer parks in Belgrade, two of which receive City water. The third trailer park is only connected to City sewer.  Commercial plus apartments – includes commercial businesses with attached apartments. Residential water use is estimated at 2/3 of the total use for this billing category.  Yard hydrants – privately owned spigot style yard hydrants for residential properties Water sale records for the residential services were tabulated for each year to find the average residential water use. Table 5-3 provides the residential water sales as well as the calculated average annual residential water use. TABLE 5-3: RESIDENTIAL WATER SALES (GAL/MONTH) 2012 2013 2014 2015 Jan 11,731,000 16,025,000 12,876,000 11,572,000 Feb 12,408,000 11,325,000 11,794,000 11,400,000 Mar 10,602,000 11,583,000 10,953,000 11,666,000 Apr 11,665,000 12,040,000 14,096,000 14,281,000 May 19,968,000 30,213,000 17,199,000 15,659,000 Jun 43,504,000 29,623,000 35,921,000 39,288,000 Jul 71,711,000 64,309,000 59,143,000 66,897,000 Aug 66,936,000 68,317,000 53,720,000 51,163,000 Sep 41,767,000 38,541,000 26,322,000 40,081,000 Oct 17,185,000 14,327,000 15,435,000 19,175,000 Nov 11,000,000 11,508,000 11,202,000 11,990,000 Dec 9,142,000 12,940,000 14,479,000 15,277,000 Total (gal/year) 327,619,000 320,751,000 283,140,000 308,449,000 Average Annual Residential Use 309,989,750 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 30 2017 On average, the residential water sales are nearly 80% of the total water sales. Per capita water usage can be estimated from water usage records and population information. Table 5-4 and Figure 5-2 show the residential per capita water use over the last four years. TABLE 5-4: PER CAPITA WATER USAGE 2012 2013 2014 2015 Annual Residential Sales (gal) 327,619,000 320,751,000 283,140,000 308,449,000 Population 7,915 8,192 8,479 8,776 Days in Year 366 365 365 365 Per Capita Use (gal/day) 113 107 91 96 Average Per Capita Use 102 (gal/day) FIGURE 5-2: AVERAGE PER CAPITA DAILY WATER USE The average per capita water use based on residential water sales and annual population over the past four years is 102 gpcd. During the summer months (June through August) this average use increases to 212 gpcd, although there were peaks during the summer of 2013 where the average reached nearly 300 due to spells with warmer than average 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Water Use Month 2012 2013 2014 2015 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 31 2017 high temperatures. During the winter months (December through February) the average per capita use over the past four years is 50 gpd. 5.3.3 Commercial Water Sales The City records delineate several water account categories that have been grouped together as commercial water sales for the purpose of this Master Plan. These categories include all categories other than those designated as non-revenue, residential use, or large commercial use (airport and schools) and consist of the following:  Commercial  Church/Lodges  Commercial plus apartments – includes commercial businesses with attached apartments and commercial use is estimated at 1/3 of the total use for this billing category.  Military – includes national guard facilities.  Multiple MTD – includes multiple users on a shared meter. Water sale records for these users were tabulated for each year to find the average commercial water use. Table 5-5 provides the commercial water sales per City records as well as the calculated average annual commercial water use. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 32 2017 TABLE 5-5: COMMERCIAL WATER SALES (GAL/MONTH) 2012 2013 2014 2015 Jan 3,506,000 4,473,000 4,139,000 3,719,000 Feb 3,874,000 3,387,000 3,510,000 4,142,000 Mar 3,576,000 3,819,000 3,589,000 4,137,000 Apr 3,352,000 3,351,000 4,383,000 4,697,000 May 4,618,000 5,601,000 5,110,000 4,585,000 Jun 7,366,000 6,016,000 7,305,000 6,668,000 Jul 8,372,000 8,074,000 8,741,000 7,738,000 Aug 8,950,000 8,908,000 8,382,000 8,225,000 Sep 6,595,000 7,498,000 6,731,000 8,048,000 Oct 4,290,000 4,342,000 5,074,000 5,137,000 Nov 3,229,000 3,189,000 3,470,000 3,415,000 Dec 2,543,000 3,866,000 4,427,000 4,803,000 Total (gal/year) 60,271,000 62,524,000 64,861,000 65,314,000 Average Annual Commercial Use (gal/year) 63,242,500 On average, the recorded commercial water sales makes up approximately 13.8% of the total recorded sales. 5.3.4 Large Commercial Water Sales – Airport & Schools Within the City of Belgrade, there are two large commercial users who have significantly higher water demands than typical commercial users: The Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport and the School District. The School District users within City limits include Belgrade High School, Belgrade Middle School, and two elementary schools: Saddle Peak, and Heck-Quaw. Because these users have such high water usage, there is potential for them to skew the water demand analysis, and so they are tracked separately from the general commercial water usage. Water sales records for these two users were tabulated for the years 2012 to 2015 to find the average large commercial water use. Table 5-6 provides the water sales per the City records as well as the calculated average annual large commercial water use. Table 5-7 breaks the airport and school annual water sales out separately. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 33 2017 TABLE 5-6: LARGE COMMERCIAL WATER SALES (GAL/MONTH) 2012 2013 2014 2015 Jan 871,000 1,281,000 1,107,000 958,000 Feb 923,000 968,000 1,176,000 1,101,000 Mar 713,000 1,060,000 1,008,000 1,155,000 Apr 738,000 1,027,000 1,496,000 1,467,000 May 1,258,000 2,537,000 1,845,000 1,459,000 Jun 2,143,000 2,239,000 3,771,000 3,082,000 Jul 5,290,000 4,177,000 5,236,000 5,251,000 Aug 3,964,000 5,330,000 4,652,000 4,802,000 Sep 3,008,000 4,047,000 2,991,000 4,462,000 Oct 1,584,000 1,568,000 2,145,000 3,053,000 Nov 710,000 912,000 988,000 1,022,000 Dec 608,000 983,000 1,053,000 1,341,000 Total (gal/year) 21,810,000 26,129,000 27,468,000 29,153,000 Average Annual Commercial Use (gal/year) 26,140,000 TABLE 5-7: AIRPORT AND SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNUAL WATER SALES (GAL/YEAR) 2012 2013 2014 2015 Average Airport 10,323,000 14,191,000 17,380,000 18,095,000 14,997,250 Schools 11,487,000 11,938,000 10,088,000 11,058,000 11,142,750 On average, the recorded large commercial water sales makes up 6.5% of the total recorded sales. Although water use throughout the airport property is generally thought to be metered, it is uncertain whether all airport service connections constructed in the past have been located and metered. Currently airport personnel report that all connections are metered. In an effort to verify this, at the time of this report meters are being installed around the perimeter of the airport. These new meters will insure that all water entering the airport is metered and will provide verification of airport water use compared to water sales and assist with accurate water records. 5.4 Other Authorized Water Use In addition to the water sales, the City of Belgrade has other authorized water use that is non- revenue. This includes domestic use for City owned properties, irrigation for City parks, hydrant ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 34 2017 flushing, and fire suppression. Much of this water use is un-metered therefore some assumptions are necessary in order to estimate this authorized yet untracked water use. 5.4.1 Non-revenue properties Non-revenue water usage includes usage by City owned properties. Although the usage is not charged for, it is still metered by the City of Belgrade. The City usage records delineate several categories of non-revenue water use:  City shops, City wells, and City Hall.  Fire District and the Library.  Public restroom facilities at five parks: Lewis & Clark, Lion’s, K Hollensteiner Memorial, Las Campanas, and Triangle Parks Water use records for the non-revenue domestic services were tabulated for each year to find the average water use. Table 5-8 provides the non-revenue domestic water use as well as the calculated average annual non-revenue domestic water use. TABLE 5-8: NON-REVENUE DOMESTIC WATER USE (GAL/MONTH) 2012 2013 2014 2015 Jan 99,000 58,000 85,000 48,000 Feb 111,000 61,000 46,000 57,000 Mar 98,000 93,000 41,000 48,000 Apr 115,000 66,000 50,000 79,000 May 326,000 345,000 153,000 234,000 Jun 238,000 351,000 323,000 586,000 Jul 584,000 639,000 639,000 977,000 Aug 579,000 830,000 783,000 972,000 Sep 355,000 738,000 575,000 521,000 Oct 65,000 50,000 150,000 50,000 Nov 69,000 55,000 176,000 41,000 Dec 56,000 81,000 134,000 46,000 Total (gal/year) 2,695,000 3,367,000 3,155,000 3,659,000 Average Annual Non-Revenue Domestic Water Use (gal/year) 3,219,000 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 35 2017 5.4.2 Park Irrigation As discussed in the previous section 5.4.1, the water service to the City park public restrooms is metered. However, the water used for park irrigation is not currently metered. In order to estimate the authorized volume of water used for park irrigation, City staff was asked to provide information on typical park irrigation schedules. The City staff provided very detailed information for 2015 for each park that included the number of irrigation heads, average flow per head, and duration that irrigation was in operation each day and throughout the year. This information was used to estimate the average annual irrigation volume that each park received per year. The estimated annual irrigation volume for each park is provided in Table 5-9 and detailed data, including the irrigation values, is included in Appendix A. Since the only irrigation information available was from 2015, it is assumed that every year is similar, thus values from 2015 are applied to the years 2012-2014 as well. TABLE 5-9: 2015 AVERAGE ANNUAL PARK IRRIGATION Park Annual Irrigation (gallons) Children’s 429,660 City Hall 526,814 City Parking Lot 485,051 Clarkin 2,562,615 Jackrabbit 1,075,452 Jackrabbit 3,160,512 Kathy 2,278,500 Kiwanis 923,800 Lewis and Clark 5,717,868 Library (metered) 373,860 Lions 9,530,647 Lions Concession 6,595,058 McMillin 678,528 Memorial 11,315 Miller 2,514,906 Prairieview 3,490,600 Senior Center 3,013,200 Sunnyside 1,395,000 Triangle 555,055 Total Park Irrigation gallons/year 44,723,672 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 36 2017 5.4.3 Hydrant Flushing The City of Belgrade has a total of 485 hydrants that are exercised and flushed on an annual basis. The City provided a detailed record for the year 2015 which shows the day and duration for each hydrant flush. A complete copy of this data is provided in Appendix A. This information was tabulated to develop the estimated volume of water that was authorized each month for hydrant flushing. In order to convert the flushing time into gallons of water, an assumed flow rate of 1,115 gallons per minute was assumed. Table 5-10 provides the estimated volume of water used for hydrant flushing based on City data. Since the only hydrant flushing information available was from 2015, it is assumed that every year is similar, thus values from 2015 are applied to the years 2012-2014 as well. TABLE 5-10: 2015 AVERAGE ANNUAL HYDRANT FLUSHING Park Total Flushing Time Gallons January 225 250,875 February 560 624,400 March 732 816,180 April 1365 1,521,975 May 445 496,175 June 80 89,200 July 40 44,600 August September October November December 606 675,690 Total Hydrant Flushing gallons/year 4,519,095 5.4.4 Fire Suppression Three fires were analyzed that occurred in 2016 which used City water for fire suppression. In all three cases, the amount of water used was not noticeable in the water production records. Thus, fire suppression will not be accounted for as water usage, rather the water is accounted for in the water storage section of the report. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 37 2017 5.5 Water Loss Water loss is the difference between water produced and all authorized water use. To determine the total amount of water loss within the system, the City of Belgrade’s authorized water use was subtracted from the water produced. The authorized water use includes the water sales, non-revenue domestic use, park irrigation, and hydrant flushing. Table 5-11 provides a summary of these volumes and the estimated water loss for the years 2012 to 2015. TABLE 5-11: ESTIMATED WATER LOSS (GALLONS/YEAR) The average water loss over the last four years is approximately 30% of the total water produced, with a peak water loss of 34.5% occurring in 2014. The annual water loss volume is illustrated in Figure 5-3 which shows the difference between pumped water and authorized water use. Water Produced Water Sales Authorized Non- Revenue Water Use Estimated Park Irrigation Estimated City Hydrant Flushing Estimated Water Loss Water Loss % 2012 621,478,000 404,748,000 2,695,000 44,723,672 4,519,095 164,792,233 26.5% 2013 636,420,000 409,404,000 3,367,000 44,723,672 4,519,095 174,406,233 27.4% 2014 653,256,000 375,469,000 3,155,000 44,723,672 4,519,095 225,389,233 34.5% 2015 656,033,000 402,916,000 3,659,000 44,723,672 4,519,095 200,215,233 30.5% Annual Average 641,796,750 398,134,250 3,219,000 44,723,672 4,519,095 191,200,733 29.8% ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 38 2017 FIGURE 5-3: PUMPED WATER VS. AUTHORIZED WATER USE (GALLONS/YEAR) There are several factors that could be contributing to the water loss volume within Belgrade’s system. The largest component of the total water loss is more than likely system leakage. Other contributing factors could include unauthorized water use or meter inaccuracies that have not yet been discovered. Annual variations in authorized, yet unmetered water use such as park irrigation or hydrant flushing will also skew the water loss estimations. Per AWWA Standard G-200, water loss can be broken out into two types of loss: real loss and apparent loss. Apparent losses are “paper losses” and meter inaccuracies, and accounting or bookkeeping errors. Real loss is the physical loss of water from the system and includes system leakage and tank overflows. Although, it would be very beneficial to separate these losses into their separate categories within this Master Plan, the very nature of water loss makes it difficult to determine what apparent loss is and what real loss is. In general, until an apparent loss is actually discovered, it is hard to make assumptions about how much water loss, if any, is attributed to accounting errors or unauthorized use. For the purpose of this plan, it is assumed that any meter inaccuracies or bookkeeping adjustments (including rounding) would have minimal impact to the water loss volume and can be neglected. At this time, it is also assumed that there are no unauthorized or illegal water connections to the City’s system. If unauthorized 621,478,000 636,420,000 653,256,000 656,033,000 412,395,000 412,771,000 378,624,000 406,575,000 0 100,000,000 200,000,000 300,000,000 400,000,000 500,000,000 600,000,000 700,000,000 2012 2013 2014 2015 Gallons of Water Year Water Pumped Authorized Water Use ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 39 2017 connections are discovered, the City should take immediate action to install meters on these lines and assign a water revenue account to the user. By neglecting any meter and recording inaccuracies and any potential unauthorized use, this plan makes the assumption that the majority of the system’s water loss is real loss through system leakage. In order to more appropriately categorize the loss as apparent or real, a more detailed evaluation of the City’s system and investigation into potential unauthorized use would be required. At the time of this report, meters are in the process of being installed at all water lines leading to the airport, which will be critical in a future detailed study of water usage. 5.6 Summary of Water Component Volumes As previously discussed in this chapter, the total water volume that enters the City of Belgrade water system is represented by the total volume of water produced by the City’s six wells. Once the water enters the system, it is either sold for residential and commercial use, used for other authorized purposes, or is lost. Figure 5-4 shows these different water volume components as well as the average percentages that they make up within the City of Belgrade’s water system based on evaluation of previous year’s water records. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 40 2017 FIGURE 5-4: AVERAGE WATER PRODUCTION, USE, AND LOSS 5.7 System Demands Based on the preceding discussions and evaluation of the various water volume components, current and future water demands for the City of Belgrade were developed. These demands include the average day demands, the maximum day demands, and the peak hour demands. Future demands are based on population projects and anticipated growth as well as assumed water loss reductions. 5.7.1 Average Day Demand (ADD) The existing average day demand (ADD) was determined by evaluating the average water production and breaking it out into the average annual water usage for all components of the water system. This includes all water sales, the non-revenue domestic use, park irrigation, ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 41 2017 hydrant flushing and average system water loss. Table 5-12 provides a summary of the average water use volumes and the total average day demand for the current design year. TABLE 5-12: EXISTING (2018) AVERAGE DAY DEMANDS Average Annual Demand (gal/year) Average Day Demand (gal/min Residential Water Sales 312,063,000 594 Commercial Water Sales 64,494,800 123 Large Commercial 24,682,200 47 Domestic Non-Revenue 3,127,400 6 Estimated Park Irrigation 44,723,672 85 Estimated Hydrant Flushing 4,519,095 9 Estimated Water Loss 175,879,033 335 Total 629,489,200 1,198 The future ADD was determined by applying factors of growth or reduction to each water volume component in Table 5.12. For the estimated water loss, it is anticipated that the City will reduce this demand in future years by continuing to work towards reduced system leakage and also completing an investigation into potential unauthorized water use. This plan assumes that the total water loss percent will be reduced by approximately 1.3% every two years in order to achieve a reasonable water loss goal of 15% by the year 2038. For the other water volume components, the future demands were increased based on population projections and estimates of reasonable growth. The water sale categories were increased by the population growth factor of 3.5% which was discussed in Chapter 4. The non-revenue domestic use, park irrigation, and hydrant flushing categories are expected to increase at a lower rate and therefore have projected demands based on an increase of 2% per year. Table 5-13 provides the projected average day demand for each water volume component along with the system’s total ADD for the 20-year planning period. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 42 2017 TABLE 5-13: FUTURE (2038) AVERAGE DAY DEMANDS Average Day Demand (gal/min) Annual Growth Factor Future- 2038 ADD (gal/min) Residential Water Sales 594 3.5% 1,196 Commercial Water Sales 123 3.5% 247 Large Commercial 47 3.5% 95 Domestic Non-Revenue 6 2.0% 9 Estimated Park Irrigation 85 2.0% 127 Estimated Hydrant Flushing 9 2.0% 13 Estimated Water Loss* 335 NA 293 Total 1,198 1,979 *Assumes water loss by year 2038 will be 15% of water production 5.7.2 Maximum Day Demand (MDD) To determine the maximum day demand, the SCADA records were first reviewed to find the maximum day of water production between 2012 and 2015. This occurred on July 25, 2013 and was 3,990,000 gallons. A maximum day peaking factor (MDPF) was then calculated by dividing this maximum day production volume by the average annual production volume, as follows: MDPF = 3,990,000 / 1,724,627 = 2.31 This maximum day peaking factor was applied to the average daily demands for the water volume components listed in Table 5-12 to calculate the current (2018) maximum day water demands for the water system, as shown in Table 5-14. TABLE 5-14: EXISTING (2018) MAXIMUM DAY DEMANDS Maximum Day Demand (gal/min) **Residential Water Sales 1,374 Commercial Water Sales 284 Large Commercial 109 Domestic Non-Revenue 14 Estimated Park Irrigation 197 Estimated Hydrant Flushing 20 Estimated Water Loss 774 Total 2,771 The future MDD was determined by applying the factors of growth or reduction to each water volume component as discussed in the ADD section. Table 5-15 provides the projected ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 43 2017 maximum day demand for each water volume component along with the systems total MDD for the 20-year planning period. TABLE 5-15: FUTURE (2038) MAXIMUM DAY DEMANDS MDD (gal/min) Annual Growth Factor Future- 2038 MDD (gal/min) Residential Water Sales 1,374 3.5% 2,766 Commercial Water Sales 284 3.5% 572 Large Commercial 109 3.5% 219 Domestic Non-Revenue 14 2.0% 21 Estimated Park Irrigation 197 2.0% 294 Estimated Hydrant Flushing 20 2.0% 30 Estimated Water Loss* 774 NA 678 Total 2,771 4,578 *Assumes water loss by year 2038 will be 15% of water production 5.7.3 Peak Hour Demand (PHD) To determine the peak hourly demand, the SCADA records were once again reviewed. For the years 2012 to 2015, each day of maximum production was obtained from the SCADA records and then the maximum hour during each of these days was found. The maximum hourly water production also occurred on July 25, 2013 and was 229,380 gallons. A peak hour demand factor was calculated by dividing the maximum day’s hourly production volume by the average day demand’s production volume converted to hours. PHDF = 229,380 gph / (1,724,627 gpd / 24 hours) = 3.19 This peak hour demand factor was applied to the average daily demands for the water volume components listed in Table 5-12 to break out the current (2018) peak hour demands for each water volume component, as shown in Table 5-16. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 44 2017 TABLE 5-16: EXISTING (2018) PEAK HOUR DEMANDS Peak Hour Demand (gal/min) Residential Water Sales 1,895 Commercial Water Sales 392 Large Commercial 150 Domestic Non-Revenue 19 Estimated Park Irrigation 272 Estimated Hydrant Flushing 27 Estimated Water Loss 1,068 Total 3,823 The future PHD was determined by applying the factors of growth or reduction to each water volume component as discussed in the ADD section. Table 5-17 provides the projected peak hour demands for each water volume component along with the system’s total PHD for the 20- year planning period. TABLE 5-17: FUTURE (2038) PEAK HOUR DEMANDS Peak Hour (gal/min) Annual Growth Factor Future- 2038 PHD (gal/min) Residential Water Sales 1,895 3.5% 3,817 Commercial Water Sales 392 3.5% 789 Large Commercial 150 3.5% 302 Domestic Non-Revenue 19 2.0% 28 Estimated Park Irrigation 272 2.0% 405 Estimated Hydrant Flushing 27 2.0% 41 Estimated Water Loss* 1,068 NA 935 Total 3,823 6,316 *Assumes water loss by year 2038 will be 15% of water production 5.8 Fire Flow Demands 5.8.1 International Fire Code A. Fire-Flow. The State of Montana has adopted the International Fire Code 2012 Edition as the controlling fire code unless otherwise specified by a community. The Belgrade City website states the Uniform Fire Code 2003 Edition as the recommended fire code; however, the Central Valley Fire District that presides over Belgrade had adopted the 2012 International Fire Code (IFC) as the governing code. For the purpose of this document, all fire codes applied will be from the 2012 IFC, which establishes required fire-flows for structures based on the total floor area of all floors within the exterior walls, ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 45 2017 the area under all horizontal roof projections, and the type of building construction. Fire flows for all sizes of buildings are listed in Appendix B of the IFC. Fire flows are dependent on the type and size of building. For example; the required fire-flow for a structure with a fire flow area of 8,000 square feet may vary from 1,500 gpm to 2,500 gpm depending on the type of construction. The minimum fire-flow for one and two family dwellings that do not exceed 3,600 square feet is 1,000 gpm for a duration of one hour. The fire-flow must be delivered at a minimum of 20 psi residual pressure. Utilization of an approved automatic sprinkler system is one method of reducing the required fire-flow. An approved sprinkler system permits a 50% reduction in required fire-flow for one and two-family dwellings. A reduction up to 75% in required fire-flow may be permitted for other structures with approved sprinkler systems although the minimum required fire flow cannot be less than 1,500 gpm. The local fire chief is authorized to reduce the fire-flow requirements for isolated buildings or a group of buildings in rural areas or small communities where the development of full fire-flow requirements is impractical. B. Duration. The IFC also establishes minimum flow duration based on needed fire-flow which correlates to the size and type of building. The duration required if affected by the system’s supply and storage capability. For example, with required fire-flows of 2,750 gpm or less, the flow duration must be 2 hours. For needed fire-flows from 3,000 gpm to 3,500 gpm, the required flow duration is 3 hours. C. Fire-Flow Requirements The IFC requirements were followed to establish the needed fire flows as illustrated in Table 5-18. 5.8.2 Insurance Services Organization The Insurance Services Office (ISO) is a third party independent agency that evaluated the fire department, water system, and communications system within a community. It rated the results on a national scale from one to ten (with one being the best rating). The rating may affect insurance rates within the community. The Central Valley Fire District holds an ISO rating of three in areas within five miles of a fire station and 1,000 feet of a fire hydrant. The rating is a ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 5 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 46 2017 five in all other areas that are within 5 road miles of a fire station. The next evaluation is scheduled for sometime within 2017. The ISO uses a Fire Suppression Rating System that effectively scores different aspects of the integrated system to tabulate an overall rating. The water supply and distribution system represents 40 of the 105.5 points involved in the rating schedule. Ten of those points are related to hydrant size, type, condition, inspection, and fire flow testing of the hydrants. The remaining 30 points are related to the water supply system itself. Even if the water system is improved to meet needed fire-flow requirements, it may not improve the insurance rating. The water system and fire department should be of similar quality. 5.8.3 Design Fire-Flows The needed fire-flow demand can vary significantly within any zoning area depending on structure size, type of construction, and exposure. The City should consider adopting an ordinance requiring automatic sprinkler systems for all new public buildings, schools, commercial buildings, and multi-family residential buildings. As an option, the City could adopt a maximum fire flow that the City will provide in specific areas and require building construction in those areas to be compatible with the specified maximum fire flow. Unless there is some control, buildings may be constructed that require more than the needed fire-flow available. Regulatory agencies may then try to force the City to meet these needs as the Department of Environmental Quality is currently doing by denying or limiting approval of new subdivisions. In the absence of City of Belgrade ordinances to require sprinkler systems on commercial and public buildings or limit the maximum needed fire flow the City will provide; the following design fire-flows are required and utilized in this report: TABLE 5-18: DESIGN FIRE FLOWS Location or Zoning Design Fire Flow Duration High School 3,000 gpm 3 hours Middle School 3,000 gpm 3 hours Grade Schools 2,250 gpm 2 hours Business Districts (B-2 & 3) 2,500 gpm 2 hours Manufacturing Districts (M-1 & 2) 2,000 gpm 2 hours Airport 2,000 gpm 2 hours Single Family Residential (R-1) 1,000 gpm 2 hours Multi - Family (R-2) 1,500 gpm 2 hours Multi - Family R-3 & 4) 2,000 gpm 2 hours ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 47 2017 Chapter 6- Water Supply NOTE: This Chapter was written in its entirety by Mark Cunnane, PE, PG of Western Groundwater Services, LLC. Limited formatting was done by TD&H for consistency throughout the document. 6.1 Introduction This section on water supply documents the condition of existing wells and the required new source capacity to meet water demand through the planning period ending 2038. 6.2 Existing Wells The City of Belgrade water system uses a groundwater source of supply derived from six wells, as shown on Figure 6-1. This section presents planning information on these wells as obtained from a field survey and records review. Appendix B includes well inventory forms, pump manufacturer data, and additional well logs. A summary of useful well data is provided in Table 6-1. The wells are relatively young with the exception of Well Production occurs from alluvium at similar elevation in the wells, although the length of screen varies, and Well #3 is deeper than the others. It is probable that several of the wells are producing water from the same aquifer level. The aquifer type is semi-confined due to stratification that includes fine-grained materials overlying the producing intervals of the wells. The available well data includes records extending back in time to the initial construction. There is some degree of uncertainty as to the borehole geology, well construction, pumping system, hydraulic testing, and general water chemistry of each well. As time and budget permits, a thorough as-built update should be completed for each well. Subsequent to the as-built update report, well files should include only new data. Total installed capacity of the wells based on flow meter observations at the facilities is estimated at 4,250 gpm, or 6.12 million gallons per day (mgd). The standard for groundwater supplied water systems requires the installed capacity be equal to the maximum day demand with the largest well out of service, which is Well #4 (Shop), now operating at about 1,200 gpm. Considering this standard, the City’s wells are able to presently serve a maximum day demand equal to 3,050 gpm, or 4.39 mgd. ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! Planning Area Boundary Interstate 90 Jackrabbit Ln Frontage Rd Dry Creek Rd #6 #5 #3 #1 #2 #4 Figure 6-1 Existing Well Locations ± 0 3,000 Feet Well location and ID number ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 49 2017 TABLE 6-1: WATER WELL DATA SUMMARY Parameter Well ID #1 Broadway #2 Park #3 Stiles #4 Shop #5 Yukon #6 Airport Year Built 1948 1978 1981 1983 2003 2003 Ground Elevation (ft) 4,459 4,462 4,485 4,469 4,495 4,479 Pump Type Line Shaft Line Shaft Line Shaft Line Shaft Line Shaft Line Shaft Pump Intake (ft bped) 145 150 228 165 155 155 Motor Rating (hp) 100 50 60 100 100 50 Auxiliary Power No No No Yes Yes Yes Pump Q (gpm) 850 [PHONE REDACTED] 900 500 Pump TDH (ft) 302 280 280 280 270 260 Pump EFF 86 81 82.5 80 86 85 Total Depth (ft bgs) 200 185 262 205 217 220 Diameter (in) 12 10 12 16 16 16 Screen Interval (ft bgs) 53 – 178 160 – 185 227 – 261 165 – 205 155 – 205 158 – 192 Observed Q (gpm) 725 [PHONE REDACTED] 900 525 Observed P (psig) 62 68 52 72 60 56 SWL (ft bgs) 54 42 53 57 43 43 Estimated PWL (ft bgs) 120 130 140 160 120 125 Water Right Rate (gpm) 1000 550 1200 1100 1600 Water Right Volume (af) 597 [PHONE REDACTED] 645 Q – discharge rate; TDH – total dynamic head; EFF – efficiency at Q and TDH; P – pressure; SWL – static water; PWL – pumping water level; hp – horsepower; gpm – gallons per minute; ft bgs – feet below ground surface; ft bped – feet below pump pedestal (approx..); psig – pounds per square inch gauge; af – acre-feet per calendar year; SOC – Statement of Claim; PP – Provisional Permit; RES – Reservation. 6.2.1 Well No. 1 (Broadway Well) Well #1 is presently operated below the tested well capacity of 1,000 gpm due to sand production. During the field visit for this project the well was observed to have a normal pumping capacity of 725 gpm, although the SCADA system recorded an average rate of 538 gpm for the same day (Figure 6-2 The flow meter internal parts had been replaced since 2008 and the meter produces a steady reading. The City should take steps to resolve differences between the SCADA system and the well house meter. Pumping equipment for this well was newly installed by Red Tiger Drilling, Inc. in 2002. A Goulds line shaft turbine pump was installed on 140 ft of 8-inch diameter column. The pump is hung from an older discharge head with a Worthington Pump nameplate. According to ---PAGE BREAK--- 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 [PHONE REDACTED] 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 01/01 03/01 05/01 07/01 08/31 10/31 Average Pumping Rate (gpm) 2016 Annual Volume: 764 af 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 [PHONE REDACTED] 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 01/01 03/01 05/01 07/01 08/31 10/31 Average Pumping Rate (gpm) 2016 Annual Volume: 143 af 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 [PHONE REDACTED] 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 01/01 03/01 05/01 07/01 08/31 10/31 Average Pumping Rate (gpm) 2016 Annual Volume: 312 af 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 [PHONE REDACTED] 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 01/01 03/01 05/01 07/01 08/31 10/31 Average Pumping Rate (gpm) 2016 Annual Volume: 346 af 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 [PHONE REDACTED] 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 01/01 03/01 05/01 07/01 08/31 10/31 Average Pumping Rate (gpm) 2016 Annual Volume: 110 af 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 [PHONE REDACTED] 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 01/01 03/01 05/01 07/01 08/31 10/31 Average Pumping Rate (gpm) 2016 Annual Volume: 106 af A. Well #1 (Broadway) B. Well #2 (Park) C. Well #3 (Stiles) D. Well #4 (Shop) E. Well #5 (Yukon) F. Well #6 (Airport) FIGURE 6-2: SCADA FLOWRATES ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 51 2017 manufacturer data, this pump has a best efficiency of 86% when operated at 850 gpm with a total dynamic head of 302 feet. At the present operating rate, efficiency is only reduced. The well log illustrates a perforated casing construction built with 12.00 inch inside diameter casing (Figure 6-3). This type of construction is sparingly used today, as most municipal alluvial wells now use a manufactured well screen. The absence of a well seal, while not meeting modern standards, is considered to pose little additional contamination risk.1 Perforated casing wells work best in coarse, poorly sorted alluvium, which is consistent with the Belgrade aquifer. A video inspection of the casing in 1986 observed evidence of severe corrosion and deemed the well life expired2. A subsequent evaluation of apparently the same video identified specific improvements that could be completed to prolong well life.3 Continued use of the well at the reduced rate may be a reasonable approach to operation. Sand production in wells that pump directly to distribution should be kept below 0.75 parts per million by volume (ppm-v).4 Further testing of the well sand content is recommended in order to determine the optimal operating rate and pumping water level for the well. Installation of a water level metering system is also recommended.5 This instrument can be used for testing of the well and to ensure pumping level is maintained above the determined sand production threshold. 1 In the Belgrade aquifer, surface seals meeting minimum requirements have limited practical benefit as the unsaturated zone extends to a depth of 40 to 60 feet below ground (groundwater flow is entirely vertical in this zone and surface seals are prone to desiccation and cracking). A more effective surface seal in the Belgrade aquifer would need to extend to approximately 10-ft above the top of screen, however, a seal of this depth would substantially increase well cost and its usefulness is debatable. It is advisable, however, to build future wells with a surface seal to at least 38-ft, mostly to maintain compliance with future regulations which appear to be trending toward deeper seals. A sealing material most suitable for unsaturated conditions should be used. 2 Letter from M. Kaczmarek (Morrison-Maierle, Inc.) to B. Hathaway (City of Belgrade), November 11, 1986. 3 Letter from T. Berry (Morrison-Maierle, Inc.) to M. Borden (City of Belgrade), April 1, 1988. 4 This sand content is equal to 0.75 gallons of sand per one million gallons of water pumped from the well and is measured by a Rossum Sand Tester on-site. The acceptable range for pumping to distribution is 0.75 to 2.25 ppm-v. In order to protect infrastructure and eliminate user complaints, the sand content of 0.75 ppm-v should be used as a design standard—it is normally easy to achieve in a properly designed alluvial aquifer well. 5 The pump column couplings are 9-5/8 inch diameter set into a 12.00 inch inside diameter casing, providing a 1.12 inch annulus that is partially obstructed by encrustation. It may be possible to install a downhole instrument in a 0.75 inch deployment tube, but if not, the well should be equipped with an airline charged from a nitrogen gas canister. The airline could then be used to take periodic manual readings. ---PAGE BREAK--- Geologic Unit Graphic Log Lithology Well Construction Depth (ft bgs) Depth (ft bgs) Log data from GWIC No.: Year Built: Rate (gpm) Duration (hrs) Drawdown (ft) Decimal Degrees NAD 83 Coordinates Meters (MT State Plane) Pumping Test Summary (2004) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 90835 Broadway (Well 1948 750 469419 170796 111.17966W 45.77425N 53.5 ft SWL 54 ft, Dec. 1948 12" Steel Casing 9/16 x 36" Perforations 145 ft - Pump intake (approx.) 178 ft 182 ft 0, 2 Topsoil 2, 28 Gravel, loose, water at 28 ft 28, 32 Sand "Surface water and sand" 32, 54 Gravel, packed 54, 120 Gravel, some sand, packed 120, 124 Sand, more water 124, 190 Gravel, tight and some sand 190, 196 Sand, clean, more water 196, 200 tight FIGURE 6-3: BROADWAY WELL LOG ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 53 2017 At approximately 69 years, the age of this well is a concern, as an emergency replacement project could take more than 12-months to complete. If a favorable funding opportunity were to arise, replacement of this well could be justified and should be pursued. An updated video inspection of the well should be completed the next time pump work is required. It may also be feasible to conduct a casing integrity test at the same time. The Statement of Claim water right for Well #1 allows for up to 1,000 gpm and 597 af. During 2016, Well #1 was operated to produce 764 af, exceeding the water right by 167 af (Figure 6- 2A). This use demonstrates the installed equipment is able to perfect the water right volume, which is the most important and valued element of a water right. In future years, the City should use data from the SCADA system to ensure the annual pumped volume does not exceed the permitted volume. Findings related to Well #1 are summarized below.  The SCADA and well house flow rate metering differ significantly. The City should investigate and resolve the discrepancy.  Well capacity is reduced due to sand production from the well, which may be a reasonable operation plan. Further testing of the well sand content is recommended.  A water level metering system is recommended for this well. The type of instrument that can be used (pressure transducer or airline) in the well will need to be verified at the time the work is completed. 6.2.2 Well No. 2 (Park Well) Well #2 produces water at a substantially lower rate than designed suggesting possible pump or well problems. In 2007, the observed normal pumping capacity for Well #2 was 470 gpm, whereas the design rate is 550 gpm. When observed for this project, well production was 375 gpm, as measured by a new magnetic flow meter (Figure 6-2B). The construction of Well #2 is consistent with modern well design standards (Figure 6-4). The well casing used for construction is indicated to be a 12.00 inch inside diameter and have a 0.375 inch wall thickness. The screen is a 12-inch telescoping size. A new Berkeley Verti-line pump was set in Well #2 in 2002 by Red Tiger Drilling, Inc., and the pump motor was rebuilt in 2007. The pump end is set on 150 feet of 8-inch diameter column ---PAGE BREAK--- Geologic Unit Graphic Log Lithology Well Construction Depth (ft bgs) Depth (ft bgs) Log data from GWIC No.: Year Built: Rate (gpm) Duration (hrs) Drawdown (ft) Decimal Degrees NAD 83 Coordinates Meters (MT State Plane) Pumping Test Summary (2004) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 90850 Park (Well 1978 118 7 600 469942 170869 45.775001N 111.172953W Cement seal 20 ft SWL 42 ft, Sep 1978 12" x 0.375" Steel Casing 150 ft - Pump intake (approx.) 160 ft 12" SS Telescoping screen 185 ft 0, 6 Topsoil 6, 95 Gravel, dirty, coarse 95, 133 Sand, coarse and gravel 133, 185 Sand, silty, clayey and gravel FIGURE 6-4: PARK WELL LOG ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 55 2017 with 9-5/8 inch outside diameter couplings.6 It appears to have been selected to operate with an efficiency of 81% at the discharge rate of 550 gpm and total dynamic head of 280 feet. Impaired performance of the well could be due to declining pump performance, well plugging, or both. It is most likely the pump is failing, as well plugging in the City’s wells is not common. The recommendations section addresses assessment and repair of this well. Well #2 has a water right for 550 gpm and 360 af. Assuming the well capacity can be restored to the design rate of 550 gpm, the full volume of the right can be used in 153 days. Normal operation of the well is expected to fully utilize this water right. Findings related to Well #2 are summarized below.  Well capacity is low and needs to be investigated. This work will likely require replacement of the pump bowl assembly. A recommendation for this work is provided.  A water level metering system for the well is recommended. The type of instrument that can be used (pressure transducer or airline) in the well will need to be verified at the time the work is completed. 6.2.3 Well No. 3 (Stiles Well) Well #3 was observed to produce 525 gpm to system, lower than in 2007 when the rate was 580 gpm. The design capacity for the well appears to be 630 gpm with an operating efficiency greater than 82%. There may be a decline in pump and or well performance that has impacted yield. Testing of the well would be needed to verify it can produce at the higher rate, and is described in the recommendations section. Pump work is likely needed for this well in order to restore capacity. Well #3 is still operating with the original pump, a Verti-Line 10RM with seven stages installed in 1981. The pump end is set on 220 ft of 8-5/8 inch diameter column pipe. The bottom of the suction strainer secured to the pump intake is 228 ft below the well house floor, putting the pump intake at the top of screen. The construction of Well #3 is consistent with modern design standards (Figure 6-5). It was built with a 16-inch diameter steel casing (15.25 inch inside diameter) and a 16-inch telescoping well 6 This information requires confirmation next time the pump is pulled or by further record checking. ---PAGE BREAK--- Geologic Unit Graphic Log Lithology Well Construction Depth (ft bgs) Depth (ft bgs) Log data from GWIC No.: Year Built: Rate (gpm) Duration (hrs) Drawdown (ft) Decimal Degrees NAD 83 Coordinates Meters (MT State Plane) Pumping Test Summary (2004) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 188780 Stiles (Well 1981, 1988 109 16 725 469666 169836 45.765654N 111.176218W Cement seal 20 ft SWL 54 ft, Feb 1988 16" x 0.375" Steel Casing Casing break, 167 ft 225 ft - Pump intake (approx.) 227 ft 16" SS Telescoping screen, 0.125" slots 254 ft 14" x 0.25" Steel casing, with 1/4" x 2.5" perfs. 12" SS Telescoping screen, 0.125" slots 262 ft 0, 30 Gravel, large 30, 40 Gravel, large and clay 40, 55 Gravel, large 55, 70 Gravel and clay (little water) 70, 97 Sand, coarse and clay 97, 110 Sand 110, 160 Clay, sandy 160, 170 Clay, sandy and gravel 170, 182 Clay, sandy 182, 186 Clay, sandy and gravel 186, 190 Clay, sandy 190, 200 Gravel 200, 205 Clay, sandy 205, 252 Gravel and sand FIGURE 6-5: STILES WELL LOG ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 57 2017 screen. Several years after construction, a 14-3/4 inch diameter bottom casing was perforated and a 14-inch diameter liner screen was installed over this section (254 to 262 ft below ground). Well #3 is producing substantially below the water right rate of 1,200 gpm (Figure 6-2C).7 In 2016, it was also operated to produce much less than the permitted volume of 680 af. If well capacity is restored to the design rate of 630 gpm, this well can pump the annual volume in 245 days, which may be feasible. It should be feasible for the City to produce the water right volume from this well in the future as the demand increases. Addition of a second diversion onto this water right may be useful and feasible. Findings related to Well #3 are summarized below.  Present well capacity of 525 gpm is substantially below the design rate of 630 gpm. A project has been recommended to evaluate the well and pump and includes a provision to replace the pump bowl assembly.  There is no water level sensor in the well connected to the SCADA system. A new sensor connected to the SCADA system and with a well house LCD display is recommended. 6.2.4 Well No. 4 (Shop Well) This well is planned for a new magnetic flow meter in the near future (the installed meter has failed). The current estimated rate for the well is about 1,250 gpm, although data collected earlier in 2016 indicate a lower rate of 1,200 gpm (Figure 6-2D). Well #4 is constructed according to modern design standards (Figure 6-6). It is constructed with 16-inch diameter casing (15.25 inch inside diameter) and a 16-inch diameter telescoping well screen. New pumping equipment was installed in Well #4 in 2000 by Red Tiger Drilling, Inc. A Layne pump model 12RKEH with 4-stages was set onto 165 feet of 10-inch diameter column (11.75 inch maximum outside diameter at couplings). Assuming a 9.18-inch diameter impeller, the pump was designed to produce 1,010 gpm with 296 feet of total dynamic head and efficiency of 81%. The pump is apparently operating at lower total dynamic head to produce the rate of 1,250 gpm. There is no evidence of either declining pump or well performance. 7 The water right file for Well #3 indicates some intention to have reduced the rate to 680 gpm, however, for undeclared reasons this adjustment has not been made and the 1200 gpm rate prevails. If the Well #3 water right is changed in the future, it is possible that DNRC would at that time apply the lower rate. ---PAGE BREAK--- Geologic Unit Graphic Log Lithology Well Construction Depth (ft bgs) Depth (ft bgs) Log data from GWIC No.: Year Built: Rate (gpm) Duration (hrs) Drawdown (ft) Decimal Degrees NAD 83 Coordinates Meters (MT State Plane) Pumping Test Summary (2004) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 132557 Shop (Well 1983 109 24 1115 470278 170650 45.775001N 111.172953W Cement seal 20 ft SWL 57 ft, May 1983 16" x 0.375" Steel casing 165 ft - Pump intake (approx.) 168 ft 16" SS Telescoping screen, 0.040" - 0.100" slots 205 ft 0, 1 Topsoil 1, 55 Gravel, coarse and cobbles 55, 85 Sand, dirty, tight and gravel 85, 89 Sand and gravel 89, 108 Sand and gravel with clay 108, 111 Clay 111, 203 Stratified sand and gravel deposits with common zones containing clay separated by zones without clay FIGURE 6-6: SHOP WELL LOG ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 59 2017 The limited pumping test data available indicate 109 feet of drawdown in 24 hours of pumping at 1,115 gpm. These data indicate a pumping water level of 166 feet, which is essentially at the pump intake. It is advisable to operate the well at a lower rate in order to prevent cavitation on the pump impellers and air entrainment into the well. Adjustment to 1,080 gpm is recommended (pumping level approximately 150 ft below ground). Water level and pumping data could be used to further adjust the capacity upward or downward. Well #4 is being operated in excess of the water right rate of 1,100 gpm, but is producing substantially below the water right volume of 1,510 acre-feet. Well #4 could produce the full volume of the water right in 311 days of pumping. This water right would be more useful if it included two to three additional diversions. New diversions would utilize the volume of the Well #4 water right, but would also require new appropriation of rate. The new filings would not have adverse effects to surface water, as they do not include any volume. Findings related to Well #4 are summarized below.  Pumping capacity should be adjusted to about 1,080 gpm, as the present rate of 1,250 gpm is expected to result in drawdown to the pump intake, damaging the pump.  A pressure transducer to measure water level should be installed. The water level instrument should be connected to the SCADA system and also be equipped with a well house LCD readout.  The water right volume of 1,510 af would be better used if two or three additional diversions were added. 6.2.5 Well No. 5 (Yukon Well) Well #5 produces 900 gpm to the water system, although during most of 2016 it was pumped at 700 gpm (Figure 6-2E). The City should watch the pumping level carefully during use of the well at this higher rate as drawdown to the pump intake is possible. Well #5 is a modern well construction built with 16-inch diameter casing (15.25 inch inside diameter) and a 16-inch diameter telescoping well screen (Figure 6-7). It is equipped with a water level sensor connected to the SCADA system. The Well #5 pump is a Goulds model 12CLC with 5 stages, newly installed in 2004 on 8-5/8 inch diameter column pipe (estimated size—needs verification). The pump setting is estimated at 155 ft, putting the intake at the top of screen. The design rate for this pump is 900 gpm with a ---PAGE BREAK--- Geologic Unit Graphic Log Lithology Well Construction Depth (ft bgs) Depth (ft bgs) Log data from GWIC No.: Year Built: Rate (gpm) Duration (hrs) Drawdown (ft) Decimal Degrees NAD 83 Coordinates Meters (MT State Plane) Pumping Test Summary (2004) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 202221 Yukon (Well 2003 970 469346 169466 45.762265N 111.180231W Bentonite seal 20" Borehole 20 ft SWL 65 ft, Jan 2003 16" x 0.375" Steel casing Tri Seal 14" x 0.375" Steel casing 155 ft - Pump intake (approx.) 14" SS Screen, 0.180" slots 14" x 0.375" Steel casing 217 ft 0, 63 Brown cobbles grade sand 63, 79 Brown clay some gravel 79, 85 Brown clay, gravel, sand 85, 99 Brown cobbles clay gravel 99, 116 Brown cobbles gravel sand 116, 120 Black rhyolite hard 120, 135 Brown boulder cobbles gravel 135, 138 Brown clay cobbles 138, 205 Brown cobbles gravel sand 205, 218 Brown clay gravel FIGURE 6-7: YUKON WELL LOG ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 61 2017 total dynamic head of 270 feet and efficiency of 86%. The pump appears to be unimpaired, but has too much head for the installation, requiring the use of a manual valve to reduce the rate to 900 gpm. Well #5 is a diversion on the City’s water reservation, which also includes Well This reservation was approved for two wells with a total capacity of 1,600 gpm and annual volume of 645 af. Wells #5 and #6 operated together produce at 1,350 gpm (900 + 450) and can produce the total volume of the water right in 127 days. These wells are therefore capable of fully utilizing the reservation volume, which is the most critical element. There would be little benefit from a third diversion on the water right, although this could be accomplished via a change application. Findings related to Well #5 are summarized below.  The Well #5 pump is too large for the well. Modifications to the pump should be made at the City’s convenience. 6.2.6 Well No. 6 (Airport Well) Well #6 was observed to produce 525 gpm after a short runtime during the project field visit, although the SCADA system is recording a lower rate (Figure 6-2F). The construction used 16- inch diameter steel casing (15.25 inch inside diameter) and a 16-inch telescoping well screen (Figure 6-8). Well #6 is equipped with a Goulds pump model 9RCHC, designed to produce 500 gpm with a total dynamic head of 260 feet and efficiency of 85%. The well is operating very close to this point. It is expected the pump is set on 8-5/8 inch diameter column pipe with an intake at about 155 ft below ground. Well #6 is a diversion on the City’s water reservation. As noted above for Well these two wells generally use the entire reservation. Findings related to Well #6 are summarized below.  The well house flow meter appears to read higher than is being recorded by the SCADA system. This discrepancy should be resolved. ---PAGE BREAK--- Geologic Unit Graphic Log Lithology Well Construction Depth (ft bgs) Depth (ft bgs) Log data from GWIC No.: Year Built: Rate (gpm) Duration (hrs) Drawdown (ft) Decimal Degrees NAD 83 Coordinates Meters (MT State Plane) Pumping Test Summary 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 20225 Airport (Well 2003 450 471988 169803 111.14635W 45.76580N Bentonite seal 20" Borehole 20 ft SWL 43 ft, Jan 2003 16" x 0.375" Steel casing Tri Seal 155 ft - Pump intake (approx.) 14" x 0.375" Steel casing 14" SS Screen, 0.180" slots 14" SS Screen, 0.030" slots 14" SS Screen, 0.180" slots 14" x 0.375" Steel casing 212 ft 0, 61 Brown cobbles, gravel, sand 61, 81 Brown boulders, gravel, sand 81, 98 Brown cobbles, gravel, sand 98, 140 Brown cobbles, gravel, sand 140, 200 Brown gravel, sand 200, 220 Brown clay, gravel, sand FIGURE 6-8: AIRPORT WELL LOG ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 63 2017 6.3 Water Rights 6.3.1 Existing Water Rights Owned by City The existing wells in use by the City have associated water rights, as summarized in Table 6-2. General abstracts prepared by Montana DNRC for these water rights are included in Appendix B. The water rights relate one to one for Wells and Well #4 has two permits with different priority dates. In total, Well #4 can be operated at a rate of 1,100 gpm and up to 1,510 acre-feet per year. The designated points of diversions on the water rights correctly locate the wells, except for Well The correct diversion location for Well #2 is Sec. 1 T1S/R4E. The place of use for the Belgrade water rights (existing claims and permits) was enlarged to that shown on Figure 6-9 when Wells #5 and #6 were added to the reservation. Total rate and volume permitted for the existing wells is 6,350 gpm and 3,792 af. The rate component will not be perfected with the existing wells as Well #1 and Well #3 cannot produce at the listed rates. The volume of the rights is expected to be usable by the existing wells, except that additional wells should be added to the Well #4 permits (and optionally the permit of Well It should be feasible to add two or three additional wells by first extending the completion dates on these permits, and then adding the wells through a change application. It would also be necessary to apply for additional rate for the new wells. Because the new wells would derive volume from the existing permits, there would be no adverse effects to surface water.8 8 Generally, the new well locations must be similarly offset from surface water as the existing diversions on the permits. ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! Planning Area Boundary Interstate 90 Jackrabbit Ln Frontage Rd Dry Creek Rd Place of Use Boundary 7 2 6 1 8 5 11 12 36 31 19 14 13 24 18 23 35 20 3 17 34 32 10 15 22 30 25 26 27 29 26 25 30 27 29 #6 #5 #3 #1 #2 #4 ± 0 3,000 Feet 4E I 5E 1N 1S 4E I 5E 1N 1S Well location and ID number FIGURE 6-9: BELGRADE WATER RIGHTS PLACE OF USE BOUNDARY ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 65 2017 TABLE 6-2: WATER RIGHT SUMMARY Water Right No. Type Priority Date Completio n Date Rate (gpm) Volume (acre-ft) Diversion Names 41H 6482 00 Claim 12/17/1948 NA 1,000 597 WELL #1 41H 6481 00 Claim 12/31/1928 NA 550 360 WELL #2 41H 24875 00 Permit 10/22/1979 10/6/1989 1,200 680 WELL #3 41H 47751 00 Permit 10/22/1979 5/2/1984 900 908 WELL #4 41H 60867 00 Permit 4/11/1986 11/4/1996 1,100 602 WELL #4 41H 70119 00 Reservation 7/1/1985 12/31/2025 1,600 645 WELL #5 WELL #6 TOTAL 6,350 3,792 41H 65335 00 Certificate 6/25/1987 6/25/1987 30 1.85 None NA Spain-Ferris Ditch Shares 1892, 1890, 1886 NA 842 80.2* None *Based on 0.935 miner’s inches per acre. The City holds 75 miner’s inches in 75 shares. The City is named on a water right certificate, as shown at the bottom of Table 6-2. It is uncertain as to how this water right is used, although it is not associated with the production wells serving the public water system. The City also is owner of 75 shares in the Spain-Ferris Ditch Company. These shares were acquired by the City when the Las Campañas subdivision was annexed. The shares are limited to irrigation use, however, at some future time the ditch company could make changes to enable use of the shares for aquifer recharge or mitigation. A report evaluating the use of these shares has been completed.9 6.3.2 Acquisition of New Water Rights When the City annexes new development, they should require either a water rights transfer or a cash payment for the water rights to be provided by the City. The details of this policy require a study of the City’s consumptive water use per connection and the current market prices for water rights. The City in turn would require water rights with sufficient consumptive use or cash to purchase the same. The requirements for consumptive use per connection or cash payments should be updated periodically. When water rights are transferred, consideration also must be given to the DNRC findings with respect to consumptive use, as the DNRC findings could differ substantially from the assumptions made at the time of an annexation agreement. When acquiring water rights through transfer, it is critical to thoroughly review the historic use of the right. This analysis determines all details pertaining to the water right, including: type of use, 9 Western Groundwater Services, LLC (2012) Spain Ferris Ditch Water Rights Usage Study, report to the City of Belgrade, June 4, 2012. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 66 2017 period of use, maximum rate of diversion, diverted volume, consumptive use, direct return flow, deep percolation return flow, place of use, etc. At this time, proof of ownership and affidavits concerning usage should also be provided by the water right owners. The City must also critically evaluate and determine how it will exactly use the water right acquired through this process. There are several questions that should be answered: 1) can it be assigned directly to new wells? 2) can it be used by mitigation (leaving in stream)? 3) does it require aquifer recharge? 4) if so, how much return flow must be recharged in addition to the consumptive use? 5) if required, where and how will aquifer recharge occur? 6) how much will the aquifer recharge facilities cost? 6.3.3 Permitting New Wells The process for permitting water supply wells that require new water rights is moderately well established, although case law will continue to reveal new findings and should be reviewed during any new application process. As the Gallatin Valley lies within the Upper Missouri Watershed, a closed basin, it will normally be required that the City purchase water rights for a new well. These rights will typically have a surface water diversion and a historic use of irrigation. The most difficult aspect of water right permitting at this time is locating a willing seller and negotiating a sale for a useful water right. In order to apply seasonal irrigation water rights to a new water supply well operating year- round, it may be necessary to divert the right and use the diverted water for aquifer recharge. It is also possible that the purchased water right can be left in the stream, a process referred to as mitigation. This latter option is the most ideal and should be carefully evaluated when planning the water right application submittal. There is case law in the Gallatin Valley that supports this latter option.10 A project can also be planned to convert an irrigation water right over to either aquifer recharge or mitigation over a period of time, during which a remaining part of the water right can continue to be used for irrigation. If aquifer recharge is required, consideration must be given to both the consumptive use of the water right, and also the deep percolation return flow. If the deep percolation return flow is required to avoid adverse effects, it also must be recharged. This requirement will increase the 10 Bostwick Properties, Inc. v. Montana DNRC, DA 12-0007, Supreme Court of Montana, February 26, 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 67 2017 size and costs of aquifer recharge facilities. Depending on conditions, the increase in size and costs could be substantial. The principal measure of a purchased water right being used for a municipal well is the consumptive use portion. The associated new water well is approved for a total pumped volume that results in the same volume of consumptive use as the purchased water right. Municipalities have a consumptive use in the vicinity of about 33% (this proportion is specifically determined as part of the application). A municipal water well therefore can be permitted for about three times the consumptive use of the purchased water right a purchased right with 100 af of consumptive use could be used to permit a municipal well with 300 af of annual pumped volume). 6.4 Water Quality Water quality data were reviewed for the City’s wells and field parameters were measured during the site visit. The source water is meeting all Safe Drinking Water Act primary and secondary drinking water standards. Each of the wells on the system qualifies for a waiver from the microbial treatment requirements. Analysis is provided below in this section on virus attenuation for comparison to the microbial treatment standard. 6.4.1 Field Parameters Field parameters were measured during site visits on November 9, 2016 using a Horiba U52 water quality multi-sensor with internal data logger. Data were measured in grab samples obtained from a tap in the discharge piping, and recorded in the instrument memory, which were later downloaded for analysis. There was no manual data entry performed. The field parameter values are listed for each of the wells in Table 6-3. These values are the average of two or three measurements, except only one measurement was made at Well The oxidation reduction potential (Eh) was computed from the instrument value according to a formula provided by the instrument manufacturer.11 As these data show, there is good consistency among Wells #1 to #4 with respect to temperature, pH, Eh, specific conductance, and dissolved oxygen. Wells #5 and #6 exhibit slight differences. Well #6 has the most significant deviation from the other wells. 11 Eh = E + 206 – 0.7*(T-25), where E is the instrument value in millivolts and T is water temperature in degrees Celsius. Eh is the electrical potential of the water relative to the standard hydrogen half-cell reaction. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 68 2017 Turbidity data shown in Table 6-3 are considered accurate, however, only Well #1 was in service during the field visits. The other wells were operated a short time to obtain the water quality data, and the early time readings reflect turbidity conditions at well startup. Wells and #6 exhibit the largest values, with Well #6 being substantially greater than the other wells. Dissolved oxygen values are indicating nearly full saturation, which would range from about 8.9 to 9.2 mg/L for the water temperature and atmospheric pressure (635 mmHg) of the Belgrade aquifer. The depressed values are indicative of a deeper groundwater that is not directly connected to the atmosphere. The oxidation-reduction potential (Eh) is indicating the same. The lowest oxidizing conditions occurred for Well which is the most easterly of the City’s wells and is directly down-gradient from a gravel mining area groundwater flow occurs directly from the mining area toward Well Additional repeat data would be needed from the wells to establish if the Well #6 parameters are actually significantly different from the other wells. The higher turbidity of Well #6 could also be indicative of mining influence on the groundwater quality (or could simply be related to startup of the well). TABLE 6-3: FIELD WATER QUALITY DATA Well ID T pH Eh SC Turb DO (mV) (µS/cm) (NTU) (mg/L) #1 (Broadway) 52.0 7.51 451 503 0.75 8.07 #2 (Park) 53.2 7.46 468 506 1.45 8.07 #3 (Stiles) 52.8 7.58 467 473 0.75 7.59 #4 (Shop) 52.9 7.53 463 478 2.80 7.73 #5 (Yukon) 51.1 7.33 461 489 0.60 8.70 #6 (Airport) 50.1 7.19 357 367 8.83 6.53 T – temperature (degrees Fahrenheit); pH (standard units); Eh – electrical potential (millivolts); SC – specific conductance (micro-Siemens per centimeter); Turb – turbidity (nephelometric turbidity units); DO – dissolved oxygen (milligrams per liter). 6.4.2 Nitrate Nitrate is an acute contaminant meaning that it can immediately cause a health effect when ingested at concentrations exceeding the maximum contaminant level (MCL). The nitrate MCL is reported as 10 milli-grams per liter as nitrogen (mg/L as Excessive nitrate in drinking water primarily affects children, infants, and the unborn, and can result in death due to as nitrate replaces oxygen in the blood stream. Nitrate concentrations are measured in the City’s wells annually and reported to MDEQ. A plot of these data from 2008 to 2015 shows levels that fluctuate between 0.1 and 2.8 mg/L as N ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 69 2017 (Figure 6-10). These values are substantially below the MCL, indicating the City does not have a nitrate problem. Concentrations of nitrate in groundwater are derived from natural and man-made sources. Natural nitrate concentrations in alluvial groundwater are typically less than 1.5 mg/L as N. Values above 1.5 mg/L as N are indicative of some man-made input, which can occur from on- site sewage systems and agriculture. The agricultural sources include fallow fields, animal wastes, and fertilizers. These specific sources of nitrate can be distinguished from one another based on nitrogen isotope analysis.12 It would be for the City to periodically review nitrate trends as the present data indicate some tendency for increasing levels. Upward trends are observed for Wells and These trends are not well-defined, and also do not suggest any potential for rapidly increasing values. Tracking of these data would, however, keep the City well-informed as to how this important contaminant occurs in the water system. 6.4.3 Coliform Bacteria For naturally disinfected water systems, as is the case for Belgrade, coliform bacteria play an important role in water quality monitoring. The City presently collects eight samples per month from the distribution system for analysis of coliform bacteria. The occurrence of coliform bacteria in water is taken to indicate the potential occurrence of pathogenic microorganisms, as they occur in the feces of all warm-blooded animals including humans. They are also present in the environment, however, and can occur in water when otherwise pathogens are not present. Coliform samples collected from January 2007 through October 2016 were reviewed and are summarized in Tables 6-4 and 6-5. Over the entire period there were 31 positives out of 1,806 samples equating to 1.7% of the samples collected. There does not appear to be an emerging pattern with respect to the years during which positive samples occurred, although most were more recent. There does appear to be a definite pattern when the data are considered by month. Positive samples have occurred consistently during the months of October through January. 12 Nitrogen-15 (N15) can vary among the nitrogen sources and the ratio N15/N14 is used for evaluation. ---PAGE BREAK--- 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Nitrate (mg/L as Nitrogen) Broadway (Well Park (Well Stiles (Well Shop (Well Yukon (Well Airport (Well FIGURE 6-10: NITRATE HISTORY ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 71 2017 TABLE 6-4: COLIFORM POSITIVE SAMPLES BY YEAR Year Number Positive 2007 0 2008 0 2009 6 2010 0 2011 9 2012 0 2013 4 2014 3 2015 9 2016 0 Total 31 TABLE 6-5: COLIFORM POSITIVE SAMPLES BY MONTH Month Number Positive Jan 5 Feb 0 Mar 0 Apr 0 May 0 Jun 0 Jul 0 Aug 0 Sep 0 Oct 8 Nov 13 Dec 5 Total 31 Period: 2007 – 2016 As required, whenever a positive sample occurs, the City immediately collects repeat samples. In all cases, these repeat samples have not been positive and there have not been any coliform rule violations. Consequently, the City has maintained the naturally disinfected status for microbial treatment. Based on review of the positive samples, it appears most likely they can be attributed to the sampling site that was used and or the long residence time of water in the Yukon Avenue water storage tank. It is unclear as to why positive samples have not also occurred in other cold-weather months, such as February through April. Other ways exist for coliform bacteria to enter a water system, and the City must be vigilant and open-minded in scrutinizing any positive coliform samples. Repairs to buried piping and construction of new connections can result in contamination introducing viral contaminants that can result in consumer infections. Any downhole work in the water supply wells can also introduce real contaminants resulting in infections to users. Extreme caution should be used ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 72 2017 whenever this type of work is occurring. Disinfection practices should be strictly followed and verified before water in the affected part of the water system is restored (disinfection and bacteriological sampling should be conducted in relation to any breach in the water system including downhole work at wells). 6.4.4 Groundwater Rule The Groundwater Rule could at some future time impact the City’s water system, but there does not appear to be any indication this occurrence is imminent under the present conditions.13 Should this rule be applied in full to the City the cost implications would be substantial. The general discussion provided here considers the treatment requirements that could be imposed and the associated cost impacts. As this information shows, the City should be highly vigilant that new development, either residential or commercial, does not compromise the natural disinfection treatment that now exists. When a system is required to meet the treatment technique of the Groundwater Rule, a microbial treatment process achieving 99.99% inactivation of viruses must be installed. While there are other options under the rule, this is the most likely outcome for Belgrade. Chlorine disinfection is the most common treatment method applied to groundwater, however, ultra-violet (UV) light disinfection is an emerging technology. Although UV disinfection treatment has been available for many years, it has only recently been validated for treatment of viruses. When chlorine is used, a dose is applied at the wellhead and contact time is achieved prior to the first service connection. For wells, this is usually accomplished in a large diameter buried pipe that loops back to the well house for sampling and analysis. In Belgrade and with a moderately low dose of 0.5 mg/L free chlorine, a contact time of 12-minutes would be required (10 pH 6 – For a well producing 500 gpm, this contact time could be accomplished in 113 feet of 36-inch diameter pipe. For a rate of 1,000 gpm, the same pipe size would require a length of 227 feet (a dose of 1 mg/L would reduce these by half). Thus, chlorination treatment of the Belgrade wells is much more expensive than simply adding a chlorinator at the well house. Costs at each well may be in the range from $200,000 to $500,000. 13 A requirement to meet the treatment technique of this rule could be imposed within a couple weeks should the City detect a fecal indicator E. Coli) in a triggered source water sample triggered by a routine coliform positive result). It is most likely that if this condition occurred, it would apply to only one well rather than all of the wells. The City could then operate without the impacted well while developing a plan for rule compliance. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 73 2017 UV treatment can be installed with some increase in building size and additional piping. It does not require the large contact pipeline, or the handling of chlorine chemicals, but is more expensive than chlorination. Also, as there is no residual concentration provided by UV, contaminants entering the water system during new construction and leak repairs are not treated. The UV dose that is required to achieve the inactivation level for viruses is 186 milli- joules per square centimeter (mJ/cm2), which is much greater than has been provided by UV reactors for treatment of Giardia lamblia and in surface water, where the dose is at most 22 mJ/cm2. Consequently, UV reactors validated to the virus treatment standard are now offered by few vendors and the market is still small. This business climate coupled with the high dose that is needed has resulted in expensive costs for the equipment. Big Sky Water and Sewer District recently installed UV to treat 995 gpm of groundwater for a total project cost of about $750,000. Based on this amount, Belgrade could expect to spend about $400,000 to treat a 500 gpm well and possibly $900,000 to treat a 1,200 gpm well. In developing new source capacity in the future, the City may consider including design provisions to facilitate the installation of future treatment, should it be required. This may be as simple as acquiring more land or easements, or could include construction of a larger building with a separate chlorine room, for example. 6.4.5 Virus Transport Analysis Groundwater systems approved to operate without an engineered disinfection system are presumed to achieve 99.99% virus inactivation by natural processes. MDEQ Circular DEQ-1 states the conditions a well must meet to qualify for presumed treatment. One of these requires casing extend to a depth of at least 25 feet below ground. The other requires that the shallowest groundwater level be more than 25 feet below ground. It is implicit in the standard that wells meeting these criteria are achieving 99.99% virus inactivation and or removal. A virus transport analysis was completed for the Belgrade wells to compare the physical conditions to predicted virus inactivation. This analysis used the US EPA computer program VIRULO14, which is also used by MDEQ to evaluate deviation requests from the standards.15 The model was set up to evaluate a worst case condition, which consisted of a sand formation 14 US EPA (2002) Predicting Attenuation of Viruses during Percolation in Soils, EPA-600-R-02-051b. 15 A well that does not meet the casing and groundwater level criteria can qualify for natural treatment approval if 99.99% inactivation or removal is shown to occur from the nearest virus source to the well. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 74 2017 from land surface to the water table at 40 feet below ground. The shallowest static water level for the Belgrade wells is 42 ft, and the formation is known to be horizontally stratified alluvium with grain sizes ranging from clay to cobbles. VIRULO contains a database for five viral organisms and several media types.16 When using the program, the first step is to select the media type (clay, silt, sand, or mixtures) and its thickness, and then run simulations of each virus type to determine the worst case organism. Hepatitis A was found to be the worst case organism. VIRULO conducts a probabilistic simulation by varying model input parameters based on probability distributions, and with correlations among selected parameters. All of the inputs used in the analysis presented here were included in the software database; none of the values were changed except for media thickness. Five simulations each with 1,000,000 realizations were run, accumulating a total of 270 viral breakthroughs transport through the entire 40 ft depth). The probability of breakthrough was therefore 0.00005 (270/5000000), which equates to 99.995% inactivation or removal. The same sequence of model runs was also completed using a thickness of 30 ft, resulting in a probability of breakthrough of 0.00006 (299/5000000), which equates to 99.994% inactivation or removal. As shown, the results were not highly sensitive to thickness. The VIRULO model results show that the Belgrade wells meet the natural treatment standard in the unsaturated zone. There is also additional virus inactivation and removal that occurs in the aquifer as groundwater travels to the well. This saturated zone inactivation was not evaluated, but would be additional treatment beyond that indicated by the VIRULO model. 6.5 Source Capacity Development This section presents the estimated source capacity requirements based on population growth projection and unit water use rates presented earlier. Recommendations are also provided for new well constructions. 6.5.1 Water Supply Needs The planning study is using a population steady growth rate of 3.5%, which results in an estimated 2016 population of 9,083. Using data from 2012-2016 data for pumped volume, the unit water use rate is determined to be 102 gallons per capita day (gpcd). The peaking factor for 16 Polio, hepatitis A, reovirus 3, coxsackievirus, echovirus. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 75 2017 maximum day demand also was determined to be 2.31. These parameter values were used to estimate the maximum day demand to the end of the planning period (Figure 6-11). The source capacity standard for groundwater is based on maximum day demand with the largest well out of service. For Belgrade, Well #4 producing at 1,200 gpm is the largest well. The Source Capacity Standard curve is determined by adding 1,200 gpm to the projected maximum day demand. The Installed Source Capacity curve is then determined such that the City is always meeting the standard. This curve follows a stair-step pattern with each step increasing the source capacity by 700 gpm. The rate of 700 gpm is a conservative estimate of the average rate for new wells in the Belgrade area. The average of the City’s existing six wells is approximately 770 gpm. Through the planning period, a total of seven new wells (Wells #7 through #13) are identified in order to achieve the source capacity standard given the projected maximum day demand. A typical well project requires about 18 months for completion, however, permitting the water rights can required more time. The source capacity analysis indicates that the City should immediately proceed with the construction of Wells #7 and increasing the total installed capacity to approximately 5,650 gpm. If the 3.5% growth rate is sustained, new wells would be installed about every three to five years. Continued monitoring of water use should be used to adjust the source development timeline as needed. 6.5.2 New Well Constructions Well constructions completed by the City should achieve the minimum criteria described in this section. Deviation from this criterion, while possible, could result in a requirement for microbial disinfection treatment of the well discharge. ---PAGE BREAK--- 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Rate (gpm) Year Maximum Day Demand Source Capacity Standard Installed Source Capacity Well #7 Well #8 Well #9 Well #10 Well #11 Well #12 Largest Well: Well 1200 gpm Well #13 FIGURE 6-11: SOURCE CAPACITY ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 77 2017 6.5.3 Well Control Zone Restrictions The well control zone extends strictly for 100 ft radially outward from the well, although a small buffer is recommended. Properties selected for wells should be at least 200 ft by 200 ft in area with the well located at the center (or ideally about 210 x 210 providing a 105 ft radius for the control zone). The requirements listed here have been used to declare well control zone easements accepted by MDEQ. The requirements are as follows:  No septic system, wastewater disposal system, sewer lines (interior/exterior), holding tanks, sewage lift station, French drain, or class V injection well, and any structure used to convey or retain industrial or sanitary waste shall be located within the well control zone.  No hazardous substances as defined by 75-10-602 MCA, gasoline, liquid fuels, petroleum products, or solvents shall be stored within the well control zone.  No stormwater injection well, grass infiltration swale, or other stormwater disposal mechanism shall be located within the well control zone.  No natural or constructed surface waters, including ponds, creeks, rivers, or irrigation ditches/canals shall be located inside the well control zone.  No livestock shall be confined, fed, watered, or maintained within the well control zone.  No private well shall be constructed within the well control zone.  Activities, which may threaten the quality of water in the well control zone, are prohibited.  Maintenance of land shall be accomplished only by mechanical means.  Structures, impervious parking areas, and other land uses may be allowed in the well control zone, if they meet the above listed criteria. 6.5.4 Depth to Groundwater New well sites should target areas where the depth to groundwater exceeds 30 ft when measured during the seasonal high water period from about mid-June to mid-July. If more than one site is under consideration, depth to groundwater may be used as a discriminating factor. Development of a site with a static water level less than 25 ft would require a deviation from microbial treatment or that the well discharge be treated by disinfection. 6.5.5 Aquifer Geology The aquifer underlying Belgrade is generally simple—a well drilled nearly anywhere is going to have good production (500+ gpm) and possibly could yield in excess of 1,000 gpm. The geology, however, is not well known, and the deeper parts of the aquifer have more ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 78 2017 heterogeneity, so some good decision making is needed during construction in order to obtain the best well at a site. A test well drilled before the production well is always advised so that some study of the materials can be completed before a call must be made as to where a production well should be screened. The most permeable and youngest alluvial deposits extend to a depth of about 60 ft below ground. These shallow deposits are most likely related to the last glacial episode that occurred in the area, 10,000 to 20,000 years before present. There is little clay in these sediments, and bedding is not well defined in boreholes. Below the younger alluvium (~60 ft), older alluvium deposits occur that are loose and water bearing, but have greater clay content and greater lithological variety, ranging from clay (<0.075 millimeters (mm)) to gravel (5 mm to 3 inches and with occurrences of cobbles (3-in to 12- in). Bedding defined by abrupt changes in sediment sizes and sorting is discernible in these materials. The City’s existing wells all produce from these older alluvium formations. The older alluvium thickness is not well-defined--three miles south of Belgrade alluvium total thickness is about 135 ft; two miles north of Belgrade—total thickness exceeds 400 ft and the bottom has not yet been drilled. Given this information, within the vicinity of the Belgrade and on the north side of the City, there is potential for productive aquifer zones to exist at depths greater than the existing Belgrade wells, which have a maximum depth of 262 ft below ground (Well Stiles). The River Rock Water and Sewer District installed their new Well #3 in 2015 near to the northwest corner of River Rock Pond—about 2 miles due west of Well #5 (Yukon). This well was terminated for budget reasons at 280 feet, but had not yet penetrated to the bottom of productive materials.17 It produced 1225 gpm for three days with about 36 ft of total drawdown, and estimated aquifer transmissivity of about 23,000 ft2/d. The aquifer was also of the leaky type, receiving recharge from adjacent beds during the test. 6.5.6 Interference Drawdown City wells should be separated from one another by a distance of approximately 2,000 ft. This offset distance is estimated to result in 2 ft of interference drawdown for a well pumping 700 gpm from the Belgrade aquifer. The hypothetical well used for the analysis was 200 ft in total 17 Morrison-Maierle, Inc. (2015) Public Water System Well #3 Summary Report, prepared for River Rock County Water and Sewer District (August). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 79 2017 depth with a screen in the lower 50 ft of the well, and static water level 50 ft below ground surface. Aquifer transmissivity was set equal to 7,500 ft2/d, and the aquifer was modeled as anisotropic and unconfined.18 Specific storage and yield values were 0.0001 and 0.25, respectively. The anisotropy ratio (vertical/radial) was specified as 0.1. 6.5.7 Construction and Dimensions Vertical wells with natural filter pack screens are considered to be the most practical means for developing new source capacity. If in the future horizontal wells can be drilled, they may be considered at that time. Radial collector wells are less desirable due to depth limits and high capital costs. Each well construction should be preceded by a test well at the same site. The test well would be drilled at 6- or 8-inch diameter as an exploratory well to determine aquifer thickness and quality of materials. The test well also would serve as a monitoring well for pump testing. It is preferable to perforate the test well after the production well has been built so that the well screen and perforations are at equal depths.19 Production wells should be constructed using a casing diameter that is suitable for the intended pumping equipment and with sufficient space to accommodate a water level instrument deployment tube. A 16-inch diameter casing size will normally be suitable. The surface seal should be built in a borehole at least 4-inches larger in diameter than the production casing and extend to at least 38 ft below ground. The well screen should be a stainless steel telescoping type, terminated at the top with a figure-K packer to prevent sand entry. 6.5.8 Power Service Three-phase power costs can vary substantially depending on the availability to a selected well site. Power costs can be a discriminating factor for selecting one site over another. Prior to test well drilling at a candidate site, an application for power should be made in order to obtain a firm cost estimate for the service extension to the site. Roughly, three-phase power can be run to a site for $50 to $60 per foot, however, the costs can be substantially greater if electrical hardware upgrades are required in order to accommodate the pump motor horsepower. This latter factor 18Well drawdown modeling was completed using AQTESOLV by HydroSolve, Inc. and the unconfined aquifer model by Moench. 19 Although the test well is being used to identify the production well screen intervals, changes may be made in the production well at time of drilling. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 80 2017 must be known prior to pursuing site development, and consequently, the only way to make this determination is through an application for power service. 6.6 Well Improvements This section describes improvements that are recommended for the City’s water supply source capacity. Cost data were obtained for each of the recommended projects by obtaining quotes from contractors and suppliers. Engineering and contingency fees were estimated using typical percentages applied to construction costs. 6.6.1 Water Level Sensors, Wells #1 through Well #4 This improvement installs water level sensors in Wells #1 through The purpose of these sensors is to monitor pumping water level, providing data for daily operation and periodically evaluating well and pump performance. The sensors would be equipped with an LCD display in the well house and would also be read and displayed through the SCADA system. This work requires pulling of the well pumps, coring through the concrete pedestals, resetting of the pumps with an instrument deployment tube, and disinfection and microbial sampling. The sensor display and connection to the SCADA control panel must also be completed. The sounding tube, disinfection, and microbial sampling must be as per MDEQ Circular DEQ-1 3.2.2.1 and 3.2.7.6. There is no MDEQ plan review requirement for this work. Annular space in Wells #1 and #2 may be limited to accommodate an instrument deployment tube—this should be tested when the pump is being pulled. With use of a micro-sensor model (0.63-inch diameter), the instruments in these wells may be set into ¾-inch diameter PVC. Given the pump and casing dimensions, fitting this equipment into the well should be feasible but must be confirmed. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 81 2017 TABLE 6-6: WATER LEVEL SENSOR COST ESTIMATE Item Qty Unit Rate Total Pull pump 4 EA $ 2,170 $ 8,680 Reset pump, sensor tube & disinfect 4 EA $ 2,770 $ 11,080 Video log 4 EA $ 795 $ 3,180 Pedestal coring 4 EA $ 500 $ 2,000 Sensor system 4 EA $ 4,163 $ 16,650 Contractor Total $ 41,590 Engineering 35% $ 14,557 Subtotal $ 56,147 Contingency 15% $ 8,422 TOTAL $ 64,568 6.6.2 Well #2 Testing and Pump Replacement Well #2 (Park) originally was designed to produce 550 gpm, and is now operating at about 375 gpm. This improvement conducts testing to evaluate well and pump performance to verify well capacity, pump condition, and to select new pumping parts, as needed. For the purpose of cost estimation, replacement of the pump bowl assembly is included. The testing work of this improvement is planned to occur after the well is equipped with a water level sensor, as the sensor is required to complete the testing. Disinfection and microbial sampling are required as per MDEQ Circular DEQ-1 3.2.2.1 and 3.2.7.6, but there is no MDEQ plan review required. TABLE 6-7: WELL #2 TESTING AND PUMP REPLACEMENT COST ESTIMATE Item Qty Unit Rate Total Pull pump 1 EA $ 2,170 $ 2,170 Reset pump & disinfect 1 EA $ 2,770 $ 2,770 Pump bowl assembly 1 EA $ 6,500 $ 6,500 Contractor Total $ 11,440 Engineering 35% $ 4,004 Subtotal $ 15,444 Contingency 15% $ 2,317 TOTAL $ 17,761 6.6.3 Well #3 Testing and Pump Replacement Well #3 (Stiles) originally was designed to produce at 630 gpm and is now producing about 525 gpm. This improvement is identical to that for Well #2 above, and includes the same cost components, including replacement of the pump bowl assembly. The testing part of this work also is planned to occur after the well is equipped with a water level sensor. Disinfection and microbial sampling are required as per MDEQ Circular DEQ-1 3.2.2.1 and 3.2.7.6, but there is no MDEQ plan review required. The costs are greater for Well #3 (than Well because of its greater depth (cf. 262 ft v. 185 ft). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 82 2017 TABLE 6-8: WELL #3 TESTING AND PUMP REPLACEMENT Item Qty Unit Rate Total Pull pump 1 EA $ 2,480 $ 2,480 Reset pump & disinfect 1 EA $ 3,080 $ 3,080 Pump bowl assembly 1 EA $ 7,450 $ 7,450 Contractor Total $ 13,010 Engineering 35% $ 4,554 Subtotal $ 17,564 Contingency 15% $ 2,635 TOTAL $ 20,198 6.6.4 Well #1 Sand Content Testing Well #1 (Broadway) is producing apparently sand free water at a rate of 725 gpm. Although the sand content in the discharge appears low, it has not been measured analytically. The testing would provide operation guidance to the City to ensure the well is being operated with acceptable sand production, as sand can damage the well, pump and other infrastructure. This improvement completes several pumping tests while measuring sand content in the discharge using a Rossum Sand Tester (limit of detection 0.5 ppm-v). The testing procedure would run the well to system at several rates over several days while measuring sand content and determining the rate at which sand content remains below the design standard of 0.75 ppm- v. The Rossum Sand Tester would require the installation of a ¼-inch tap in the well discharge piping approximately 24-inches from the discharge head (installed same time as water level sensor). The project assumes City staff would run the testing after the initial test is started. TABLE 6-9: WELL #1 SAND CONTENT TESTING COST ESTIMATE Item Qty Unit Rate Total 1/4" tap and ball valve (by City) 1 EA $ - $ - Engineer site work & report 1 EA $3,200 $3,200 TOTAL $3,200 6.6.5 Wells #7 and #8 Construction and Testing. This improvement constructs and completes two new wells designated as Wells #7 and The cost data presented for this improvement are a total project cost for the well to be operational in the water system according to assumptions described below. Well constructions include a test well (6-inch dia.) and a production well, both drilled to a depth of 320 ft below ground. Production well constructions use 16-inch diameter screens and casings, and line-shaft pumping equipment rated to 75 hp and 700 gpm. Completion piping in ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 6 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 83 2017 the building and for transmission was budgeted as for 12-inch diameter ductile iron. A magnetic flow meter of the same make and model as the City newly installed in Well but at 12-inch diameter, also was used. The cost estimate assumes a total of 150 ft of transmission piping and that three-phase power is ½ mile from the well site and has a unit rate of $62/ft. The actual transmission piping and electrical power service fees should be determined on a site-specific basis prior to final site selection. TABLE 6-10: CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION OF WELLS #7 AND #8 Item Qty Unit Rate Total Test well 2 EA $ 16,900 $ 33,800 Well construction & testing 2 EA $ 199,078 $ 398,157 Well completion 2 EA $ 508,305 $ 1,016,611 Contractor Total $ 1,448,568 Engineering 18% $ 260,742 Subtotal $ 1,709,310 Contingency 10% $ 170,931 TOTAL $ 1,880,241 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 84 2017 Chapter 7 - Distribution System 7.1 Introduction The distribution system pertains to the components of the total system that relay water from the water source to the user. In particular it focuses on the pipes and valves within the system. Pipe diameter, material, length, and condition all affect pressure, flow, and velocity of the water. The water supply and storage tanks are discussed separately in this Master Plan. 7.2 Existing Distribution System The distribution system consists of approximately 271,500 linear feet of water mains. 2009 and 2010 water system improvement greatly reduced water mains under 4 inches. The current system’s piping diameters, materials, and are summarized in Table 7-1 below. TABLE 7-1: WATER PIPE INFORMATION Pipe Diameter (in) Ductile Iron (ft) PVC (ft) Steel (ft) Total length by Diameter 4 348 348 6 53,196 28,464 81,660 8 15,286 85,715 100,001 10 14,671 28,529 595 43,795 12 2,852 41,616 200 44,668 Total Length by Material (ft) 86,353 184,324 795 271,472 Although nearly all 4-inch diameter mains have been replaced, the remaining 4-inch diameter mains are some of the oldest mains in town and were probably installed in the early 1900’s. They are cast iron with lead joints and are believed to be a source of system leakage. Some of the 6-inch mains may also have leaded joints but their location is not known. Rubber gasket mechanical joints were developed and began use in the 1930’s. This joint eliminated the lead joint connections used up until that time. Push-on rubber gasket joints that eliminated bolted mechanical joint connections were developed in the 1950’s but were not commonly utilized until ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 85 2017 the 1970’s. Ductile iron pipe was not developed until the 1950’s and was not widely used until the 1960’s. 7.3 Design Parameters 7.3.1 Primary Design Parameters. The water distribution system must meet the following primary design parameters listed in DEQ Circular 1 2014 Edition:  Minimum normal working pressure of 35 psi (Section 8.2.1).  Minimum pressure of 20 psi at all points in the system under all flow conditions (Section 8.2.1).  Maximum normal working pressures in the 60 to 80 psi range (Section 8.2.1). Mains in distribution systems with static pressures exceeding 100 psi should be equipped with pressure reducing devices (Section 8.3.1).  Minimum main diameter of 6 inches for all mains providing fire protection, with larger diameters required as needed to provide required pressure within the system. (Section 8.2.2).  The water system must be able to meet maximum day pumping demand with the largest well out of service.* *This is a pump station water supply requirement from Chapter 6 of DEQ Circular 1 that can affect distribution system performance. This requirement only applies to pumping demand which is equal to the maximum day domestic demand – fire flow is not applicable as long as there is adequate storage to meet system demands. The probability that a fire will occur during the peak hour demand on maximum day with one well out of service is extremely small. Loss of utility power during this type of event is even more remote. As such, the following design parameters which are subject to DEQ approval are utilized for system analysis: 1. Maximum day flow plus fire demand with the largest well out of service. 2. Fire flow plus evening peak hour domestic demand with all pumps in service. 3. Pressures and available fire flows are based on the tanks being at their lowest calculated level during maximum day domestic demand. 4. Stand-by power on the three existing wells currently without stand-by power is not required in order to count these wells toward the total water supply. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 86 2017 7.3.2 Secondary Design Parameters. The following design parameters are recommended but are not required:  Pressures greater than 50 psi are recommended under average and maximum day flow demands (excluding peak hour) in order to minimize consumer complaints about inadequate pressure.  Pipe head losses less than 2 feet/1,000 feet for mains 16 inches in diameter or larger. (AWWA recommendation).  Pipe head losses less than 6 feet/1,000 feet for smaller mains. (AWWA recommendation).  Flow velocities less than 5 feet per second (AWWA recommendation).  Maximum flow velocities of 10 feet per second under all flow conditions.  Minimum design pressure of 40 psi under fire flow conditions in transmission mains that serve future development in the upper pressure zone. This makes 20 psi available to deliver water to the point of need in future 7.4 Design Flows 7.4.1 Domestic Flows. Design flows are described in detail in Chapter 5 and summarized below in Table 7-2 for current conditions and for projected demands in 2038. The system peak hour domestic flow occurs between 9:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. The City can significantly reduce the peak hour demand on the system by deferring the start of park irrigation until after midnight. This makes more water available for fire suppression without increasing storage or supply. TABLE 7-2: DESIGN FLOWS The projected maximum day demand for the year 2038 utilized in this report is 6.6 mgd. The projected residential population for the year 2038 is 19,360 mgd. Although the residential areas are projected to be nearly fully developed by 2038, significant portions of the business and commercial zoned areas are not expected to be fully developed by that time. Year Average Day Maximum Day Peak Hour Current 1,724,628 gpd 3,999,000 gpd 159 gpm 2038 2,849,457 gpd 6,592,345 gpd 263 gpm ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 87 2017 7.4.2 Fire Flows Recommended design fire flows are listed for various zoning classifications in Chapter 5 and summarized again in Table 7-3. These flows may or may not be applicable to all structures that may be constructed in these areas unless the City adopts regulations requiring new structures to be compatible with the available fire flow. Needed fire flows can be significantly reduced if automatic sprinkler systems are utilized. The fire code allows needed fire flow to be reduced by 75% to a minimum of 1,500 gpm with the use of automatic sprinkler systems. A fire demand of 3,000 gpm can potentially be reduced to 1,000 with automatic sprinklers. The corresponding fire duration is also reduced from 3 hours to 2 hours. Reductions of this magnitude significantly reduce water system storage requirements and may reduce required water main sizes. Although it may be impractical to require installation of automatic sprinkler systems in existing buildings, the City should consider adoption of an ordinance requiring automatic sprinklers in all new commercial buildings, public buildings, and multi-family residential construction with more than two families or fire flow area greater than 3,600 s.f. This could help reduce storage requirements in the upper pressure district. It will not affect the lower pressure district storage requirements unless the existing middle school, high school, commercial, and public structures also are required to have sprinklers. Automatic sprinklers in single or dual family residences with needed fire flows less than 1,500 gpm or less will not affect system design. Current recommended fire flows for the various zoning areas are summarized in Table 7-3. If fire sprinklers were required in all zoning areas except for R-1 and R-2, fire flows could potentially be reduced to 1,000 gpm in these areas. A minimum fire flow of 1,500 gpm is recommended for areas other than R-1 or R-2. This provides some reserve capacity and is compatible with previous fire code standards. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 88 2017 TABLE 7-3: DESIGN FIRE FLOWS Location or Zoning Design Fire Flow Duration High School 3,000 gpm- 3hours Middle School 3,000 gpm- 3 hours Grade Schools 2,250 gpm- 2 hours Business Districts (B-2 & 3) 2,500 gpm- 2 hours Manufacturing Districts (M-1 & 2) 2,000 gpm- 2 hours Airport 2,000 gpm- 2 hours Single Family Residential (R-1) 1,000 gpm- 2 hours Multi-Family (R-2) 1,500 gpm- 2 hours Multi-Family (R-3 & 4) 2,000 gpm- 2 hours 7.5 Water Modeling 7.5.1 Modeling Software Water modeling of the existing water system was completed using WaterCAD V8i, which is based on the EPANET flow analysis algorithm developed by the EPA. The method for creating the model consists of overlaying the water system components on a base map. Pipe data includes pipe size, material, and roughness factors. WaterCAD automatically calculates the of the pipes based on placement on the base map, and then adjusted when exact are known. The roughness factor is used in the Hazen-Williams formula Q = k*C*A*R0.63*S0.54. The formula relates flow in a pipe with the roughness coefficient flow area hydraulic radius friction slope and a constant to calculate head loss Roughness factors typically vary between materials, and increasing values represent smoother pipe conditions. The roughness factors were lowered from standard values to model actual condition of aged pipes and fittings within the system. The roughness factors used in this model can be seen in Table 7-4. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 89 2017 TABLE 7-4: ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENTS Pipe Material C Ductile Iron 120 PVC 150 Steel 100 The information used in the water model reflects the information provided by the City of Belgrade corroborated with field measurements and observations where possible. Locations of water connections are based on City records and water demands are applied to junction nodes within the model to replicate the demands of the system. Water supply has been added to the model to reflect the actual performance of the wells based on pumping records and testing. The model reflects the expected flow rate of the new well that was approved for construction in 2017. Water storage tanks are modeled in WaterCAD with parameters that include base elevation, diameter, and height of initial, minimum, and maximum water levels. A list of all pipes and junction nodes, as used in WaterCAD, are included in Appendix D. 7.5.2 Model Validation Although pipe diameters and are generally known, the roughness of the pipe interior is not known and must be estimated. In order to determine if the estimated roughness coefficients are appropriate or if there are errors in the piping representation, the model must be validated by demonstrating the predicted model results accurately reflect actual system performance. Flow tests were performed on June 29, 2016 and August 23, 2016 between 10:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. in order to verify the validity of the model calibration. The tests were conducted by opening hydrant nozzles and measuring flow at the hydrant with a pitot gauge. Static pressures and residual pressures were recorded at the nearest available location to the hydrant. In order to accurately model system response during the tests, the domestic flows that were occurring in the system at that time had to be included. The total system flow demand for an hour prior to running the flow tests was determined by utilizing SCADA information regarding ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 90 2017 tank water level changes and well production. This flow was utilized to represent the average hourly system domestic demand while the flow tests were being conducted. The demands correlated with the times of the tests were proportionately spread throughout the system by using the ratio of the EPS calibration day to the test day. Tank water levels in the model were adjusted to match the SCADA system levels recorded at the time of the tests. The flow rate at each of the hydrants was input into the model as separate steady-state scenarios. Pressures from the model were then compared to the field pressure measurements. Nine tests were conducted at dispersed locations across Belgrade in order to validate model response at different locations across the City’s water system, see Table 7-5. TABLE 7-5: MODEL CALIBRATION Differential Between Model Projected Pressure and Measured Pressure Location Flow Field Pressure Model Pressure Static Pressure Differential Residual Pressure Differential Static Residual Static Residual 1 1186 77 76 79 72 2 -4 2 1300 90 89 91 83 1 -6 3 1186 78 71 77 69 -1 -2 4 1061 69 51 69 55 0 4 5 1113 69 67 70 65 1 -2 6 1010 61 60 63 60 2 0 7 1087 58 56 58 54 0 -2 8 1034 51 49 49 47 -2 -2 9 1061 58 57 57 56 -1 -1 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 91 2017 Additional testing information such as locations, dates, and times are listed in Table 7-6. TABLE 7-6: ADDITIONAL TESTING INFORMATION Location Relative Direction of Hydrant (A+B) Date Time 1 Meadowlark Subdivision B (west of A) 9/23/2016 10:58 AM 2 Ryan Glen Subdivision A (east of B) 9/24/2016 11:20 AM 3 Sunrise Dr. A (west of B) 6/29/2016 10:07 AM 4 Biehl Dr. & 11th St. A (south of B) 6/29/2016 10:32 AM 5 Triple Crown Rd. A (west of B) 6/29/2016 11:00 AM 6 Bridge View Dr. A (west of B) 6/29/2016 11:23 AM 7 Boundary Ln. off W. Madison Ave. A (north of B) 6/29/2016 11:51 AM 8 Amsterdam Rd. A (east of B) 6/29/2016 12:12 PM 9 E. Madison Avenueat Water Tank A (SW of B) 6/29/2016 12:46 PM Based on the probable accuracy of the flow metering equipment and estimated ground elevations the measured differences were considered satisfactory and the model validated. 7.5.3 Extended Period Simulation. Extended Period Simulation (EPS) utilizes the computer model to simulate an actual day of operation. If the model closely replicates the pump operation, tank levels, and flows recorded during that day, the model is a valid representation of the water system. In order to do this, time dependent data must be developed to define well operation, flow demands, and tank water levels on a continuous basis throughout a high demand day. Belgrade’s continuous recording SCADA system made it possible to utilize this validation technique. SCADA data from the past several years was reviewed to find a high demand day. Pump curves and operating times during that day were input into the model. System demands were developed by using the calculated maximum day demand and back-calculating the estimated population using zoning densities. The demand loads were distributed around the distribution system based on zoning and type of development. An estimated water loss was distributed over ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 92 2017 33 junction nodes throughout the system to simulate the total water demand on the system. Pump performance was adjusted to match metered data by adjusting the well groundwater drawdown elevations. A time varying flow demand curve that simulates what occurred on July 25, 2013 was developed using one hour intervals for the full 24-hour period. This demand curve allowed the model to run as an extended scenario and cover a full day of water demand fluctuations. After some minor adjustments, the model pumping rates and tank level fluctuations reasonably imitated actual system performance on that day. The graph below illustrates the diurnal curve used in WaterCAD. FIGURE 7-1: DIURNAL CURVE 7.5.4 Existing Distribution System The existing water system is illustrated in Figure 7-2. The modeled system includes the New Well which was approved for construction in April 2017, which is modeled with a projected flow of 700 gpm although the actual capacity could be higher or lower than expected and modeled. Typical projected system operating pressures under maximum day flow conditions with the 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 gpm Hours MDD 2013 MDD 2013 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 93 2017 Shop Well out of service are illustrated on Figure 7-3. The majority of the expected pressures range between 60 and 90 psi. The pressures in the northerly subdivisions such as Ryen Glenn exceed 90 psi. Pressure regulators for individual homes may be desirable in this area. The Uniform Plumbing Code recommends regulators when pressures exceed 80 psi. Many people prefer higher pressures and do not install regulators. Portions of the system south of the Interstate, the Las Campanas Subdivision, and some adjacent areas have pressures in the 50-60 psi range. The lower pressures in these areas are primarily the result of the higher ground elevations although the delivery system in the Las Campanas area is a factor under maximum day flows. Pressures at any given time are controlled by the water level in the storage tanks and the water demand on the system. Higher pressures cannot be provided unless a higher pressure district is developed to serve this area. The benefits of such a district at this location would not justify the cost at this time, but will as development increases (which is discussed later in this chapter). The projected fire flow availability of the system during maximum day demand, with wells in service except the Shop Well, can be seen in Figure 7-4. Available fire flows fall below 2,000 gpm in several locations but only one location falls below 1,000 gpm. Fire flow less than 1,000 gpm fails the fire code for a single family residential structure. 7.6 Recommended Improvements Recommended Improvements for the distribution system are described below. For a full list of recommended improvements see section 1.8. 7.6.1 East Crossing Loop The East Crossing Loop extends from the existing 12-inch main on Yukon Road east along Alaska Road and then turns north crossing the Interstate, connecting to the Las Campanas Subdivision and ultimately connecting to the existing 12-inch main along the highway by the airport- see Figure 7-5. This loop provides several benefits:  The East Crossing Loop is needed to meet projected peak hour and fire demands along the highway on the east side of Belgrade and along the Northeast Loop.  The Yukon Tank water becomes more readily available to support Northeast Loop development and helps reduce the draw on the City Shop Tank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 94 2017  A third Interstate crossing is provided thus decreasing vulnerability of the system to line failure under the Interstate.  Water supply reliability and fire flow to the Las Campanas Subdivision is improved. The estimated cost of this main is $3,304,000. The cost of easements or property acquisition is excluded. ---PAGE BREAK--- SHEET DESIGNED BY: QUALITY CHECK: JOB NO. FIELDBOOK DRAWN BY: DATE: B16-048 XX APRIL 2017 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA REV DATE REVISION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 FIGURE 7-2 EXISTING WATER SYSTEM .DWG 7-2 JLB KW MM T T W W W W W W W W T EXISTING DESCRIPTION WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) LEGEND NOT TO SCALE ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: 7-3 UPDATED NEW WELL PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES- MAXIMUM DAY 7-3 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: 7-4 UPDATED NEW WELL FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS- MAXIMUM DAY 7-4 ---PAGE BREAK--- QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: FIGURE 7-5 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 EAST CROSSING LOOP PRIORITY NO. 3 7-5 W T DESCRIPTION EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) W W W W T T I-90 FRONTAGE RD. ALASKA FRONTAGE RD. WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND LEGEND NOT TO SCALE ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 99 2017 7.6.2 West Central Avenue10-Inch Main Replacement and Extension. The northwesterly end of the water system along West Central Avenue currently cannot meet minimum residential fire flow requirements of 1,000 gpm at one location much less the recommended fire flow for the zoning classification. A segment of 10-inch main between Jackrabbit Road and 6th St. needs to be installed to provide a continuous 10-inch main to 8th St. The 10-inch main on Central also needs to be extended northwesterly on Central from 8th St. to the City boundary to help correct fire flow deficiencies in this area. This main extension will also help serve the proposed Prescott Property development and it is part of a future looped transmission main system for the northwest side of town. The recommended improvements are shown on Figure 7-6. The estimated cost of this extension is $958,000. 7.6.3 Northeast Loop Tie A primary transmission main that completes the Northeast Loop is needed. This can be done by completing a major main loop via a proposed Northeast Loop Tie on Cardinal Drive to Jackrabbit Lane, Sunrise Drive, and Westwood Circle from the current 6-inch line to a 12-inch line - see Figure 7-7. The estimated cost for the Northeast Loop Tie is $1,227,000. 7.6.4 Well #7 Main Upgrade The water main around Well #7 needs to be upgraded to a 12-inch pipe from the current 6-inch pipe. This improvement will become increasingly needed as the Prescott property is developed in order to maintain adequate pressure and fire flow -see Figure 7-8. The estimated cost for the Well #7 Main Upgrade is $1,426,000. 7.6.5 South Central Commercial District The south central commercial district is bounded on the north by Northern Pacific Avenue, on the south by Madison Avenue, and on the west by Jackrabbit Lane. Needed fire flows in this area vary from 1,500 to 2,000 gpm. Fire flows in this area can be improved by replacement of some of the 6-inch mains with 8-inch mains and elimination of dead end mains by looping the mains as illustrated in Figure 7-9. These improvements will insure fire flows above 2,500 gpm in this area. The estimated cost of these improvements is $1,165,000. ---PAGE BREAK--- QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: FIGURE 7-6 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 W. CENTRAL AVE. 10-IN MAIN REPLACEMENT & EXTENSION PRIORITY NO. 4 7-6 W T EXISTING DESCRIPTION W. PARK AVE. 11TH ST. W. CENTRAL AVE. BIEHL DR. WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) LEGEND NOT TO SCALE ---PAGE BREAK--- QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: FIGURE 7-7 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 N.E. LOOP TIE PRIORITY NO. 5 7-7 W T EXISTING DESCRIPTION EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) CRUISER LN. CARDINAL DR. SPOONER RD. JACKRABBIT LN. HAPPY LN. WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND LEGEND NOT TO SCALE ---PAGE BREAK--- QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: FIGURE 7-9 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 WELL #7 MAIN UPGRADE APRIL 2017 PRIORITY NO. 6 7-8 W T EXISTING DESCRIPTION EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) WESTWOOD CIR. JACKRABBIT LN. CHEERY DR. PAISLEY DR. WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND LEGEND NOT TO SCALE W ---PAGE BREAK--- QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: FIGURE 7-10 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB S. CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT APRIL 2017 PRIORITY NO. 8 B16-048 7-9 W T EXISTING DESCRIPTION EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) W S. BROADWAY JACKRABBIT LN. SILVERBOW AVE. WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND LEGEND NOT TO SCALE ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 105 2017 7.6.6 West Crossing Loop The proposed West Crossing Loop shown in Figure 7-10 is critical to development on the City’s west and north side and it provides an extremely important second interstate water main crossing that ties the Yukon Tank to the remainder of the water system north of Interstate 90. The existing single interstate crossing makes the City extremely vulnerable to a main failure under the interstate. If the existing interstate crossing main were to fail, the system will be able to meet domestic demands if all wells are available, but it cannot support a fire demand. The West Crossing Loop extends from the end of the 10-inch main on West Central Avenue to a connection point with the SID 78 water main system near the Flying J truck stop on Amsterdam Churchill Road. The main is routed through a commercial area that contains the Bruce Industrial Park. This area currently does not have City water service. The proposed main will provide service to the area and provide key support to the remainder of the City system. This loop will eventually tie to the proposed upper pressure district so that the storage capacity that will be available in the upper pressure district can help support the lower pressure district in an emergency or when demands are high. A 16-inch main is proposed from the connection point with the upper pressure district south of the interstate to a point in the proposed Prescott Property where the 16-inch main continues north. The larger 16-inch main helps maintain potential flow velocities less than 5 feet per second. A 12-inch main will connect the16-inch main to the existing 10-inch main on West Central Avenue and to SID 78 south of the Interstate. Two 10-inch cross connection mains to the existing system are shown in the Industrial Park area. These proposed mains tie the West Crossing Loop to City’s existing system and complete a major supply loop to serve this area. These 10 inch mains are not a part of the West Crossing Loop but they are recommended in the future to provide adequate fire protection and service to the area and support the City’s existing system along Jackrabbit Lane. The estimated cost of the West Crossing loop is $5,103,000. This includes that portion of the loop in the Prescott Property which may be constructed as a separate project by the developer of that property. The two Industrial Park 10-inch cross tie mains are assumed to be installed as development proceeds in this area. A cost estimate is not provided. ---PAGE BREAK--- SHEET DESIGNED BY: QUALITY CHECK: JOB NO. FIELDBOOK DRAWN BY: DATE: B16-048 XX APRIL 2017 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA REV DATE REVISION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 WEST CROSSING LOOP PRIORITY NO. 9 FIGURE 7-11.DWG 7-10 JLB KW MM W T EXISTING DESCRIPTION EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) W W W W. MADISON AVE. ARDEN DR. ANDREA DR. WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND LEGEND NOT TO SCALE ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 107 2017 7.6.8 Prescott Subdivision Development The proposed Prescott subdivision on the northwest side of the City has a projected population of 3,261. A preliminary layout of the subdivision water mains is shown on Figure 7-11. The proposed subdivision water main sizes have been revised where appropriate to be compatible with recommendations of this report for the West Crossing Loop, the Northeast Loop Tie, and potential future development to the west within the planning area boundary. The Northeast Loop that serves the Ryen Glenn Estates, Meadowlark Trails and other future development on the north and east side of Belgrade needs to be completed by connecting to the West Crossing Loop through the Northeast Loop Tie and Prescott Property main system. The loop tie through the Prescott Property provides the greatest benefit to potential development on the northwest side of the City. The extension of the 10-inch main on Central Avenue and installation of the missing 10-inch segment are required to provide service to meet recommended fire flows for existing development on the northwesterly end of Central Avenue and to provide service to the Prescott Property. A cost estimate for the water system on the Prescott Property is not included herein since it is a private future development. The proposed zoning for the Prescott Property is primarily R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4. A small section of B-2 zoning is proposed along the southern boundary. Recommended fire flows will vary from 1,000 gpm for R-1, 1,500 gpm for R-2, 2,000 gpm for R-3 and R-4, and 2,500 gpm for B-2. A minimum of three wells will be constructed to support this development. Two of the wells will be located within the subdivision as indicated on the drawing. A third well will be located on the east side of Belgrade on the Northeast Loop. A minimum of three wells at 600 gpm per well are needed to serve the subdivision if one of the wells is out of service. The scenario modeled;  Two new wells.  The 10-inch main on West Central Avenue has been extended to connect with the subdivision and the missing 10-inch segment has been installed. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 108 2017  The Northeast Loop Tie has been constructed between the Northeast Loop and the Prescott Property.  The West Crossing Loop has been completed. 7.6.9 Spooner Road Main The missing main segment on Spooner Road should be completed with a 10-inch piping section- see Figure 7-12. The existing 8-inch main can remain in place. The estimated cost of this limited replacement is $285,000. ---PAGE BREAK--- PRESCOTT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT PRIORITY NO. 10 7-11 W T NEW DESCRIPTION EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) W W W CRUISER LN. BOLINGER RD. WESTWOOD CIR. QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: FIGURE 7-12 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND LEGEND NOT TO SCALE ---PAGE BREAK--- QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: FIGURE 7-13 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB SPOONER ROAD MAIN APRIL 2017 PRIORITY NO. 11 B16-048 7-12 W T EXISTING DESCRIPTION EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) SPOONER RD. JACKRABBIT LN. MAYFAIR DR. GOLDEN WEST DR. WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND LEGEND NOT TO SCALE ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 111 2017 7.7 Future System- 2028 and Beyond By 2028 all improvements suggested above should be complete and in place. The system will reflect Figure 7-13. Sometime between 2028 and 2038, the growing City will require further expansion which will include the need for an Upper Pressure District. A significant part of the commercial development is projected to occur in a strip fashion along Jackrabbit Lane in the Upper Pressure District. In addition to commercial development, residential population is expected to grow. All of the residential zoned areas south of the Interstate are in the proposed Upper Pressure District. Currently, the only existing water distribution system south of the Interstate is in the Lower Pressure District; SID 78. There are no existing wells, storage tanks, or distribution mains to serve the Upper Pressure District or other portions of the lower pressure district. A completely new system must be developed. The projected water system needed to serve the area by the year 2038 is shown on Figure 7-14. Depending on the order in which wells and tanks are constructed, it may be necessary to have a booster pump station installed between the Lower and Upper Pressure Districts in order to supply adequate pressures within the Upper Pressure District due to the difference in ground elevation. Transversely, if enough wells and tanks are installed to provide adequate pressure to the Upper Pressure District, pressure reducing valves will be needed between the two districts so that the Upper Pressure District does not increase the pressure in the Lower Pressure District too much. 7.7.1 Upper District Primary Loop The Upper District Primary Loop provides the basic building block for development of the Upper Pressure District along with a 750,000 gallon elevated tank which is proposed to be located north of East Cameron Rd between Jackrabbit Lane and Alaska Rd. S. Initially a minimum of two wells are needed. The number of wells will continue to increase as development proceeds so that maximum day demand can be met with one well out of service. Another elevated storage tank will be warranted as the population continues to grow. The West Arterial extends a 16- inch main from Cameron Bridge Road along Jackrabbit Lane to Frank Road. It continues east as a 16-inch main and then again north to tie into the proposed East Crossing Loop on Alaska Road. A pressure reducing station is required before Alaska Road since the East Crossing Loop is in the lower pressure district. A pressure reducing station is also needed at the proposed tie to SID 78 near Frank Road. ---PAGE BREAK--- SHEET DESIGNED BY: QUALITY CHECK: JOB NO. FIELDBOOK DRAWN BY: DATE: B16-048 XX APRIL 2017 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA REV DATE REVISION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 FIGURE 7-13 PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM 2028 .DWG 7-13 JLB KW MM W T EXISTING DESCRIPTION WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) W W W W W W W W W W T T LEGEND NOT TO SCALE ---PAGE BREAK--- SHEET DESIGNED BY: QUALITY CHECK: JOB NO. FIELDBOOK DRAWN BY: DATE: B16-048 XX APRIL 2017 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA REV DATE REVISION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 FIGURE 7-14 PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM 2038 .DWG 7-14 JLB KW MM W T EXISTING DESCRIPTION WATER MAIN COLOR CODING LEGEND EXIST MAIN DIAMETER (IN) LEGEND NOT TO SCALE W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W T T T ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 7 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 113 2017 The estimated cost of the Upper District Primary Loop is $18,306,000. The cost of easements or property acquisition is excluded. 7.7.2 Thunder Road Tie The existing 8-inch main on the east end of Thunder Road in SID 78 should ultimately be extended east and tie into the West Loop Tie. This will help support development in the area and provides some added service reliability to the area. A potential cost is not provided since this is for future development and not a required basic service item. 7.8 WaterCAD Results All improvements up until 2028 system were modeled in WaterCAD both as a steady state run which shows an instantaneous snap shot of the system and as an Extended Period Simulation (EPS) run. For all analysis in this report, the tanks were initially ¾ full, and the Shop Well was taken out of commission. The results of the steady state runs show pressures and fire flow availability at all junction nodes in the system and can be seen in Appendix D as listed below in Table 7-7. EPS results are discussed in more detail in Chapter 8 and are included in table form in Appendix D. TABLE 7-7: FIGURES OF PRESSURE AND FIRE FLOW Improvement Steady State Pressures (Figure No.) Fire Flow Available (Figure No.) Mountain View Park Well 7-15 7-16 West Central Ave. 10 in Main Replacement 7-17 7-18 Northeast Loop Tie 7-19 7-20 New Well Main Upgrades 7-21 7-22 South Central Commercial District 7-23 7-24 West Crossing Loop 7-25 7-26 Prescott Property Development 7-27 7-28 Spooner Road Main 7-29 7-30 East Crossing Loop 7-31 7-32 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 8 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 114 2017 Chapter 8 - Water Storage 8.1 Introduction Water storage is vital to an overall water system. In most systems, the wells do not produce enough water to fulfill instantaneous demands at all times. Water storage provides a way to meet demands without requiring more wells. Of great importance are fire flow demands that require substantial flows in addition to regular demands, which would be challenging to meet without water storage. Water storage continues water supply during events such as power or pump failures. It also helps sustain a relatively uniform pressure with minimal pressure fluctuations while providing a means of controlling start/stop cycles of the water supply wells based on tank levels. Due to the importance of water storage, there are several requirements and regulations that will be discussed in this section. 8.2 Description of Existing Storage Facilities Existing water storage facilities consist of a 500,000 gallon elevated water storage tank located at the City Shop Complex by the airport and another 500,000 gallon elevated tank that was constructed in 2008 near the end of Yukon Lane, south of the Interstate, next to the Yukon Well. The tanks have the following physical features: TABLE 8-1: STORAGE TANK INFORMATION Storage Tank Characteristics Diameter (ft) Height to Low Water Level (ft) Height to Overflow (ft) Overflow Elevation (ft) Storage Capacity (gal) City Shop Tank 56’0” 112.0 141.85 4604.5 500,000 Yukon Tank 57’4” 82.0 114.0 4604.5 500,000 Total Storage (gal) 1,000,000 8.3 Storage Requirements Storage requirements are closely tied to pumping capacity, supply redundancy, and backup power, thus all will be discussed in this section with the storage requirements. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 8 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 115 2017 Storage Size The 2014 edition of DEQ Circular 1, Chapter 7 establishes the following storage requirements: Storage facilities must be sufficient, as determined from engineering studies, to supplement source capacity to satisfy all system demands occurring on the maximum day, plus fire flow demands where fire protection is provided. A. The minimum allowable storage must be equal to the average day demand plus fire flow demand, as defined below, where fire protection is provided. B. Any volume less than that required under A. above must be accompanied by a Storage Sizing Engineering Analysis, as defined in the glossary. Large non- residential demands must be accompanied by a Storage Sizing Engineering Analysis and may require additional storage to meet system demands. C. Where fire protection is provided, fire flow demand must satisfy the governing fire protection agency recommendation, or without such a recommendation, the fire code adopted by the State of Montana. D. Each pressure zone of systems with multiple pressure zones must be analyzed separately and provided with sufficient storage to satisfy the above requirements. E. Excessive storage capacity should be avoided to prevent water quality deterioration and potential freezing problems. Pumping Requirements Source capacity must be considered since storage facilities must be sufficient to supplement source capacity, which is determined directly by the well pumping capacity. The 2014 edition of DEQ Circular 1, Chapter 6 describes the following applicable requirements: A. Pumps. At least two pumping units must be provided. With any pump out of service, the remaining pump or pumps must be capable of providing the maximum daily pumping demand of the system. Additional capacity may be required if storage for the pump station service area is inadequate per Section 7.0.1 of the Circular. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 8 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 116 2017 B. Standby Power. 1. When power failure would result in cessation of minimum essential service, sufficient power must be provided to meet average day demand through a standby or auxiliary power source. 2. Auxiliary power is not required when documentation is submitted that shows power outages are infrequent and of short duration and fire protection is not diminished by power failure. 8.4 Design Parameters Considering all requirements for water storage, the design parameters for this Master Plan are: 1. Average and maximum day water demands are as defined in Chapter 5. 2. Storage in the lower pressure district is based on a maximum fire flow of 3,000 gpm with a 3-hour duration. 3. Storage in the upper pressure district will be based on a maximum fire flow of 2,500 gpm with a 2-hour duration. 4. Storage Sizing Engineering Analysis utilized each of the following design requirements in order to check performance: a. The average maximum day flow plus fire flow with the largest well out of service. b. The most extreme domestic flow demand (peak hour) occurs in the evening around 10:00 p.m. on maximum day. Fire flow extends from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. 5. Standby power is only required on enough wells to meet average day demands as required in DEQ Chapter 6. All wells with or without standby power are utilized to meet maximum day plus fire flow demands. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 8 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 117 2017 8.5 Storage Sizing 8.5.1 Current Water Storage Required Based on DEQ Circular 1 Chapter 7, the existing water storage requirement is the total of the Average Day Demand (see chapter 5) and the higher of the fire flow requirements above; 𝐴𝐷𝐷+ 𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑒 𝐹𝑙𝑜𝑤= 𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 (𝑔𝑎𝑙) 1,724,627 𝑔𝑎𝑙+ (3,000𝑔𝑝𝑚 𝑥 3 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠) = 𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 (𝑔𝑎𝑙) 1,724,627 𝑔𝑎𝑙+ 540,000 𝑔𝑎𝑙= 𝟐, 𝟐𝟔𝟒, 𝟔𝟐𝟕 𝒈𝒂𝒍 Belgrade currently has one million gallons of water storage and needs an additional 1,264,627 gallons to be compliant with DEQ requirements without doing a storage sizing analysis. 8.5.2 Future Water Storage Required The Average Day Demand for the year 2038 can be seen in Chapter 5. Using the 2038 ADD and assuming the fire flow requirements will remain the same, the water storage required in 2038 is calculated below; 2038 𝐴𝐷𝐷+ 𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑒 𝐹𝑙𝑜𝑤= 𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 (𝑔𝑎𝑙) 2,849,457 𝑔𝑎𝑙+ (3,000𝑔𝑝𝑚 𝑥 3 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠) = 𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 (𝑔𝑎𝑙) 2,849,457 𝑔𝑎𝑙+ 540,000 𝑔𝑎𝑙= 𝟑, 𝟑𝟖𝟗, 𝟒𝟓𝟕, 𝒈𝒂𝒍 8.6 Storage Sizing Engineering Analysis Using WaterCAD, Extended Period Simulation (EPS) simulates the water system over a 24 hour period in order to show how the system reacts as fluctuations in use occur throughout the day. For this report, a 5-day simulation was used in which the first day simulated 80% of the MDD. The second day modeled 90% of MDD. The third day the full MDD was used with a 3 hour fire simulated near the high school from 8 pm to 11 pm. The fourth day demands return to 90% of MDD and the last day of the EPS has demands of 80% of MDD. The scenarios are described more specifically below and levels in the storage tanks were recorded at the end of the simulated fire. Each scenario below builds on the previous scenarios. Improvements that did not change the storage tank levels by more than 1% are not outlined in ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 8 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 118 2017 this chapter. All results from the EPS runs are shown as tank levels at the beginning and end of each day. The Tables can all be seen in Appendix D as listed below in Table 8-2. TABLE 8-2: EPS RESULTS IN APPENDIX D EPS (Table No.) Existing System with New Well #7 8-3 New Well #8 8-4 West Central Ave. 10 in Main Replacement 8-5 Replacement of 4-inch Diameter Piping 8-6 Northeast Loop Tie 8-7 New Well Main Upgrade 8-8 Broadway Well Improvements (1,000 gpm) 8-9 South Central Commercial District 8-10 West Crossing Loop 8-11 Prescott Property Development 8-12 Spooner Road Main 8-13 East Crossing Loop (actually at #3 in upgrade priority due to this analysis) 8-14 8.6.1 Existing System with New Well #7 In this scenario, the New Well is in place with assumed capacity of 700 gpm. The water storage tanks will have the following minimum volumes remaining at the end of the fire: City Shop Tank……………0% full Yukon Tank………………..50.5% full 8.6.2 New Well #8 In this scenario the proposed Well #8 is in place with assumed capacity of 700 gpm. The water storage tanks will have the following minimum volumes remaining at the end of the fire: City Shop Tank……………8.4% full Yukon Tank………………..70.1% full ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 8 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 119 2017 8.6.3 Broadway Well Improvements In this scenario the Broadway well is improved as suggested in Chapter 6 which increases the flow to 1,000 gpm. See Appendix D, Figures 8-1 and 8-2, for expected pressures during typical operation and fire flow availability. The water storage tanks will have the following minimum volumes remaining at the end of the fire: City Shop Tank……………17.6% full Yukon Tank………………..74.6% full 8.6.4 West Crossing Loop In this scenario the West Loop as been completed which allows for better flow throughout the system. The water storage tanks will have the following minimum volumes remaining at the end of the fire: City Shop Tank……………27.5% full Yukon Tank………………..63.6% full 8.6.5 Prescott Property Development In this scenario the Prescott Property has been developed with two additional wells. Demands reflect the projected 2028 maximum day demands. The water storage tanks will have the following minimum volumes remaining at the end of the fire: City Shop Tank……………38.4% full Yukon Tank………………..69.2% full 8.6.6 East Loop In this scenario, the East Loop has been constructed. All other improvements reflect the scenario above. The water storage tanks will have the following minimum volumes remaining at the end of the fire: City Shop Tank……………41.8% full Yukon Tank………………..65.7% full *Note that because of this analysis, the report recommends moving this improvement up to third on the upgrade priority list to improve tank balance and hydraulics in the north side of tow. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 8 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 120 2017 8.7 Recommended Storage Improvements By 2038 it is expected that Belgrade will have expanded to the South and that expansion in combination with increased population will necessitate an Upper Pressure District as discussed in Chapter 7. Developing the Upper Pressure District will require additional water storage. 8.7.1 Tank Size and Number Recommendation Two 750,000 gallon storage tanks are recommended for the upper pressure district. This is adequate not only for projected development through 2038 but also adequate to support additional development within the planning area boundary beyond the design year. Two tanks are recommended so that one tank can be removed for maintenance when necessary and still provide minimum essential water service and reasonable fire protection to the pressure district. One tank should be constructed before development proceeds in the upper pressure district. This tank should be adequate for about 10 years or more. The second tank can be constructed when development justifies construction. The size of the second tank should also be reviewed at that time to determine if it is still appropriate for the development in the area. 8.7.2 Tank Overflow Elevation The overflow elevation must be set to meet minimum desired pressures in the upper portion of the pressure district without creating excessive pressures in the lower portion of the pressure district. The highest ground elevations within the planning area boundary (approximate elevation of 4,540 feet) occur along Valley Center Road. A minimum pressure of 45 psi is recommended at this location when the tank is nearly empty. This requires a tank low water level elevation of approximately 4,644 feet. Assuming a tank operating depth of 32 feet, the corresponding overflow elevation is 4,676 feet. Pressure at Valley Center Road will be about 59 psi when the tank is full. This is close to the recommended operating pressure of 60 psi. The lowest ground elevations in the upper pressure district occur on the northern boundary of the pressure district that generally follows the 4,490 foot contour elevation. Pressures along this contour will be about 96 psi when the tanks are full and demand is low. This is less than the maximum 100 psi without the pressure regulation requirement in DEQ Circular 1. Individual customers in this area may wish to install pressure regulators on their services as ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 8 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 121 2017 recommended by the International Plumbing Code. Pressures decrease with increasing ground elevation to the south. Recommended tank overflow elevation is 4,676 feet. Recommended tank bowl depth is 32 to 34 feet. 8.7.3 Tank Location The two tanks should be separated as far as reasonably practical and be centrally located as much as possible in order to take maximum advantage of their benefit to the transmission system. Preliminary information from tank constructors indicates the maximum height range for tanks of this size in this seismic range is about 160 to 170 feet without requiring a special tank design which would be substantially more expensive to fabricate and construct The site shown on Fig. 7-28 represents a potential location for the first tank. The tank can potentially be built further to the south at higher ground elevations depending on the availability of a suitable tank site. Tank locations further north are not recommended because of ground elevation. Actual ground elevations should be determined and tank manufacturers should be contacted for additional height recommendations before trying to obtain a tank site. 8.7.4 Estimated Cost of New Tanks The current estimated construction cost for each 750,000 gallon elevated tank is $3,758,000 including a small amount of associated piping and engineering costs. Land costs will add additional project cost. 8.7.5 Develop and Implement Fire Flow Ordinance Developing and implementing a fire flow ordinance will prevent any new construction from affecting the amount of water storage needed in the future from exceeding the water storage currently needed. Options to consider could require all construction in specific zoning areas to be compatible with current flows or could include an ordinance requiring automatic fire sprinkler systems for public and commercial buildings and multi-family structures that have fire flow requirements greater than single-family residences with a fire rating area less than 3,600 square feet. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 8 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 122 2017 8.8 SCADA System The existing Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System records the water level in the City Shop tank and automatically starts and stops the well pumps based on the tank water level via a radio telemetry system. Well operating times, flow rates, total flow, and alarms are also recorded at the master control station which is located at the City Shop Complex. The SCADA system will have to be reprogrammed as additional wells and tanks are added to the system. The existing control monitoring system will eventually need to be completely upgraded to accommodate system growth, new control and alarm system additions, and replace outdated hardware and software. The capability of the existing system has not been evaluated as part of this report. Based on age alone, an upgraded system will probably be needed within 5 to 10 years. Various hardware components may need replacement before then. Although adequate, the system is severely outdated and slow to use. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 9 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 123 2017 Chapter 9- Staffing Requirements 9.1 Introduction This chapter evaluates the staffing requirements that are necessary for the City of Belgrade to sufficiently operate and maintain the City water system. Although some assumptions were made in regard to man hours required for certain tasks, industry standards were applied when possible. Research and evaluation into man hour requirements utilized by cities of similar size to Belgrade was also completed. 9.2 Summary of Operation and Maintenance Tasks The following O&M tasks should be considered standard practice by municipal water systems in order to maintain the integrity and efficiency of their water system: Daily/Weekly O&M Requirements  Visual observation of storage reservoirs  Visual observation of wells O&M Requirements  DEQ sampling, monitoring and reporting requirements  Meter reading (completed over several days on a basis) Annual O&M Requirements  Exercising of valves  Hydrant flushing Irregular O&M requirements  System repairs  Work orders for new service In addition to the above mentioned tasks that are typical of all municipal water systems, the City of Belgrade also has staffing requirements related to the City Splash Park. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 9 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 124 2017 9.3 Man Hour & Staffing Requirements for O&M Tasks For each O&M task listed in the previous section, the man hours required to complete each task were estimated. The hours were converted as necessary to annual requirements in order to have a complete total. At the end of this section, the hours for each task are totaled in order to develop the staffing requirements necessary to properly operate and maintain the City of Belgrade water system. Visual Observation of Storage Reservoirs This task should preferably be completed on a daily basis during the work week, but on a weekly basis at the minimum. The inspection would include travel to and from the reservoir sites and a quick visual observation of the following components for any signs of damage, deteriorated condition, or water quality issues:  Tank security (fences, locks, signage, etc)  Foundation  Exterior walls  Overflow or drain lines  Roof (including vents, ladders, hatches) It is estimated that one person could complete a thorough visual observation of the two storage tanks, including travel time, within three hours. Assuming this task is completed on a weekly basis, the total man hours required for visual observation of the storage reservoirs is estimated at 156 hours per year. Visual Observation of Well This task should preferably be completed on a daily basis during the work week, but on a weekly basis at the minimum. The inspection would include travel to and from the well sites and a quick visual observation of the following components for any signs of damage, deteriorated condition, or water quality issues:  Well casing  Well cap  Well vent ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 9 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 125 2017  Electrical Conduit (if present) In addition, City staff should complete a visual observation of the area surrounding the well head to ensure that potential sources of contamination have not been introduced to the site (chemicals, livestock, etc). Ideally, the visual observation of the wells could be completed at the same time that City staff is making their rounds for observation of the storage reservoirs. It is estimated that each observation of a single well could be completed within half an hour. Currently, the City has seven wells. Assuming this task is also completed on a weekly basis when reservoir observation takes place, the total man hours required for observation of the wells is estimated at 182 hours per year. DEQ Sampling, Monitoring, and Reporting Requirements For the Belgrade water system, The DEQ PWS Monitoring Schedule lists one “analyte group name” that requires sampling, and that is for coliform. There are 48 other required analyte groups that must be sampled on frequencies that vary between annually and every nine years. For most analytes, the sample count required is only one, but coliform sampling requires eight samples and the lead/copper sampling requires 20 samples. In order to develop a reasoning for the sampling man hour estimate, the average number of samples that the City must collect on an annual basis was first calculated. This is presented below: Analyte Group Name or # of Analytes Sample Count Required Sample Frequency Total number of Samples per Year Coliform 8 96 Lead Copper 20 Every 3 years 7 6 Analytes 1 Annually 6 26 Analytes 1 Every 3 years 9 15 Analytes 1 Every 9 years 2 Total samples per year 120 Although the total number of samples will vary per year depending on the monitoring period for each analyte group, this is a starting point for estimating the total man hours required by the City to comply with DEQ monitoring. It was then assumed that each sample would require 2 hours ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 9 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 126 2017 to complete which would take into account travel time for staff to reach the sample point locations, collection of the water sample, in-house lab testing, and reporting to DEQ. This results in an estimated total of 240 man hours per year for DEQ sampling, monitoring, and reporting. Meter Reading According to City staff, the City reads meters each month between the 25th and end of the month and the process usually takes two days. This is consistent with meter reading requirements that other cities of similar size report. Meter reading capabilities and staffing requirements will vary depending on whether or not the meters are manually read or read by radio. For manual reads, experienced personnel can read an average of 250 to 300 meters per day. For radio reads, the total number of meters read per day can be as high as several thousand. The City of Belgrade has nearly 2,600 meters that are read and they are remotely read, but there is travel time involved with driving between meters. Assuming there is one staff member remotely reading meters for two days each month, the total man hours required for meter reading on an annual basis is 192 hours per year. Exercising of Valves Exercising of valves is an important maintenance tool to keep the water system operating efficiently. If valves are not used over a prolonged period, there is potential for them to corrode and get stuck. Ideally, all valves should be exercised on an annual basis. Valves can be exercised manually with hand tools or a valve exerciser can be used. A valve exercise is a portable, truck-mounted, or trailer-mounted tool that are powered by electric, hydraulic, or pneumatic means. Although valve exercisers take longer than manually exercising the valve, they typically perform a better job. The City of Belgrade exercises their valves manually. Based on discussions with other municipalities that are of similar size to Belgrade, an experienced crew of two people can exercise an average of 25 valves per day. Existing City water system maps were reviewed and it was determined that the City of Belgrade has approximately 1,700 valves on their water system main line. At an average of 25 valves per day, this would require 68 days for a crew of three people to exercise each valve once a year. This results in an estimated 1,632 man hours per year for exercising valves (three people at 544 hours each). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 9 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 127 2017 Hydrant Flushing Hydrant flushing for all hydrants within a water system should be completed on an annual basis. The City of Belgrade follows this schedule and City staff provided their hydrant flushing data for the year 2015. On average, hydrants were flushed for an average duration of 11 minutes. This time does not include travel time to each hydrant, setup, or cleanup. To conservatively estimate the total time required for flushing all hydrants, it is estimated that one hour be allocated to flushing each hydrant. This task also requires a minimum of two people to complete. The City of Belgrade currently has 485 hydrants within their system. Based on this number, the total man hours required for hydrant flushing is estimated at 1,455 hours per year (three people at 485 hours each). System Repair As previously mentioned in this plan, the City currently has an average water loss of 30%; much of which is thought to be attributed to system leakage. As with any municipal water system, repair of leaks within the system is a necessity. Leaks can increase during the winter when pipes freeze and break, but they also occur randomly throughout the year due to aging infrastructure, or if accidently hit during construction projects. Based on discussions with municipalities of similar size to Belgrade, water system repairs typically account for 20 percent of the O&M requirements. And system repairs usually require a minimum of three workers, but often times more. A conservative staffing requirement for system leak repair is to assume a staffing requirement of five workers at 20 percent of the annual full-time work hours (annual work hours equals 2080 hours based on 40 hours per week for 52 weeks a year). This results in an estimated 2,080 man hours required for system leak repair (five people at 416 hours each). Work Orders for System Expansion City growth is expected to remain steady within the City of Belgrade and this will require expansion of the existing water system. As the system expands, the City will have work orders for new mainline construction, service connections, hydrants, and other system components. Man hour requirements will fluctuate with the specific type of expansion project, but for estimating purposes, it is assumed that new construction work efforts may require up to five City staff at one time. A fairly conservative estimate for developing system expansion man hour requirements is to assume that the City will receive a minimum of four work orders per month ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 9 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 128 2017 (one per week). It is then assumed that that each work order will require five City employees working 8 hour days for one day. This results in five employees working 32 hours each per month on system expansion. This should be considered an average work order requirement since some work orders will require fewer staff and may not require a full day’s work, while other work orders may require several days work to complete. Based on these assumptions, an estimated 1,920 man hours per year are required for system expansion work orders (five employees at 384 hours each). Splash Park The Splash Park is located within the Lewis and Clark Park and typically operates between mid- June to mid-September. According to City staff, operation and maintenance requirements for the Splash Park dictate that one City staff member spend half a day, every day while it’s open, at the Park to complete routine operations. This results in an estimated 360 man hours per year for Splash Park O&M. 9.4 Summary of Man Hour Requirements The following table provides a summary of the man hour requirements described in the previous section. The following assumptions were made when creating the man hour summary:  One employee would be assigned to complete visual observation of the storage reservoirs and the wells (making one round trip site visit for all observations).  The employee who completes the observations of the reservoirs and well sites would also collect water samples for DEQ testing and monitoring requirements while making the rounds. The table allocates the estimated man hours from the previous section among staffing positions while ensuring that no one employee has more than 2,000 hours allocated to them for the year. This takes into account the fact that there are 2,080 regular work hours in a year (40 hours per week times 52 weeks per year) and a portion of these hours will be spent on vacation, sick leave, work training, etc. It is also understood that unforeseen or non- typical events can occur within the water system, such as construction of a new well or major leak repair, and some cushion needs to be provided in the availability of city staff. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 9 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 129 2017 Summary of Annual Man Hour Requirements Task Staff #1 Annual Man Hours Staff #2 Annual Man Hours Staff #3 Annual Man Hours Staff #4 Annual Man Hours Staff #5 Annual Man Hours Total Annual Hours Visual Observation of Storage Reservoirs 156 156 Visual Observation of Wells 182 182 DEQ Sampling, Monitoring & Reporting 240 240 Meter Reading 192 192 Exercising of Valves 544 544 1,088 Hydrant Flushing 485 485 970 System Repair 416 416 416 416 416 2,080 Work Orders (New Service) 384 384 384 384 384 1,920 Splash Park O&M 360 360 Total Hours 1,378 1,352 1,829 1,829 800 7,188 As shown in the table, it is estimated that the City of Belgrade should have a minimum of five employees that are dedicated full-time to the operation and maintenance of the City’s water system. It is very important to note that this estimate if for field crew man hours. This estimate does not take into account the managerial or office tasks that are associated with the water system. There should be additional staffing positions in place to account for the various water system management, finance, and associated office duties. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 10 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 130 2017 Chapter 10- Vulnerability Assessment & Wellhead Protection Plan 10.1 Vulnerability Assessment A Vulnerability Assessment and Emergency Response Plan was prepared by the City of Belgrade with the assistance of the Montana Rural Water Association in June 2004. This evaluation addressed concerns with the City’s distribution, supply, and storage system. It identified and prioritized areas of the water system that are vulnerable to vandalism. A summary of the high priority assets recommendations are as follows:  Increase security patrols and perimeter checks at wells and tanks  Add fencing around wells  Ensure anti-climb measures are in place at tanks  Add security lighting at wells and tanks  Ensure hatches and screens are in place at tanks  Procure emergency generator at booster stations  Provide additional redundancy in SCADA control capabilities  Provide emergency power to repeater on tower to provide survivable radio communications system architecture  Use entry alarm capability for wells Other medium and low priority items are discussed in detail in the Vulnerability Assessment. The report also provided an implementation schedule for the above recommendations. 10.2 Wellhead Protection Plan A Wellhead Protection Plan was completed in November 1995 by the City of Belgrade with the assistance of the Montana Rural Water Association. The purpose of the plan is to protect a community’s groundwater from contamination. Areas that contribute to aquifers used for a public water system are delineated. Activities within these areas that pose a risk to the community water supply such as chemical storage, sewer systems, and land uses are identified along with the potential for contamination. Computer modeling of the aquifer determines the probability of contamination to the water supply in the event of a hazardous material spill or other source of contamination. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 10 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 131 2017 The State of Montana recommends a three zone management system. The first level is the restricted area and consists of a 100-foot radius around each well. Within this radius, State law excluded specified activities such as sewer mains or septic systems. The second level is the protected area and consists of the area within a five-year delineated capture zone or a 2,500 foot radius around each well. The third level is the managed area and is the recharge area. This area is defined by natural hydrogeologic boundaries such as rivers, groundwater divides, faults and mountain ranges. At the time of the 1995, Belgrade had four water supply wells. The capture zones around each well were modeled taking into account the geology, hydrogeology, and construction of the well. Included was an inventory of potential contamination sources and the probability that they would harm Belgrade’s water source. The evaluation provided in the Wellhead Protection Plan shows that the four Belgrade wells have a high degree of protection from surface contaminants. A copy of the Plan is included in the Appendix C. Considering that there are now six well in Belgrade, and soon to be seven, another Well Head Protection Plan should be completed. Although there is not a law stating when or how often this plan should be reevaluated, as the water system changes, it would be appropriate to update the Well Protection Plan. The last one was over 20 years ago. 10.3 Water Source Assessment The Source Water Protection Program within the Montana Department of Environmental Quality prepared a Water Source Assessment for the City of Belgrade in 2006. This assessment outlines the major concerns for the groundwater in Belgrade. The most concerning potential contaminants stem from the possibility of sewage leaking into the groundwater from damaged septic or sewage systems. It was recommended by the DEQ to maintain, rehabilitate, and replace existing sewer lines. Monitoring of well water is not only highly suggested, but it is required. In the event that there is contamination, well monitoring will detect the problem so it can be remedied quickly. Of moderate concern is the contamination that can occur from agriculture fertilizers, chemicals associated with transportation, and leakage from underground storage tanks. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 11 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 132 2017 Chapter 11- Financial 11.1 History of Revenues and Expenditures Table 10-1 shows the history of revenues and expenditures for Belgrade for the last three fiscal years. TABLE 11-1: HISTORY OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES Description FY 12/13 FY13/14 FY 14/15 ASSSETS Cash & cash equivalents 1,051,045 977,249 570,870 Receivables 89,307 114,020 111,855 Total Current Assets 1,140,352 1,091,269 682,725 Other Assets 8,583 Restricted cash and equivalents 343,601 571,051 572,071 Total Other Assets 352,184 571,051 572,071 Property, plant & equip. 13,681,338 13,745,211 13,608,240 Accumulated depreciation & amortization (4,379,265) (5,020,626) (5,641,673) Net property, plant & equip. 9,302,073 8,724,585 7,967,167 Total Assets 10,794,609 10,386,905 9,221,963 LIABILITIES Current liabilities 131,104 795,000 148,740 Noncurrent liabilities 3,232,880 2,594,349 2,691,031 Total Liabilities 3,363,984 3,389,349 2,839,771 NET ASSETS Total net assets 7,430,625 6,997,556 6,347,374 Total liabilities & fund equity 10,794,609 10,386,905 9,187,145 OPERATING REVENUES Charges for services 1,056,129 1,154,796 1,173,945 OPERATING EXPENSES Total operating expenses 1,197,558 1,881,386 1,210,471 Operating Income (141,429) (726,590) (36,526) NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES) Total non operating revenues (expenses) (68,646) 406,521 (63,144) Income before other revenues (210,075) (320,069) (99,670) ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 11 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 133 2017 Description FY 12/13 FY13/14 FY 14/15 CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS & TRANFERS Total capital contributions & transfers (121,025) (113,000) (112,067) Change in Net Assets (331,100) (433,069) (211,737) NET ASSETS Beginning of Fiscal Year 7,761,725 7,430,625 6,997,556 NET ASSETS End of Fiscal Year 7,430,625 6,997,556 6,347,374 The cash flow for the water account is shown in the following table. TABLE 11-2: HISTORY OF CASH FLOW Cash Flow Description FY 12/13 FY13/14 FY 14/15 Net Cash Flow (Used) from Operations 398,677 551,769 (28,736) Net Cash Flow (Used) by Capital & Related Activities (121,025) (113,000) (105,810) Net Cash Flows Provided (Used) by Investing Activities (128,536) (294,985) (274,905) Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash & Cash Equivalents 161,474 153,654 (405,359) Cash & Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year 1,233,172 1,394,646 1,548,300 Cash & Cash Equivalents at End of Year 1,394,646 1,548,300 1,142,941 Classified as Current Assets 1,051,045 977,249 570,870 Classified as Restricted Assets 343,601 571,051 572,071 Totals $1,394,646 $1,548,300 $1,142,941 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 11 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 134 2017 11.2 Rate Schedules The current rate schedule for water usage was adopted by the City of Belgrade in November 2013 and is provided in the following table. TABLE 11-3: METERED WATER RATE SCHEDULE PER MONTH 0-5,000 $18.19 Over 5,000 gallons $18.19 + $1.37 per 1,000 gallons Note: At the time of this report the City was conducting a rate study to revise the existing rate schedule. 11.3 Residential and Commercial Users The following table gives the estimated number of users and the average cost per users for residential and commercial customers for 2012-2015. TABLE 11-4: AVERAGE USER COSTS 11.4 Impact Fees The City of Belgrade has adopted impact fees for streets and fire protection. Both the street and fire protection impact fees are assessed to anyone obtaining a building permit or an extension of a building permit that was issued before the effective date of the code adoption. For residential construction, the fee is assessed per house. For non-residential construction, the fees are assessed per square foot or in another unique manner dependent upon the building use. A copy of the City Ordinances involving impact fees is included in Appendix E. 11.5 Financial Plan A financial plan to fund the recommended improvements is not within the scope of work for this Master Plan. Average Number of Users Average Cost Per User 2012 Residential 2345 $27.85 Commercial 168 $52.86 2013 Residential 2416 $27.06 Commercial 158 $57.08 2014 Residential 2491 $24.88 Commercial 157 $59.07 2015 Residential 2538 $25.77 Commercial 159 $58.80 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 12 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 135 2017 Chapter 12- Environmental Considerations of Proposed Improvements 12.1 General. The environmental impacts of each proposed improvement will have to be assessed on an individual basis prior to and during the construction process. Depending on the nature and location of the improvement the environmental review may be as simple as the completion of several permits or entail a more involved Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or Environmental Assessment (EA). 12.2 Permits. 12.2.1 Stream Permitting Whenever construction is proposed in or near a body of water that is designated as a Water of the State of Montana a Joint Application for Proposed Work in Montana’s Streams, Wetlands, Floodplains and Other Water Bodies must be prepared. This application can be completed once and copies sent to the pertinent reviewing agencies. The applicable permits are:  310 Permit – Montana Natural Streambed and Land Preservation Act. This permit applies to work in or near a stream on public or private land.  124 Permit – Montana Stream Protection Act. This permit pertains to government projects only that may affect the bed or banks of any stream in the state.  Floodplain Permit – Montana Floodplain and Floodway Management Act. This permit pertains to any new construction within in a designated 100-year floodplain.  Section 404 Permit – Federal Clean Water Act. This permit is necessary if there will be any discharge or placement of fill material into state waters. This includes lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, and other aquatic sites.  Section 10 Permit – Federal Rivers and Harbors Act. This permit is necessary for work in, on, under or over any federally listed navigable water of the U.S. These rivers are the Yellowstone, Missouri and East Kootenai Rivers. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 12 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 136 2017  318 Authorization – Short-Term Water Quality Standard for Turbidity. This permit is necessary for any construction activity that will cause short-term or temporary violations of state surface water quality standards for turbidity.  Montana Land-Use License or Easement on Navigable Waters. This permit is required for any work that is proposed on lands below the low water mark of navigable rivers. 12.2.2 Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated w/ Construction Activity A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan must be prepared and submitted to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) if the construction activity results in the disturbance of equal to or greater than one acre of land and discharges to State waters. 12.2.3 Easements/Right-of-Way In some areas, facilities are located on or must cross private property. Common situations include Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNFS) right-of-way. Encroachment permits and/or easements are necessary for utility work within the MDT’s and BNSF’s right-of–ways. A permit from Montana Rail Link may be required since Montana Rail leases the track from BNFS and operators the railway in the Belgrade area. 12.3 Air Quality State, Federal and local air quality standards must be maintained during construction projects. The Montana Code Annotated 2015 section 75-2-102 states that “it is the public policy of this state….to achieve and maintain levels of air quality that will protect human health and safety and to the greatest degree practicable, prevent injury to plant and animal life and property, foster the comfort and convenience of the people, promote the economics and social development of this state, and facilitate the enjoyment of the natural attractions of this state”. 12.4 Hazardous Materials In some areas of the City there is the potential to uncover hazardous materials/soils when excavating for water system improvements. This can be due to leaking underground fuel storage tanks and from waste and/or dumping sites. Contaminated ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 12 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 137 2017 soils at these sites can be costly to remediate. Issues such as these should be investigated prior to construction to avoid delays and unnecessary construction costs. 12.5 Wetlands Wetlands may present in some areas of the City especially near streams or irrigation ditches. They must be identified and delineated prior to construction and if there is significant impact to wetlands, mitigation in the form of constructing new wetlands must be included as part of the project. The US Army Corp of Engineers must be contacted prior to work in or near wetlands to determine a project’s impact and necessary mitigation measures. 12.6 Floodplains The Gallatin River and numerous tributaries flow in the Belgrade area. Water system improvement projects within a 100-year floodplain will need to be permitted thru the Department of Natural Resources (DNRC) prior to beginning construction. 12.7 Groundwater Depth to groundwater varies throughout the City and during different times of the year. Construction methods will have to be adjusted depending on if groundwater is present during excavation for water system improvements. 12.8 Government Agency Notification and Comment During any environmental review and prior to construction several state agencies must be notified in writing about proposed projects in order to provide their comments. Some of these agencies are:  State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). SHPO must be contacted prior to construction so that they can determine if there are any historical or cultural sites that the proposed project will impact.  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department. These agencies must be contacted to determine if the proposed work will cause impacts to aquatic or biological species. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 12 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 138 2017  Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC). The DNRC must be notified prior to construction to determine if there are any impacts to the environment. 12.9 Historic and Cultural Issues The City of Belgrade and surrounding areas have a rich cultural and archeological history. The Lewis and Clark Expedition as well as Native American peoples have contributed greatly to the history of the area. During the construction of recommended improvements, the State Historical Preservation Office should be contacted to determine if any proposed work will impact historical or cultural landmarks or buildings. In areas that have been previously disturbed such as for water main replacement this should not pose a problem. In areas of new construction potential impacts to historical and/or cultural sites may dictate the final location of new infrastructure. The City and designers should be aware of these potential issues prior to construction of any improvements. 12.10 Fish and Wildlife Belgrade is situated in a valley that is surrounded by the Bridger, Gallatin, and Madison Mountain Ranges. The Gallatin River and numerous tributaries are all located within short distances from Belgrade. This area of the state has an abundance of wildlife including deer, elk, birds of prey, numerous small mammals and many aquatic species. The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks must be notified prior to the construction of any improvements to determine impact to threatened or endangered species. Each proposed improvement will have to be addressed on an individual basis. 12.11 Environmental Assessment Projects with federal or state funding must have an Environmental Assessment prepared that includes an evaluation of the impacts of the project on the following:  Agriculture  Air Quality  Aquatic Species  Endangered Species  Energy  Floodplains  Groundwater  Historic & Archaeological ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 12 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 139 2017 Sites  Housing  Land Use  Noise  Population  Public Services  Recreation & Open Space  Socio–Economic/ Environmental Justice  Solid Waste  Surface Water  Topography  Transportation  Undeveloped Land & Vacant Land  Wetlands  Wildlife ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 13 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 140 2017 Chapter 13- Summary of Recommendations 13.1 General The following recommendations for improvements to the City’s water distribution, supply, and storage systems for the 20-year planning period have been prioritized by need. In general, improvements to the existing system that reduce leakage and improve available fire flow to various parts of the City were assigned a higher priority than improvements necessary for growth and expansion of the system. Priority 1 – New Well #7 A new water supply well on is currently in the beginning stages of construction to meet peak hour domestic demand and prevent the City Shop Tank from dewatering during a 3,000 gpm fire or maximum day as currently required under DEQ regulations. Standby power will be installed. Regulatory authorities are requiring this well be constructed before the Prescott Development or any other significant new water demand can be added to the water system unless a deviation to the current interpretation of DEQ regulations is approved. The estimated cost of this well is $958,000. Priority 2 – New Well #8 An additional new water supply well is needed to provide adequate water pressure and fire flow availability south of the interstate. Standby power will likely be required. The estimated cost of this well without standby power is $850.000 plus $150,000 for land acquisition. The estimated cost is $1,000,000. Priority 3 – East Crossing Loop The East Crossing Loop extends from the existing 12-inch main on Yukon Road east along Alaska Road and then turns north crossing the Interstate, connecting to the Las Campanas Subdivision and ultimately connecting to the existing 12-inch main along the highway by the airport. The estimated cost of this main is $3,004,000. The cost of easements or property acquisition is excluded. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 13 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 141 2017 Priority 4 – West Central Ave. 10-Inch Main Available fire flows are currently inadequate for the zoning classification in northwesterly part of town along the westerly end of Central Ave. The existing 6-inch main on Central Ave needs to be replaced with a 10-inch main. This 10-inch main will form part of a future major main system that will serve the proposed Prescott Property development and complete the Northeast Loop that serves the entire north side of Belgrade. The estimated cost for this main extension is $982,000. Priority 5 – 4-Inch Main Replacement The older part of town was originally served with 4-inch cast iron mains with lead joint pipes. Some of these 4- inch mains are still in service and are thought to contribute to the total system leakage. These 4-inch mains are inadequate in size to provide recommended fire flows. Replacement of the 4-inch mains with 8-inch mains is recommended to improve fire protection and reduce leakage. The estimated costs for the 4-inch Main Replacement is $150,000. Priority 6 – Northeast Loop Tie The existing Northeast Loop main needs to be continued through the Prescott Property development and tied back into the 10-inch main on West Central Ave. in order to form a complete major main loop on the northwest side of town. The Northeast Loop Tie is needed to tie the existing 12-inch main on Spooner Road to the major main system proposed for the Prescott Property in order to complete the Northeast Loop. The estimated cost of the Northeast Loop Tie is $1,227,000. Priority 7 – New Well Main Upgrades The water main around the New Well needs to be upgraded to a 12-inch pipe from the current 6-inch pipe. This improvement will become increasingly needed as the Prescott property is developed in order to maintain adequate pressure and fire flow. The estimated cost for the New Well Water Main Upgrade is $1,426,000. Priority 8 – Broadway Well Improvements The Broadway Well is currently producing an average of just over 500 gpm. Improvements should be made to increase the well to 1,000 gpm as allowed but the corresponding water right. These improvements could include drilling deeper or even a ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 13 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 142 2017 new well. The cost for a new well is $1,000,000 which includes $150,000 to purchase land. Priority 9 – South Central Commercial District The south central commercial district is bounded on the north by Northern Pacific Avenue, on the south by Madison Avenue and on the west by Jackrabbit Lane. Needed fire flows in this area vary from 1,500 to 2,000 gpm. Fire flows in this area can be improved by replacement of some of the 6-inch mains with 8-inch mains and elimination of dead end mains by looping the mains. These improvements will insure fire flows above 2,500 gpm in this area. The estimated cost of these improvements is $1,165,000. Priority 10 – West Crossing Loop The proposed West Crossing Loop is critical to development on the City’s west and north side and it provides an extremely important second Interstate water main crossing that ties the Yukon Tank to the remainder of the water system north of the Interstate 90. The estimated cost of the West Crossing loop is $5,103,000. The two Industrial Park 10-inch cross tie mains are assumed to be installed as development proceeds in this area. A cost estimate is not provided. Priority 11 – Prescott Subdivision Development As the Prescott Subdivision develops, the water system in the area must also develop and expand to support the growing residential population of the development. It is recommended that a minimum of two wells are constructed at a minimum of 600 gpm each. A cost estimate for the water system on the Prescott Property is not included herein since it is a private future development. Priority 12 – Spooner Road Main The missing main segment on Spooner Road should be completed with a 10-inch piping section. The existing 8-inch main can remain in place. The estimated cost of this limited replacement is $285,000. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 13 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 143 2017 Priority 13 – Well Water Level Sensors This improvement installs water level sensors in Wells #1 through The purpose of these sensors is to monitor pumping water level, providing data for daily operation and periodically evaluating well and pump performance. The estimated cost is $38,000. Priority 14 – Source Water Protection Plan Source water protection planning for the City’s wells is recommended. The existing plan needs to be upgraded to the expanded water supply needs. The estimated cost of a plan is $20,000. Priority 15 – Well and Pump Performance Testing This improvement for Wells #2 and #3 conducts testing to evaluate well and pump performance to verify well capacity, pump condition, and to select new pumping parts, as needed. For the purpose of cost estimation, replacement of the pump bowl assembly is included. The estimated cost is $65,000. Priority 16 – Modifications to Well #5 The Well #5 pump is too large for the well. Modifications to the pump should be made at the City’s convenience. The estimated cost is $25,000. Priority 17 – Irrigation Study A study to evaluate the use of ditch water for irrigation of parks within the City limits is recommended. The City has acquired water rights for ditch water that could be utilized for irrigation if economically feasible. The estimated cost of this study is $20,000. Priority 18 – Upper Pressure District Projects An Upper Pressure District needs to be created in order to provide service south of the existing SID 78 Service area. Projected development for 2028 is illustrated in Figure 7- 14. Projected development for 2038 is illustrated in Figure 7-15. A new pressure district requires a minimum of two supply wells, distribution mains to the development area, and a minimum of one elevated water tank. In addition the Upper Pressure District should be connected to the existing lower pressure district in order to ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 13 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 144 2017 help support the lower district with storage from the upper district. Projected components and estimated cost of a basic network for this system are as follows: Two Wells with Standby Power $1,227,000 Basic Distribution System $6,020,000 Jackrabbit Ln. Main $1,566,000 West Loop Tie $1,977,000 Two Water Tanks $7,516,000 Total projected cost for all listed system components is $18,306,000. 13.2 Other Recommendations A. Changes in Park Irrigation Time. The City’s parks are currently watered between 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Peak hour demand occurs between 9:00 p.m. and 12:00 p.m. By changing the start of the watering time to 12:00 p.m. the water demands on the supply and storage systems will be reduced significantly. There is no cost associated with this change. B. Water System Audit. A water system audit should be done annually or at least every 3-5 years to help identify problems and sales losses in the system. An audit can be done by City staff although some technical assistance may be helpful. C. SCADA System Upgrades. The SCADA system will eventually need to be upgraded due to the age of its components and its ability to meet system demands. The upgrade will likely be needed within the next 5-10 years. A cost estimate for these upgrades in not included. D. Water Supply Wells. Additional water supply wells will have to be added as the system develops. Rules and regulations regarding water supply and standby power requirements may change significantly during that period and will need to be reviewed on a regular basis. E. Water Storage. The two existing water tanks in the lower pressure district should be adequate for all projected development in that district when provided some additional support from the proposed upper pressure district tanks. Two 750,000 gallon tanks are proposed to ultimately serve the upper pressure district. The proposed size and location of these tanks should be reviewed and revised as appropriate as development occurs in the area. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 13 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 145 2017 F. Service Lines. Deteriorated service lines may be a significant contributor to the overall leakage problem. City maintenance crews have encountered leaks in relatively new copper services as well as in older steel pipe services. The reason for the deterioration of copper pipe water services is unknown at this time. It may be due in part to grounding of the building electrical systems to the water service pipe. The individual property owner is responsible for repair and maintenance of their service line from the main to their building. Since the leakage frequently occurs before their water meter, the owner is frequently not aware there is a problem until it is severe. Service lines should be replaced at least to the property line during replacement of any mains in the street. The remainder of the service line should be pressure tested for leaks at the same time. If it leaks, the property owner should be notified to replace the remainder of the service line. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Belgrade Chapter 14 TD&H Engineering Water Master Plan 146 2017 Chapter 14- References 2012 International Fire Code (2012). International Code Council, County Club Hills. IL. 2015 International Fire Code (2015). International Code Council. Country Club Hills. IL. (Jul. 11, 2016). “Belgrade, Montana.” (MT 59714) profile: population, maps, real estate, averages, homes, statistics, relocation, travel, jobs, hospitals, schools, crime, moving, houses, news, sex offenders, (Jul. 11, 2016). “City of Belgrade, Montana.” City of Belgrade, Montana, (May 3, 2017). “DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.” Montana Department of Commerce, (Aug. 4, 2016). “DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE.” Montana Department of Commerce, (Aug. 4, 2016). County, M. T. G. “Welcome to Gallatin County, Montana.” Welcome to Gallatin County, Montana, (May 3, 2017). “Ground Water Rule.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, (Jul. 11, 2016). O’Connel, William, (1995). “Wellhead Protection Plan for Belgrade, Montana”, Montana Rural Water Systems, Inc. “Oracle Reports Services - Servlet.” Oracle Reports Services - Servlet, (Jul. 11, 2016). “Population estimates, July 1, 2015, (V2015).” Belgrade city Montana QuickFacts From the US Census Bureau, (Jun. 20, 2016). “Revised Total Coliform Rule And Total Coliform Rule.” EPA, Environmental ProtectionAgency, and-total-coliform-rule> (Jul. 11, 2016). Shyne, J. (2006). “Source Water Assessment.” MT, Belgrade. < http://deq.mt.gov/Portals /112/Water/WPB/NRISReports/MT0000136.pdf >(July 14, 2016). Water rights in Montana. (2012). Montana Dept. of Natural Resources and Conservation, Helena, MT. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix A Water Usage Records ---PAGE BREAK--- Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Totals # of Users Non-Revenue CITY SHOPS 5,000 6,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 4,000 7,000 2,000 2,000 56,000 2 FIRE DISTRICT 9,000 15,000 14,000 12,000 15,000 11,000 7,000 10,000 7,000 7,000 47,000 35,000 189,000 2 LIBRARY 10,000 12,000 10,000 6,000 20,000 26,000 10,000 52,000 35,000 4,000 6,000 6,000 197,000 1 LEWIS & CLARK PARK 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,000 0 0 0 0 0 12,000 2 LION'S PARK 0 0 1,000 1,000 3,000 3,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,000 1 K HOLLENSTEINER MEM PARK 0 0 0 0 1,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 9,000 1,000 0 0 15,000 1 MADISON STREET TRIANGLE PARK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LAS CAMPANAS PARKS 0 0 0 24,000 194,000 137,000 346,000 342,000 173,000 0 0 0 1,216,000 2 CITY OF BELGRADE-GOV 56,000 58,000 52,000 53,000 77,000 46,000 196,000 145,000 102,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 793,000 1 BELGRADE CITY WELLS 19,000 20,000 15,000 14,000 12,000 7,000 7,000 25,000 25,000 42,000 12,000 11,000 209,000 5 MILITARY 0 Non-Revenue Totals: 99,000 111,000 98,000 115,000 326,000 238,000 584,000 579,000 355,000 65,000 69,000 56,000 2,695,000 17 Residential CITY OF BELGRADE - SINGLE FAMILY 8,000 9,000 6,000 9,000 14,000 20,000 37,000 35,000 20,000 9,000 9,000 6,000 182,000 2 RESIDENTIAL MULTI 2,976,000 3,202,000 2,759,000 2,930,000 3,635,000 6,856,000 10,210,000 10,516,000 7,398,000 3,684,000 2,869,000 2,290,000 59,325,000 287 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE 7,969,000 8,411,000 7,204,000 8,044,000 15,124,000 32,647,000 56,350,000 50,827,000 30,687,000 12,023,000 7,466,000 6,327,000 243,079,000 2,035 TRAILER PARK 741,000 727,000 582,000 631,000 747,000 1,451,000 2,486,000 2,570,000 1,462,000 734,000 527,000 404,000 13,062,000 2 YARD HYDRANTS 0 0 2,000 7,000 405,000 2,439,000 2,517,000 2,870,000 2,087,000 566,000 5,000 0 10,898,000 15 FLAT-MULTI OCCU/GALLATIN FIELD 0 0 0 0 0 35,000 42,000 60,000 82,000 104,000 85,000 79,000 487,000 1 COMMERCIAL/APTS (2/3) 37,000 59,000 49,000 44,000 43,000 56,000 69,000 58,000 31,000 65,000 39,000 36,000 586,000 3 Residential Totals: 11,731,000 12,408,000 10,602,000 11,665,000 19,968,000 43,504,000 71,711,000 66,936,000 41,767,000 17,185,000 11,000,000 9,142,000 327,619,000 2,345 Commercial MULTIPLE MTD 377,000 427,000 403,000 421,000 487,000 866,000 794,000 1,019,000 841,000 504,000 431,000 327,000 6,897,000 14 COMMERCIAL 3,064,000 3,353,000 3,104,000 2,829,000 3,666,000 5,626,000 6,701,000 7,053,000 4,979,000 3,606,000 2,712,000 2,163,000 48,856,000 135 COMMERCIAL/APTS (1/3) 19,000 30,000 24,000 22,000 22,000 28,000 34,000 29,000 16,000 33,000 19,000 18,000 294,000 2 CHURCH/LODGES 40,000 57,000 39,000 72,000 184,000 496,000 531,000 552,000 474,000 138,000 60,000 28,000 2,671,000 15 MILITARY 6,000 7,000 6,000 8,000 259,000 350,000 312,000 297,000 285,000 9,000 7,000 7,000 1,553,000 2 Commercial Totals: 3,506,000 3,874,000 3,576,000 3,352,000 4,618,000 7,366,000 8,372,000 8,950,000 6,595,000 4,290,000 3,229,000 2,543,000 60,271,000 168 Large Commercial GALLATIN AIRPORT AUTHORITY 478,000 496,000 423,000 330,000 750,000 1,240,000 2,150,000 1,770,000 1,284,000 736,000 362,000 304,000 10,323,000 63 SCHOOLS 393,000 427,000 290,000 408,000 508,000 617,000 968,000 771,000 909,000 592,000 348,000 304,000 6,535,000 10 SCHOOL SOCCER AND SOFTBALL FIELDS 0 0 0 0 0 286,000 2,172,000 1,423,000 815,000 256,000 0 0 4,952,000 2 Large Commercial Totals: 871,000 923,000 713,000 738,000 1,258,000 2,143,000 5,290,000 3,964,000 3,008,000 1,584,000 710,000 608,000 16,858,000 75 Non-Revenue Total: 99,000 111,000 98,000 115,000 326,000 238,000 584,000 579,000 355,000 65,000 69,000 56,000 2,695,000 Water Sales Total: 16,108,000 17,205,000 14,891,000 15,755,000 25,844,000 53,013,000 85,373,000 79,850,000 51,370,000 23,059,000 14,939,000 12,293,000 409,700,000 Total Recorded Use: 16,207,000 17,316,000 14,989,000 15,870,000 26,170,000 53,251,000 85,957,000 80,429,000 51,725,000 23,124,000 15,008,000 12,349,000 412,395,000 2,605 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN 2012 - WATER USAGE (GALLONS PER MONTH) ---PAGE BREAK--- Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13 Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13 Nov-13 Dec-13 Totals # of Users Non-Revenue CITY SHOPS 4,000 4,000 6,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 1,000 27,000 2 FIRE DISTRICT 21,000 9,000 33,000 21,000 24,000 10,000 10,000 15,000 13,000 11,000 9,000 50,000 226,000 2 LIBRARY 10,000 23,000 15,000 19,000 33,000 39,000 60,000 57,000 52,000 9,000 6,000 3,000 326,000 1 LEWIS & CLARK PARK 0 0 0 0 1,000 4,000 7,000 6,000 3,000 0 0 0 21,000 2 LION'S PARK 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,000 1,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 2 K HOLLENSTEINER MEM PARK 0 0 0 1,000 0 1,000 18,000 1,000 0 0 0 0 21,000 1 MADISON STREET TRIANGLE PARK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LAS CAMPAMNAS PARK 43,000 60,000 231,000 391,000 337,000 1,062,000 2 CITY OF BELGRADE-GOV 4,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 38,000 20,000 65,000 81,000 49,000 3,000 2,000 3,000 273,000 1 BELGRADE CITY WELLS 10,000 14,000 25,000 14,000 3,000 1,000 6,000 20,000 20,000 17,000 27,000 16,000 173,000 5 MILITARY 9,000 8,000 11,000 8,000 202,000 214,000 232,000 257,000 262,000 8,000 9,000 8,000 1,228,000 0 Non-Revenue Totals: 58,000 61,000 93,000 66,000 345,000 351,000 639,000 830,000 738,000 50,000 55,000 81,000 3,367,000 18 Residential CITY OF BELGRADE - SINGLE FAMILY 11,000 8,000 7,000 9,000 13,000 8,000 41,000 41,000 35,000 11,000 5,000 4,000 193,000 2 RESIDENTIAL MULTI 4,140,000 2,835,000 3,152,000 3,005,000 5,074,000 5,794,000 9,108,000 9,829,000 7,068,000 3,622,000 2,959,000 3,278,000 59,864,000 287 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE 10,800,000 7,871,000 7,800,000 8,402,000 22,897,000 21,136,000 50,680,000 53,370,000 27,983,000 9,677,000 7,877,000 8,739,000 237,232,000 2106 TRAILER PARK 922,000 548,000 556,000 550,000 996,000 962,000 2,046,000 2,478,000 1,522,000 761,000 566,000 781,000 12,688,000 2 YARD HYDRANTS 0 0 1,000 8,000 1,156,000 1,656,000 2,341,000 2,498,000 1,863,000 185,000 43,000 0 9,751,000 15 FLAT-MULTI OCCU/GALLATIN FIELD 81,000 17,000 22,000 19,000 28,000 25,000 26,000 34,000 22,000 26,000 22,000 21,000 343,000 1 COMMERCIAL/APTS (2/3) 71,000 46,000 45,000 47,000 49,000 42,000 67,000 67,000 48,000 45,000 36,000 117,000 680,000 3 Residential Totals: 16,025,000 11,325,000 11,583,000 12,040,000 30,213,000 29,623,000 64,309,000 68,317,000 38,541,000 14,327,000 11,508,000 12,940,000 320,751,000 2,416 Commercial MULTIPLE MTD 579,000 476,000 483,000 403,000 697,000 750,000 760,000 875,000 952,000 684,000 460,000 530,000 7,649,000 10 COMMERCIAL 3,816,000 2,851,000 3,247,000 2,887,000 4,410,000 4,774,000 6,447,000 7,028,000 5,830,000 3,557,000 2,657,000 3,229,000 50,733,000 131 COMMERCIAL/APTS (1/3) 35,000 23,000 22,000 23,000 25,000 21,000 33,000 33,000 24,000 23,000 18,000 59,000 339,000 2 CHURCH/LODGES 34,000 29,000 56,000 30,000 267,000 257,000 602,000 715,000 430,000 70,000 45,000 40,000 2,575,000 13 MILITARY 9,000 8,000 11,000 8,000 202,000 214,000 232,000 257,000 262,000 8,000 9,000 8,000 1,228,000 2 Commercial Totals: 4,473,000 3,387,000 3,819,000 3,351,000 5,601,000 6,016,000 8,074,000 8,908,000 7,498,000 4,342,000 3,189,000 3,866,000 62,524,000 158 Large Commercial GALLATIN AIRPORT AUTHORITY 804,000 575,000 669,000 588,000 1,240,000 1,175,000 2,110,000 2,703,000 2,220,000 951,000 511,000 645,000 14,191,000 36 SCHOOLS 477,000 393,000 391,000 431,000 819,000 647,000 815,000 836,000 962,000 512,000 401,000 338,000 7,022,000 9 SCHOOL DISTRICT/SOCCER & SOFTBALL FIELDS 8,000 478,000 417,000 1,252,000 1,791,000 865,000 105,000 4,916,000 2 Large Commercial Totals: 1,281,000 968,000 1,060,000 1,027,000 2,537,000 2,239,000 4,177,000 5,330,000 4,047,000 1,568,000 912,000 983,000 26,129,000 47 Non-Revenue Total: 58,000 61,000 93,000 66,000 345,000 351,000 639,000 830,000 738,000 50,000 55,000 81,000 3,367,000 Water Sales Total: 21,779,000 15,680,000 16,462,000 16,418,000 38,351,000 37,878,000 76,560,000 82,555,000 50,086,000 20,237,000 15,609,000 17,789,000 409,404,000 Total Recorded Use: 21,837,000 15,741,000 16,555,000 16,484,000 38,696,000 38,229,000 77,199,000 83,385,000 50,824,000 20,287,000 15,664,000 17,870,000 412,771,000 2,639 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN 2013 - WATER USAGE (GALLONS PER MONTH) ---PAGE BREAK--- Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Totals # of Users Non-Revenue CITY SHOPS 3,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 24,000 2 FIRE DISTRICT 54,000 13,000 10,000 12,000 11,000 10,000 15,000 62,000 13,000 104,000 150,000 102,000 556,000 2 LIBRARY 4,000 4,000 6,000 5,000 30,000 40,000 58,000 57,000 26,000 4,000 3,000 3,000 240,000 1 LEWIS & CLARK PARK 0 0 0 0 0 0 144,000 74,000 24,000 1,000 0 0 243,000 2 LION'S PARK 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,000 2 K HOLLENSTEINER MEM PARK 0 0 0 0 1,000 2,000 59,000 7,000 43,000 10,000 0 0 122,000 1 MADISON STREET TRIANGLE PARK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LAS CAMPANAS PARK 91,000 231,000 273,000 415,000 354,000 1,364,000 2 CITY OF BELGRADE-GOV 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 7,000 28,000 66,000 143,000 94,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 359,000 1 BELGRADE CITY WELLS 21,000 23,000 19,000 28,000 12,000 10,000 22,000 23,000 19,000 27,000 18,000 24,000 246,000 5 MILITARY 0 Non-Revenue Totals: 85,000 46,000 41,000 50,000 153,000 323,000 639,000 783,000 575,000 150,000 176,000 134,000 3,155,000 18 Residential CITY OF BELGRADE - SINGLE FAMILY 3,000 4,000 4,000 14,000 16,000 19,000 43,000 32,000 14,000 12,000 12,000 14,000 187,000 2 RESIDENTIAL MULTI 3229000 3064000 2759000 3494000 3372000 6093000 8830000 8171000 5836000 3691000 2658000 3426000 54,623,000 292 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE 8817000 7867000 7446000 9743000 12875000 26589000 45830000 41359000 17941000 10682000 7710000 10247000 207,106,000 2175 TRAILER PARK 740,000 803,000 696,000 773,000 780,000 1,224,000 2,237,000 1,993,000 876,000 698,000 752,000 719,000 12,291,000 2 YARD HYDRANTS 0 0 0 10000 94000 1933000 2132000 2101000 1595000 [PHONE REDACTED] 1000 8,154,000 16 FLAT-MULTI OCCU/GALLATIN FIELD 18,000 17,000 12,000 17,000 15,000 18,000 21,000 22,000 15,000 16,000 13,000 20,000 204,000 1 COMMERCIAL/APTS (2/3) 69,000 39,000 36,000 45,000 47,000 45,000 50,000 42,000 45,000 49,000 56,000 52,000 575,000 3 Residential Totals: 12,876,000 11,794,000 10,953,000 14,096,000 17,199,000 35,921,000 59,143,000 53,720,000 26,322,000 15,435,000 11,202,000 14,479,000 283,140,000 2,491 Commercial MULTIPLE MTD 567,000 486,000 525,000 501,000 432,000 659,000 816,000 760,000 587,000 545,000 385,000 528,000 6,791,000 11 COMMERCIAL 3492000 2958000 2999000 3745000 4316000 6216000 7332000 6896000 5638000 4375000 3006000 3809000 54,782,000 131 COMMERCIAL/APTS (1/3) 34,000 20,000 18,000 22,000 24,000 23,000 25,000 21,000 23,000 25,000 28,000 26,000 289,000 2 CHURCH/LODGES 34,000 37,000 34,000 50,000 137,000 241,000 379,000 519,000 368,000 116,000 41,000 55,000 2,011,000 11 MILITARY 12000 9000 13000 65000 201000 166000 189000 186000 115000 13000 10000 9000 988,000 2 Commercial Totals: 4,139,000 3,510,000 3,589,000 4,383,000 5,110,000 7,305,000 8,741,000 8,382,000 6,731,000 5,074,000 3,470,000 4,427,000 64,861,000 157 Large Commercial GALLATIN AIRPORT AUTHORITY 746,000 789,000 702,000 777000 1090000 2368000 3398000 2873000 1945000 1362000 604000 726000 17,380,000 36 SCHOOLS 361000 387000 306000 454000 371000 700000 768000 616000 544000 468000 384000 327000 5,686,000 9 SCHOOL DIST #44/SOCCER & SOFTBALL FIELDS 265,000 384,000 703,000 1,070,000 1,163,000 502,000 315,000 4,402,000 2 Large Commercial Totals: 1,107,000 1,176,000 1,008,000 1,496,000 1,845,000 3,771,000 5,236,000 4,652,000 2,991,000 2,145,000 988,000 1,053,000 27,468,000 47 Non-Revenue Total: 85,000 46,000 41,000 50,000 153,000 323,000 639,000 783,000 575,000 150,000 176,000 134,000 3,155,000 Water Sales Total: 18,122,000 16,480,000 15,550,000 19,975,000 24,154,000 46,997,000 73,120,000 66,754,000 36,044,000 22,654,000 15,660,000 19,959,000 375,469,000 Total Recorded Use: 18,207,000 16,526,000 15,591,000 20,025,000 24,307,000 47,320,000 73,759,000 67,537,000 36,619,000 22,804,000 15,836,000 20,093,000 378,624,000 2,713 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN 2014 - WATER USAGE (GALLONS PER MONTH) ---PAGE BREAK--- Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Totals # of Users Non-Revenue CITY SHOPS 2,000 2,000 4,000 2,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 23,000 2 FIRE DISTRICT 19,000 11,000 12,000 17,000 6,000 12,000 11,000 10,000 12,000 13,000 15,000 11,000 149,000 2 LIBRARY 4,000 13,000 10,000 11,000 44,000 54,000 86,000 69,000 56,000 4,000 2,000 3,000 356,000 1 LEWIS & CLARK PARK 0 0 0 0 7,000 107,000 109,000 120,000 30,000 0 0 0 373,000 2 LION'S PARK 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,000 0 0 1,000 0 0 2,000 1 K HOLLENSTEINER MEM PARK 0 0 0 0 0 1,000 39,000 18,000 51,000 2,000 0 0 111,000 1 MADISON STREET TRIANGLE PARK 0 LAS CAMPANAS PARKS 10,000 111,000 341,000 583,000 598,000 266,000 1,909,000 2 CITY OF BELGRADE-GOV 3,000 3,000 2,000 14,000 44,000 47,000 131,000 134,000 80,000 3,000 2,000 3,000 466,000 1 BELGRADE CITY WELLS 20,000 28,000 20,000 25,000 20,000 23,000 16,000 21,000 25,000 25,000 20,000 27,000 270,000 5 MILITARY 0 Non-Revenue Totals: 48,000 57,000 48,000 79,000 234,000 586,000 977,000 972,000 521,000 50,000 41,000 46,000 3,659,000 17 Residential CITY OF BELGRADE - SINGLE FAMILY 10,000 11,000 11,000 13,000 11,000 21,000 45,000 31,000 20,000 12,000 11,000 13,000 209,000 2 RESIDENTIAL MULTI 2,828,000 2,865,000 2,939,000 3,512,000 3,186,000 6,170,000 9,891,000 8,201,000 7,459,000 4,045,000 2,973,000 3,761,000 57,830,000 293 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE 8,125,000 7,920,000 8,058,000 9,881,000 11,162,000 30,108,000 52,269,000 38,890,000 29,882,000 12,817,000 7,891,000 10,021,000 227,024,000 2222 TRAILER PARK 555,000 554,000 597,000 770,000 840,000 1,598,000 2,522,000 1,641,000 914,000 2,055,000 1,065,000 1,419,000 14,530,000 2 YARD HYDRANTS 0 0 1,000 30,000 397,000 1,333,000 2,110,000 2,340,000 1,750,000 187,000 0 0 8,148,000 15 FLAT-MULTI OCCU/GALLATIN FIELD 13,000 13,000 12,000 15,000 13,000 12,000 13,000 16,000 15,000 18,000 15,000 20,000 175,000 1 COMMERCIAL/APTS (2/3) 41,000 37,000 48,000 60,000 50,000 46,000 47,000 44,000 41,000 41,000 35,000 43,000 533,000 3 Residential Totals: 11,572,000 11,400,000 11,666,000 14,281,000 15,659,000 39,288,000 66,897,000 51,163,000 40,081,000 19,175,000 11,990,000 15,277,000 308,449,000 2,538 Commercial MULTIPLE MTD 425,000 451,000 467,000 473,000 509,000 612,000 817,000 758,000 813,000 464,000 335,000 435,000 6,559,000 10 COMMERCIAL 3,240,000 3,641,000 3,609,000 4,059,000 3,850,000 5,684,000 6,236,000 6,963,000 6,796,000 4,579,000 3,010,000 4,298,000 55,965,000 132 COMMERCIAL/APTS (1/3) 20,000 19,000 24,000 30,000 25,000 23,000 23,000 22,000 20,000 21,000 18,000 21,000 266,000 2 CHURCH/LODGES 27,000 23,000 29,000 54,000 102,000 247,000 480,000 370,000 326,000 66,000 45,000 43,000 1,812,000 13 MILITARY 7,000 8,000 8,000 81,000 99,000 102,000 182,000 112,000 93,000 7,000 7,000 6,000 712,000 2 Commercial Totals: 3,719,000 4,142,000 4,137,000 4,697,000 4,585,000 6,668,000 7,738,000 8,225,000 8,048,000 5,137,000 3,415,000 4,803,000 65,314,000 159 Large Commercial GALLATIN AIRPORT AUTHORITY 638,000 734,000 849,000 968,000 986,000 2,081,000 2,943,000 2,836,000 2,607,000 1,888,000 631,000 934,000 18,095,000 31 SCHOOLS 320,000 367,000 306,000 499,000 391,000 462,000 703,000 562,000 927,000 611,000 391,000 407,000 5,946,000 10 SCHOOL DISTRICT/SOCCER & SOFTBALL FIELDS 82,000 539,000 1,605,000 1,404,000 928,000 554,000 5,112,000 2 Large Commercial Totals: 958,000 1,101,000 1,155,000 1,467,000 1,459,000 3,082,000 5,251,000 4,802,000 4,462,000 3,053,000 1,022,000 1,341,000 29,153,000 43 Non-Revenue Total: 48,000 57,000 48,000 79,000 234,000 586,000 977,000 972,000 521,000 50,000 41,000 46,000 3,659,000 Water Sales Total: 16,249,000 16,643,000 16,958,000 20,445,000 21,703,000 49,038,000 79,886,000 64,190,000 52,591,000 27,365,000 16,427,000 21,421,000 402,916,000 Total Recorded Use: 16,297,000 16,700,000 17,006,000 20,524,000 21,937,000 49,624,000 80,863,000 65,162,000 53,112,000 27,415,000 16,468,000 21,467,000 406,575,000 2,757 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN 2015 - WATER USAGE (GALLONS PER MONTH) ---PAGE BREAK--- Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Totals Non-Revenue CITY SHOPS 2,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 0 3,000 0 2,000 1,000 2,000 18,000 FIRE DISTRICT 13,000 10,000 17,000 14,000 9,000 17,000 11,000 14,000 13,000 10,000 15,000 12,000 155,000 LIBRARY 3,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 71,000 92,000 91,000 28,000 2,000 3,000 2,000 302,000 LEWIS & CLARK PARK 0 0 0 5,000 13,000 106,000 94,000 96,000 22,000 0 0 0 336,000 LION'S PARK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K HOLLENSTEINER MEM PARK 0 0 0 0 0 17,000 3,000 4,000 0 0 0 0 24,000 MADISON STREET TRIANGLE PARK 0 CITY OF BELGRADE-GOV 4,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 25,000 57,000 155,000 188,000 57,000 3,000 4,000 3,000 514,000 BELGRADE CITY WELLS 26,000 18,000 23,000 22,000 47,000 209,000 403,000 477,000 134,000 18,000 18,000 17,000 1,412,000 MILITARY 0 Non-Revenue Totals: 48,000 38,000 50,000 51,000 98,000 479,000 758,000 873,000 254,000 35,000 41,000 36,000 2,761,000 Residential CITY OF BELGRADE - SINGLE FAMILY 9,000 11,000 11,000 13,000 12,000 21,000 11,000 27,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 11,000 162,000 RESIDENTIAL MULTI 3,093,000 3,106,000 3,289,000 3,714,000 3,752,000 7,582,000 8,112,000 9,550,000 5,684,000 3,752,000 3,899,000 3,306,000 58,839,000 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE 8,119,000 7,935,000 8,467,000 11,137,000 14,552,000 40,344,000 44,769,000 54,789,000 21,192,000 11,629,000 10,072,000 8,841,000 241,846,000 TRAILER PARK 1,149,000 1,050,000 925,000 1,073,000 969,000 1,479,000 570,000 684,000 174,000 826,000 670,000 615,000 10,184,000 YARD HYDRANTS 0 0 3,000 6,000 515,000 1,497,000 1,855,000 1,822,000 1,251,000 958,000 766,000 5,000 8,678,000 FLAT-MULTI OCCU/GALLATIN FIELD 16,000 13,000 16,000 16,000 15,000 15,000 34,000 27,000 16,000 15,000 16,000 15,000 214,000 COMMERCIAL/APTS (2/3) 36,000 36,000 39,000 39,000 36,000 41,000 35,000 41,000 34,000 33,000 36,000 27,000 433,000 Residential Totals: 12,422,000 12,151,000 12,750,000 15,998,000 19,851,000 50,979,000 55,386,000 66,940,000 28,363,000 17,225,000 15,471,000 12,820,000 320,356,000 Commercial MULTIPLE MTD 369,000 417,000 418,000 481,000 570,000 819,000 917,000 1,051,000 695,000 393,000 391,000 370,000 6,891,000 COMMERCIAL 4,045,000 3,819,000 3,897,000 4,362,000 4,556,000 6,919,000 6,413,000 7,896,000 5,416,000 4,510,000 4,308,000 3,253,000 59,394,000 COMMERCIAL/APTS (1/3) 18,000 18,000 19,000 20,000 18,000 20,000 17,000 20,000 17,000 17,000 18,000 14,000 216,000 CHURCH/LODGES 47,000 35,000 39,000 34,000 82,000 372,000 469,000 555,000 261,000 100,000 28,000 34,000 2,056,000 MILITARY 9,000 8,000 12,000 46,000 149,000 184,000 158,000 254,000 106,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 947,000 Commercial Totals: 4,488,000 4,297,000 4,385,000 4,943,000 5,375,000 8,314,000 7,974,000 9,776,000 6,495,000 5,027,000 4,752,000 3,678,000 69,504,000 Large Commercial GALLATIN AIRPORT AUTHORITY 858,000 909,000 981,000 1,038,000 1,392,000 2,523,000 2,498,000 2,867,000 2,239,000 1,187,000 945,000 720,000 18,157,000 SCHOOLS 322,000 414,000 360,000 513,000 528,000 596,000 533,000 670,000 444,000 559,000 334,000 373,000 5,646,000 Large Commercial Totals: 1,180,000 1,323,000 1,341,000 1,551,000 1,920,000 3,119,000 3,031,000 3,537,000 2,683,000 1,746,000 1,279,000 1,093,000 23,803,000 Non-Revenue Total: 48,000 38,000 50,000 51,000 98,000 479,000 758,000 873,000 254,000 35,000 41,000 36,000 2,761,000 Water Sales Total: 18,090,000 17,771,000 18,476,000 22,492,000 27,146,000 62,412,000 66,391,000 80,253,000 37,541,000 23,998,000 21,502,000 17,591,000 413,663,000 Total Recorded Use: 18,138,000 17,809,000 18,526,000 22,543,000 27,244,000 62,891,000 67,149,000 81,126,000 37,795,000 24,033,000 21,543,000 17,627,000 416,424,000 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN 2016 - WATER USAGE (GALLONS PER MONTH) ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix B Well Information ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- 13 ---PAGE BREAK--- 14 ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- 17 ---PAGE BREAK--- 18 ---PAGE BREAK--- 19 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- 21 ---PAGE BREAK--- 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- 24 ---PAGE BREAK--- 25 ---PAGE BREAK--- 26 ---PAGE BREAK--- 27 ---PAGE BREAK--- 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- 29 ---PAGE BREAK--- 30 ---PAGE BREAK--- 31 ---PAGE BREAK--- 32 ---PAGE BREAK--- 33 ---PAGE BREAK--- 34 ---PAGE BREAK--- 35 ---PAGE BREAK--- 36 ---PAGE BREAK--- 37 ---PAGE BREAK--- 38 ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix C Wellhead Protection Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- MONTANA RURAL WATER SYSTEMS INC 925 7th Avenue South Great Falls MT 59405 Ph 454 1151 Fax 454 3116 WELLHEAD PR OTECI ION PLAN for BELGRADE MONTANA Prepared By William O Connell Montana Rural Water Assoeiadon November 1995 FILE COpy f I I I I II I i Ll A 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- TABLE OF CONTENTS t 1 1 jf I lJc lrIlNI 1I c ilRtc iJ 1rIc J 4c1r JB lRl4 cr c 4rl fi lBlc c J lrICJr Iir1f c c LElrI4 l rJC 1r t Jv Ic CJr C4CNT t4C C I 1I 1ll Jr1 JL Illcc lrIc ll 1ll Ill ll APPENDICIES WELLHEAD PROTECTION RESOLUTION ORDINANCE AREA MAP AND FIVE YEAR CAPTURE ZONES HISTORIC WATER USE PUMPING TEST CITY WELL LOGS WATER TABLE AND GROUNDWATER DEPTH MAPS AREA WELL LOGS AREA UST LISTING EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Wellhead Protection Plan for Belgrade was inintiated by Joe Menicucci Belgrade s city manager and was completed through the work of the planning team The planning team consists of Joe Menicucci City Manager Henry D Hathaway Director of Public Works Jason Karp City Planner PURPOSE This report presents the technical requirements for the completion of the wellhead protection plan for the city of Belgrade Montana as required by section 1428 of the Clean Water Act of 1986 INTRODUCTION The Wellhead Protection Program was established by congress with the 1986 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act SDWA Congress directed the EPA to guide the states in adopting a voluntary Wellhead Protection Program of their own To meet this requirement Montana has implemented a program in which each community voluntarily submits a plan following a format prescribed by Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences Water Quality Division In 1991 the National Rural Water Association under EPA guidance established their Wellhead Protection Program for small water systems in 13 states As of May 1994 Montana Rural Water Systems received funding to begin offering Wellhead Protection Plans to Montana s small groundwater utilities PAGE 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- BACKGROUND A wellhead protection plan is designed to protect the groundwater used by communities from contamination The plan establishes protected areas above the aquifer yielding water to the well and extends up gradient to where modeling of the aquifer has determined contaminants in the aquifer could flow into the well The extent of the up gradient protection area is determined by computer modeling of the aquifer and projecting the extent of the well s capture zone as determined for A five year scenario Such long term planning is necessary to provide an early warning mechanism in the event of up gradient contamination but preventing the contamination of a water supply through education and public awareness is still the primary goal If contamination of the aquifer should occur it is most likely that by the time these contaminants reach the well they will be diluted and spread out over a considerable distance Therefore initially there may only be a trace of the contaminant showing up in routine tests Systems that have completed a wellhead protection plan will have information on groundwater flow and the hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer and through the completion of the contaminant source inventory a good idea of the source of the contaminant Systems having this information will then be in the position to determine the best method to ensure the continued quality of the water supply Also as part of this WHPP the community has identified a secondary water supply This water supply would be far enough away from the existing well that contamination from the same source is unlikely PAGE 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- LOCATION Belgrade s water is supplied by four wells The wells are located in Sections 1 and 12 of Township 1 South Range 4 East GEOLOGY The geology of the sediments around Belgrade are taken from the Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1482 Geology and Ground Water Resources of the Gallatin Valley Gallatin County Montana by O M Hackett F N Visher R G McMurtrey and W L Steinhilber The alluvium along the Gallatin River and under the extensive alluvial plain between the Gallatin and East Gallatin Rivers consists of cobbles and gravel intermixed with sand clay and silt The upper 20 feet as seen in gravel pits is composed of clean and moderately well sorted cobbles and gravel Most of the cobbles pebbles and sand grains are fragments of gneiss and dark volcanic rocks derived from the Gallatin and Madison Ranges In general the ratio of fine to coarse grained material increases in a direction Except where silt and clay fills the voids between the coarse particles of sand and gravel the alluvium yields copious amounts of water to wells In the vicinity of Belgrade at depths ranging from about 15 to 50 feet below the land surface there is a layer of lime cemented gravel which is a semiconfining layer for water in the underlying material The alluvium directly underlying the plain between the Gallatin and East Gallatin Rivers is thought to be of late Pleistocene age The Gallatin River appears to be at grade in its course through the valley and therefore is no longer aggrading the PAGE 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- alluvial plain The character extent and thickness of the alluvium underlying the plain between the rivers indicate that the alluvium was deposited concurrently with the glaciation of the Gallatin and Madison Ranges HYDROGEOLOGY The description of the hydrogeology of the Belgrade area is taken from the Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1482 Geology and Ground Water Resources of the Gallatin Valley Gallatin County Montana by O M Hackett F N Visher R G MCMurtrey and W L Steinhilber The specific capacity of a well is its rate of discharge per unit of drawdown The specific capacity can be determined by dividing the discharge of the well generally in gallons per minute gpm by the water level drawdown generally measured in feet An aquifer test or so called pumping test is a field method whereby the main hydrogelogic properties of an aquifer can be determined The coefficient of transmissibility transmissivity was determined using data from a single pumped well The coefficient of transmissibility transmissivity of the alluvium of the Gallatin and East Gallatin Rivers was determined at 24 sites it ranges from 38 000 to 670 000 gpd per foot and averages about 200 000 gpd per foot or 26 738 ft2 per day The well logs for wells 2 3 and 4 contain specific capacity information and the log for well 4 has the records for a 24 hour pumping test and the subsequent recovery data This information was evaluated and local transmissivity values calculated PAGE 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- PROCEDURES STRATIGRAPHY The well logs were used to obtain a more detailed description of the well sites stratigraphy Generally 50 feet of coarse gravel and cobbles is followed by at least 15 feet of a silty clay matrix This series is more or less repeated down to at least 250 feet See the attached cross sections and well logs in the appendices WELL COMPLETION The well completion information was taken from the drillers well log This information is useful in determining the level of natural protection for each well and also in understanding a wells performance Well 1 screen 56 6 182 9 16 slots Well 2 160 180 Well 3 200 248 Well 4 165 205 type na na screen The well completion information for well 1 states that the pumping rate was reduced to 800 gpm from 1150 gpm because the well was pumping sand Generally wells are designed so the velocity of the water entering the well is less than 0 1 ft second This is to prevent turbulent flow conditions from damaging the well and to limit the load sand and silt the moving water could transport Also the size of the openings in the well casing slot size limit the size of the material that can flow through The large slots described on the well log would allow sand to enter the well Well 1 reports the open interval starting at 56 6 below the surface this is shallowest completion of any the wells This means that well 1 has at least 100 feet less of protective PAGE 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- covering than the other wells Howeve the log also reports that the water encountered at a depth of 54 feet had an artesian head of over 6 feet so the static water level swl is at 48 I feet The artesian conditions identify the overlying materia as J a confining layer and that the vertical water movement is upward The screens identified in the logs for wells 2 and 4 are manufactured and have smaller openings with a greater open area This allows more water to enter the well at slower velocities and is more effective at preventing sand from flowing into the well The log for well 3 does not identify the size of the perforations and so they are assumed to be similar to the openings on well 1 Should this be the situation then this well could also pump sand MODELING The capture zones for the wells were modeled using the semi analytical option for the General Particle Tracking Module of the WHPA model package The WHPA code was developed for the U S Environmental Protection Agency Office of Ground Water Protection by HydroGeoLogic Inc The capture zones delineated for Belgrade are for a five year scenario The models were constructed assuming the wells were pumped continuously at maximum capacity for the duration of each time step The state Water Quality Division requires a that five year time of travel TOT be modeled for confined alluvial aquifers The modeling parameters were determined from analysis of the data on the well logs The thickness of the aquifer is 200 feet for the model The hydraulic gradient used was 0 00694 ft ft this value comes from maps in the above mentioned Geology and PAGE 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- Groundwater Resource Paper Hackett et al The direction of flow is due north The transmissiviy values were determined using two methods The first method used the recovery data from the pumping test which was completed when well 4 was constructed This data was included in the well log for well 4 This method uses the Cooper Jacob straight line analysis A semi log graph is constructed with the log of time vs drawdown The amount of drawdown between on log cycle of time is determined and then transmissivity is calculated from the following equation T 70 Q s 70 1115 gpm 67 1165 ft2 day Q PUMPING RATE s DRAWDOWN The data and graphs are included in the appendices The second method assumed the pumping time was insufficient to properly stress the aquifer Transmissivities were determined by calculating the specific capacity for each well and using the relationship developed by Razack and Huntley 1991 The static water level and the pumping water level were not reported on the well log for well 1 Sc pumping rate ft3 day drawdown ft T 33 6 Se 0 67 Well 2 Sc 115508 118 979ft3pd ft T 33 6 979 0 97 3389 ft2 day Well 3 T 2826 ft2 day Well 4 T 5285 ft2 day Capture zones were delineated using both transmissivity values for well 4 and are in the appendicies PAGE 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- CONTAMINANT SOURCE INVENTORY The inventory has been tabulated in table 1 In table 1 the column for other includes ditches highway frontage railroad frontage hardware stores and irrigated land TABLE 1 Contaminant source source l well septic UST storage tank chem storage other 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 4 1 1 1 5 1 6 1 1 1 2 7 3 1 1 1 8 3 1 1 9 3 1 1 10 4 2 11 3 7 1 12 3 1 13 1 1 3 1 14 5 1 5 3 15 5 1 16 3 1 17 4 2 2 18 6 1 several 1 19 2 2 20 5 2 21 1 3 22 1 23 1 2 24 1 1 25 1 1 26 1 1 27 1 1 28 1 1 29 1 1 1 1 30 1 31 1 1 1 32 1 1 33 1 2 1 34 1 1 2 PAGE 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- RESULTS Evaluation of the well logs and the areas hydrogeology show the wells to have a high degree of protection from surface contaminants The wells are moderately deep and draw their water from a locally confined aquifer The confinig layer being the lime cemented gravels identified in the hydrogeology section The results from the contaminant source inventory were plotted on a city map The inventory identified 34 potential locations of which 27 sites contained 45 wells and 15 sites contained 46 underground storage tanks The 57 other potential sources have been determined to be a lower risk to the aquifer at this time Twelve of the sites fall within the delieated five year time of travel TOT capture zones All these sites contain contain either a well or an underground storage tank UST Only one of the wells within the TOT is 100 feet deep and Seven of these sites contain UST s RECOMMENDATIONS The State recommends a three zone management set up The firat level is the restricted area and consists of a 100 foot radius around each well Within this radius State law excludes specified activities such as septic systems and sewer lines The second level is the protected area and consists of the area within the five year delineated capture zone or a 2500 foot radius The third level is the managed area and is the recharge area This area is defined by natural hydrogeologic boundries such as rivers and streams groundwater divides and faults and mountains PAGE 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade s Wellhead Protection Plan shQuld include these regions The restricted area is already defined by State law and is defined by a 100 foot radius around each well The protected area some variation of the areas outlined on the zoning map These areas are for five year pumping scenarios as recommmended by the State s Wellhead Protection Program The managed area recommended is defined as the area east from the Gallatin River to Hyalite Creek and south from the northern City limits to Highway 84 191 This is a large area 8 miles north to south and 6 miles east to west 1 2 6 8 24 square miles However this area should be recognised because activities within it boundries can impact the aquifer at Belgrade The State and EPA will accept regulatory or non regulatory management methods of the Whellhead Protection Area However due to the rapid growth in and around Belgrade I would strongly recommend zoning along with an active public education awareness program The pumping history for the last three years shows an increase of over 49 This increase has been met by a 10 fold increase in production from well 2 The analysis of the aquifer properties indicate the existing wells could provide substantially more water as the need arises The rapid growth and subsequent increased demand on the aquifer are a big part of the reason for the dual delineations Management of the WHPP based on both delineations gives a broader coverage and greater degree of safty The location of a fifth well in the northwest section of town from a hydrogeolgic perspective is sound However from the PAGE 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- wellhead protection view the industrial part just south of the area would require consideration A series of monitoring wells at the edge of the area could provide needed protection A second area to be considered is south of Interstate 90 This area is upgradient of most if not all of the industrial development Also this area is developing and establishing a water right is a good idea The final section of the WHPP is to establish emergency response procedures Designate who has the responsibility and authority to shut down wells and request help in the event of an incident The state has a contract with Olympus Environmental to respond to such threats The number for the hazardous material response organization STATE OF MONTANA WATER QUALITY DIVISION EMERGENCY RESPONSE [PHONE REDACTED] The City may want to establish a contract with a similar local company in the event Olympus is unable to respond PAGE 12 ---PAGE BREAK--- REFERENCES 1 ALT DAVID AND DONALD W 1986 ROADSIDE GEOLOGY OF MONTANA 2 Hackett O M Visher F N McMurtrey R G and Steinhilber W L Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1482 Geology and Ground Water Resources of the Gallatin Valley Gallatin County Montana 3 WQ1 STANDARDS FOR COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEMS 4 WATER QUALITY DIVISION 1994 MONTANA WELLHEAD PROTECTION PROGRAM 5 DRISCOLL FLETCHER G Ph D 1989 GROUNDWATER AND WELLS 6 FETTER C W 1988 APPLIED HYDROGEOLOGY PAGE 13 ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDICIES WELLHEAD PROTECTION RESOLUTION ORDINANCE AREA MAP FIVE YAER CAPTURE ZONES HISTORIC WATER USE PUMPING TEST CITY WELL LOGS WATER TABLE GROUNDWATER DEPTH MAPS AREA WELL LOGS AREA UST LISTING EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION ---PAGE BREAK--- DELINEATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- T It I I a t Q 1 7 I I r O I 1 I I I I 1 1 J u I J I I I I I o C I 9 I II v X I I II Ii c Ii I JIC I t I 1 oq r II i 0 u o u 0 D 0 tl 3 0 C tJ V O r i I I i f I I T I 1 0 CIl U c I Y I r en r ---PAGE BREAK--- o M f L I I f om I 11 f 1 t C V I I 11 1l 0 1 j I I f 1 d II I f J c 21 f 11 J R vl v J h Z f j I l 7 t I o t o c I I o vU T7t j f 1 J I 0 II I r H t Jj j J I jj 5 AII I I I J X 91 m t lE j J 1 U 5 i 01 I J co V C I o II j 0 V 1 I g 1 1 I cf I j ij A Nliil IIU I V v r r a A i J i v L I I a t V I 4 11 1 1 i Z l jI 1 7T r fL 71 r r j E U i VI I I 9 1 I iD I I I r e l 4 aC o 4f 1 1 L I N i r 5 I L f T I U I II I I I L HI V I e I I I 7 1 II A O I WiW tf V I Ii Ir 1 I If G en l b1 iD a ii l I 0 r CQ t I J t o n l1 b r i i 1 J L 01 L iL I y I A I 1 I I en 1r ---PAGE BREAK--- r VV liij I j fL J JJ JI I t 7 7 1l t Xl I f5 Ii V 1 V 11 VO iii 4 1 J I t f 1fJ5 I i O II u t c t IR f V V7 j I LI I r J 1 tJ 2 ro i I I r J t ill ci 1 i l AI J X l 0 os S d t o i l k CI t 0 1r 1 0 Y I i ri i 1 I fila tJ 1 I W I y y Ill 1 35tl or I II H JJJO I I I i r v7 J 3vlj I u J 1 i P iffi ir l 0 fI i f I j Ii 07 1 If I I I L L v fL f ff 1 t I i 1 I II l d I i 1F1 if I rr I t I t v U yo i iR t II IIV AI r j I I I t OYI I ry I r II I 4 e l I II A I j fiP II 11 f J l I fl I 1 0 Ii j If U ff 1 I H I 10 s I I l E i I I 1 to J I 1 r 1 if i iN i I@ t s rL r j ir 1 i ff I I i I Y II L J Li lIiNiUu c I y It I I J C L 1 J r l 11 11 r I ---PAGE BREAK--- r I lo u Q C d0 J f II II II II II II II Dr II II N It IIII CXli N II II lII II IIII N II II II II II II I II II II II II II II D N CXli II lII CJI D N ---PAGE BREAK--- Q fV7 t If 01 I SI i t J I l u r f 5 J I I I WI I N E I v N I I I I I I I WI WI ---PAGE BREAK--- HISTORIC WATER USE ---PAGE BREAK--- v 0 m W tn en w J J 1 0 w 2 m 3 S W 0 I W a C C w z0 W J e J N C 0 m I W m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L 0 L 0 L I N N NOllV ---PAGE BREAK--- BELGRADE WATER USE DATE WELL 1 WELL 2 1992 9022000 17145000 1993 4994000 4945000 1994 4335000 152614999 BY WELL WELL 3 WELL 4 TOTAl GAl PER YEAR 45645100 216406000 288 218 100 19136500 217452999 246 528 499 12679900 259110000 428 739 899 ---PAGE BREAK--- PUMPING TEST ---PAGE BREAK--- w o w q D J ww OS C J W m I I I l t w N W J 0 I W t l i 0 0 0 0 07 0 0 0 q CO CO 0 N q CO CO I I I I I I I I l NMOaMV a z w I W i fl 3 3 II r 3 lI r V I N 3 II I lI t v I 1 a N Q II ---PAGE BREAK--- U Wl e Z D Ev J D W WS C eI W In w f w z NE w W E W o W OOOOOOOO Ocx ON ocx I I I I I I I I 1 NMOaMV a ---PAGE BREAK--- BELGRADE PUMPING TEST WELL 4 TIME ELAPSE t PWL 1210 1 57 1215 5 150 1230 15 150 100 45 150 130 75 150 200 105 150 230 135 150 300 165 150 330 195 150 400 225 150 430 255 150 500 285 150 530 315 150 600 345 150 630 375 151 700 405 151 800 465 151 900 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 700 151 300 885 151 415 960 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] 165 1000 1305 165 1030 1335 165 1100 1365 166 1130 1395 166 1200 1425 166 1215 1430 166 1220 1435 166 WELL 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY WELL LOGS ---PAGE BREAK--- D D M jf e A aq 1 1oUbhL ifl vJf nEST LAMM ST y tY AN DYKEN DRILLI O f r J HARRY YAM DYKEM AND BUT VAN DYUM P At k 1fj tL 10PI UOIII f rfJ r FUll LINE Of AERMOTOR WINDMillS AND SUPPLIES I PIPE PUMPS AND REPAIRS J t I 5f r zl y Ai 4 u 4offi I J7 li r 1lrU 4i t a u tf r 44 I Iff BOZEMAN MONTANA U k 13HaO Gff ar AIu r t 4 tL ffi h d7 3 J t I a 178 J 0 f JH l r J 7 J d 4 ViId l Q p I EXHIBIT n T oI l ---PAGE BREAK--- I 1 w J I r j 1 rrr It J t J Cle 1 I J1 fl 1 ll l I t ltr l f A r li I I l 1 f l i l z i tI l I I t i t l I S 0 l fi jo l 4 I I t I I it1 I 1 f 40 1t W 1i t Oen 0 N t i 1 Re ourc and CC n atlon 1 Whit Jl l lirit j f f r 1 I I j r J ti INJ t il l I 1 n r y lJaw DIP il f lt I r li WE I G hl Dont W I r i i it f jl t 1i r l r I n ink II Owner A f I s jf i l t l f t tl 7 I 1 I I Id t I l 1 I I t I f i 1J J i t r r I tli I J Q fP er I r f t r f t I I t l l t r I I I I I t t k q t t i ll t 1 Hkcl b il t j r i rils r WIIM fillclol I afrel mll1pl r m JIll L c l allJ urn 6Jj OJ Q I1 1 IN Il I Nt 111 IIl it bOll cl bl il y I rwirhi i 60clays alur th water hfiS et i ul tQ t tflciQI use fFL pW I i r J 2 CURRENT MA1l NG AO R SS X I lle t l cr pd V 6J 5ll ntnc I Ir I I 1 UrO ED USE j o l siic includes Ilwn d garden tn l iio other ecify WEI L lO C 1I p r 1 I Jt t I i f t L r t f i 1 n 1 t t r 7 t I I C i I i r t f 1 I f l t L i ik v j l r lV i 1 Ir r J l l j I i 1 i c jV NAr i lt ri A tJ t l t 1 l i i l st t l 1 0 kl i ll ii i 1 1 1f J i r J 1 i iP 1 L IiI t I lln 7 f tf I f II j t t l to j I J S i li J l I c StvtiM I lt 1a I jor l I I f ln t N ot i ti bt W I D l I I li tr I t 1 y f p1 fl j t r t J P c 1 1 I I J 1 l It J 1 Ja VJC 1 tGtt 11 C I Ui tlj I 1 V 0 Ihn rjfi 1 1 Ac 1 t5 i U 9 li jiff t 6o I bl o ed i oll I q rli ry o jllit Sio arv q t1Id t t1 W 11 r I 1 1 e i 0 a lfl l lJ 1 J tIl 1 1 f i rt 4 y I t l d1 J Ll co sl iJcTioN AQCO plEfIO r 0 I A l hDm 10 tldilltlont II n i I L tock mUrlicip I in uUrill I WElL y EST bATA Lunw oth if other apecily rumpl ill below Ind urf c Mib L fter hi pumping WCD Ipm ft lf1er hrs pumpiJlI gpm AS WelL PLUGGED OR AB qO E b7 Y A No II yes how 1 r I t Ib Ii ED 1 11 11 Well LOG r ij I i Uepth ttU f T It I F t i rom orJJ1 olJ o 1 I d 1 I oO 51 A11 ar Jl Idl CAl u Lcl1 c a R JtL J L d dy cp u Jt k ilrd t Ccrue pl Ck 3nd lliv c y 4l J j p y l f l I o I I i t I 0 a 00 f t F f r I f i J I 1 t I 1 r I j t I I 1 I j I r f i Jr t t t 1 l I I I t i f 1 II J j 1 J I r ---PAGE BREAK--- L Iia I C T V flF nn I I JP elI U n 3 t H 1 1 SS6 C f Yt routh n 1t 1 fI r I IH 1 1 r 12 1 oWI1 1hlp 1 r IIH I nll r n 1f Date wells 1t 1rt I J J n 1 1 1 t p I J 21 B 1 lJri11ecl by cable too I Ii f IIr II c I Static water level GS r t Pumping water Irvrl Do f rL nl O H Casing perforatnd 2UO f I o J 1n feet Drilled by fllit rill f 1 1 1 111 1f1ll Y lJepth c cri tioll From fo 0 51 rlt ck illl l 11 rty qr nvel 50 GO I 1 r I il Y Ritlll nil l 60 6 rI I I Y I Y HlI HI 65 70 r flil r 1111 70 n en r r1 1ilIHl qrnvel nlHl silty clay 85 90 f r lilY 90 100 I 1111 flilrr tn InIHl 100 Ill itl1d silty clny 110 130 f ill1 1 nilty cloy 130 IJ fI 1 i lilY COilrse Iallll al1d 9ravel 135 Ino f 11 II 1 i clny 100 2 1 0 Inn n ro nllet niIty clay 210 230 il t roll lid nu l Borne silty clay 230 250 Clf illl COilrnn and BIIla11 gravel ---PAGE BREAK--- I WELL LOG REPORT File No L 7 75 Co 11 H J fr I o C Form I 03 R2 81 State law requires that this form be filed by the water well driller within 60 days after completion of the well I WATER lEVEL 1 WEll OWNER 8 L Static water level I 57 I leel below land sur1ace Name City of Bel rade II Jlowing closed ln pressure psi 2 CURRENT MAILING ADDRESS I Igpm I 1 Belgrade Montana Controlled by valve reducers other specify r 3 WEll lOCATION 9 WElL TEST DATA X pump bailer County G at in other specily Township 1 S NIS Range 4 E EIW Pumping level below land surface J Sw 1 5Ll Section 1 166 ft after hrs pumping I IllS Igpm lot Block It aller hrs pumping gpm I Subdivision 10 WAS WELL PLUGGED OR ABANDONED Yes XNo l PROPOSED USE Domestic Stock fJ Irrigation LJ If yes how Other 0 specify 11 DATE COMPLETED M w 1 qR I 5 DRILLING METHOD X cable bored 12 WELL LOG forward rotary reverse rotary Jetted Depth ft other specify From To Formation I T nCO on e 4 S WELL CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETON ize 01 Size and From To Perforalions and lor I Iilled weighl Ieel feell Screen X hole 01 casing 6 16 X Kind From To Size feel Ieell 375 Stainl 55 I wall 2 168 Steel 040 165 172 070 172 181 I 080 181 185 085 185 189 i 090 189 201 I 100 201 205 Was casing lell open end Yes JNo J Was a packer or seal used Yes No II so what material usa separale sheel if necessary Was the well gravel packed Yes X No 13 DRILLER S CERTIFICATION Was the well grouted LYes No This well was drilled under my jurisdiction and this report is To what depth 20 feet true to the best 01 my knowledge Material used in grouting Cement Well head completion Pitless adapter Dale Yes XNo Jones Welding Drilling Company Top of casing 12 in or greater above grade Firm Name XYes No 1n3 Rridg r Drivp R07 pman Montana 7 WHAT IS THE TEMPERATURE OF THE WATER Address Degrees Fahrenheit a 51 et l tl 17 ft X1 Measured OEstimated Signalur license No 1III0NTANA DCPARTIIIICN T OF NA TURAL RCSOURCCS A 32 SOUTH EWING HELENA MONTANA 59620 449 3962 1 f H DEPARTMENT COpy DRillER Plllase give this copy to the well owner to complete reverse side omplelll reverse side Form 602 and send to DNRC ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF BELGRADE WELL LOG From To Formation 0 l Top Soil 1 55 Coarse gravel cobbles 55 85 Dirty tight sand gravel 85 8 m Sand gravel 89 100 Sand gravel with clay 100 104 Sand gravel fine with some clay 104Y2 107Y2 sand gravel with clay 107Y2 110 Clay 110 115 Sand gravel with clay 115 117 2 Sand 117Y2 124 Sand gravel 124 136 Sand gravel with clay 136 139 Sand fine gravel 139 160 Sand gravel with clay 160 166 Dirty sand gravel 166 176 Sand gravel with clay 176 178 Very dirty sand gravel 178 191Y2 Sand gravel with some clay 191 196 Dirty sand gravel 196 205 Sand gravel with some clay ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF BEWRADE WELL PUMPING TEST Started 12 15 P M April 22 1983 Finished 12 20 P M April 23 1983 TIME PUMPING HEIGHT G P M WATER IN LEVEL lilUBE 12 15 P M 150 ft 11 In 1035 12 30 150 11 1035 1 00 150 11 1035 1 30 150 11 1035 2 00 150 11 1035 2 30 150 11 1035 3 00 150 11 1035 3 30 150 11 1035 4 00 150 11 1035 4 30 150 11 1035 5 00 150 11 1035 5 30 150 11 1035 6 00 150 11 1035 6 30 151 10Yz 1015 7 00 151 10Yz 1015 8 00 151 10lh 1015 9 00 151 10lh 1015 10 00 151 10Yz 1015 11 55 151 10lh 1015 3 00 A M [PHONE REDACTED] 4 15 151 1012 1015 5 30 152 10 990 6 55 152 10 990 8 15 152 10 990 9 00 166 [PHONE REDACTED] 9 30 165 12Y213 1115 10 00 165 12Y213 1115 r 10 30 165 12Y213 1115 1 11 00 166 1 13 1115 11 30 166 12Y213 1115 12 00 Noon 166 121h13 1115 12 15 166 12Y213 1115 V 12 20 166 12 713 1115 PUMPING WATER LEVEL 166 ft Recovery Rate when shut off 10 seconds 125 ft 20 seconds 105 ft 30 seconds 95 ft 1 minute 75 ft 2 minutes 62 ft 3 minutes 60 ft 4 minutes 59 it 5 minutes 58 ft STATIC WATER LEVEL 57 ft ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 C of e J S YCa J fu TDl o c O 1 ft 1 I f I i t e 0 1 11 I i j 1 I 1 l0 1 I i 1 I o IJ g I I I oJ a I I I 14 ft5L IL I l u I Y I I t i t l CI d I I RJ J I I I 3 s lot cl j 0 SCr I I to 17 0 l0 I 1710 1 I O I l io l gS 00 I S To t o S li c Oll O O J CI r 1 os uo I I I i I i I I I i J t fi V ---PAGE BREAK--- WATER TABLE GROUNDWATER DEPTH MAPS ---PAGE BREAK--- I JI l J 111 I OI Zj so r n e Q d t 3 4 1 A N4 L CIl 4 l i v j N L I y 0 v f I t Uti 1 mt l f lfillf u l IW z r l lfi ilo i V ji tII ii11 f i il if J IJ h ffh t 1 A I a rh r I J f g I 8 8 J V j t 1 i1i r r I r I j r c Ik l I C I t I l 0h If V I L r Ifi N rtI t f r 15 kf t I V c C j I J n I f tv lJ V L 7 J I r v c It l r U I t v t J t 4 j I J T r rJ fL 1 V 1 oJ I f II J r I I l 1 7A Ir I I j J J iJoi j 1 2 K Jt0 rr 1 I Y I P I il i v l 5A1i r L r V 7 il 1l 1 r dlIIfi K r R aY tJil J K I L c Yl Jrl l I I l C L C r II J r Jr I f I I J l A TJi llo Vl il e f I N t 1 i eJ e 7 j J P I 1 I h I 1 f Nt Ill V r I V I h J I L 2o I r 7 A f l N t A l ll II lZ r A Y lf i Ij of I 0 Y t 1j or I g I i o I I K x V r r1 lV fi J i K cr 1 v I v Ib lll 110 1 Vr I 21t tll jl 1 2lw c J o ifr I J J 11 i J Q V l4 t6l L ill c LJ I JC A r h A ft ill 1 0 I 0 L It t r lJ e Jl 1 flY I 11 I J J l I a Jt 1 v I Y j I II I I j l 8r 1 lrl I I01 1 I I I f I i kl I boo 1 I i II I Y i rj A p K II A V rIpJ V I J ol l I J p 4 V 4 l I 2 1 4 t 4f t1 fI t I t j 1 I a J f J r J V v f Y@ J t b I I 1 1SI1 J i l r I J h c I f o l A j I j jii I Y tf J I 4 l L W 7V rpr r CIli J o ---PAGE BREAK--- I filII I lijil z fi irit IS If Z 31 i if g Z tlil I l a 00 Q ---PAGE BREAK--- AREA WELLS ---PAGE BREAK--- TOTAL STATIC PERF PERF DEPTH WATER YIELD WATER LITHOLOGY FROM TO I LOCATION SITE NAME FEET LEVEL FT GPM YEAR USE PRESENT FT FT 1S 04E 01 DURHAM W E UNKNOWN 1S 04E 01 M M READY MIX 81 0 45 00 50 0 1971 DOMESTIC 76 0 81 0 COMMERCIAL n1S 04E 01 PULMAN SARGE 78 0 50 00 16 0 1983 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 01 THOMSON RICHARD E 47 0 15 00 20 0 1978 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 01 01 CITY OF BELGRADE 60 0 2000 0 1928 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY 01S 04E 01 02 CITY OF BELGRADE 60 0 1928 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY 01S 04E 01 02 THOMSON RICHARD E 46 5 13 00 20 0 1978 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 01 ABB 01 BAUMGARTNER BILL 320 0 205 00 40 0 1990 DOMESTIC YES 15 0 280 0 STOCKWATER 1S 04E 01 AD POTTS ALAN 100 0 72 00 30 0 1982 UNKNOWN 01S 04E 01 B WI LLIAMS FLOYD 95 0 37 00 14 0 1964 DOMESTIC n1S 04E 01 B 01 WASS ARLIN JUDY 85 0 49 00 30 0 1990 IRRIGATION YES 79 0 85 0 1S 04E 01 03 CITY OF BELGRADE 200 0 54 00 1000 0 1948 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY YES 53 5 178 0 CITY WELL 1 01S 04E 01 C LONGHNANE WILLIAM 97 0 60 00 16 0 1973 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 01 CB ARNESON W A R N E 117 0 58 00 70 0 1985 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY 1S 04E 01 CB BESSETTE JEANETTE 97 0 58 00 1 0 1954 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 01 CB FENDLER ERIC 93 0 30 00 21 0 1979 DOMESTIC v1S 04E 01 CB SHELHAMER LLOYD 114 0 400 0 1946 IRRIGATION 01S 04E 01 DBD LDS CHURCH 98 0 45 00 60 0 1987 IRRIGATION n1S 04E 01 01 CITY OF BELGRADE 185 0 42 00 600 0 1978 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY YES 160 0 185 0 CITY WELL 2 1S 04E 01 DD FISHER KENNETH 120 0 48 00 50 0 1985 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 01 01 CITY OF BELGRADE 205 0 57 00 1115 0 1983 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY YES 165 0 172 0 CITY WELL 4 172 0 1810 181 0 185 0 185 0 189 0 189 0 201 0 201 0 205 0 1S 04E 02 BELGRADE DEVEL CORP 96 0 48 00 20 0 1978 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY 1S 04E 02 LUTES ERNEST 72 0 30 00 10 0 1956 DOMESTIC COMMERCIAL 01S 04E 02 OSTERMAN DAVID 80 0 50 00 50 0 1979 DOMESTIC 1 S 04E 02 RON SCHMIT CONSTRUC 98 0 45 00 40 0 1983 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 02 TWO BY FOUR DEVELOP 109 0 49 00 30 0 1980 INDUSTRIAL DOMESTI C 01S 04E 02 01 AQUATECH 75 0 50 00 35 0 1991 DOMESTIC YES INCORPORATED IRRIGATION 15 04E 02 01 DEWI TT ALLEN 63 0 26 00 50 0 1992 DOMESTIC YES u1S 04E 02 01 HORNER DARRELL 83 0 5100 30 0 1993 DOMESTIC YES 01S 04E 02 01 MONTANA HIDAWAYS 100 0 59 00 35 0 1993 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 02 01 MONTANA HIDEAWAYS 97 0 6100 30 0 1992 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 02 A THREE CHEERS MOTEL 99 0 60 00 60 0 1972 UNKNOWN 1S 04E 02 AA CLARK ALMA C 65 0 30 0 1934 DOMESTIC STOCKWATER 01S 04E 02 ABBB MCLEES JOHN 100 0 50 00 7 0 1979 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 02 AC ERICKSON JESS 92 0 53 00 20 0 1968 STOCKWATER 1S 04E 02 AC 01 CREEK BUTLER 80 0 45 00 50 0 1991 DOMESTIC YES INDUSTRIAL 01S 04E 02 ACC FILSON METAL PRODUCT 80 0 55 00 25 0 1980 UNKNOWN 1S 04E 02 ADB MYERS ROB 90 0 53 00 15 0 1976 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 02 B CLARK FRANK 65 0 50 0 1917 DOMESTIC STOCKWATER 01S 04E 02 B 01 ANDREWS FLOYD 83 0 47 00 20 0 1990 DOMESTIC YES 015 04E 02 BA WAHL ROBERT D 78 0 44 00 20 0 1965 DOMESTIC 15 04E 02 BA WINTEROWD ROBERT 80 0 38 00 30 0 1965 DOMESTIC 15 04E 02 BAC 01 OSPREY BOATS 100 0 55 00 40 0 1994 DOMESTIC YES u1S 04E 02 BBB PRESCOTT JOHN 80 0 57 00 30 0 1987 DOMESTIC STOCKWATER n1S 04E 02 BC VAN DYKEN HERMAN 87 0 55 00 20 0 1971 DOMESTI C STOCKWATER ---PAGE BREAK--- 1S 04E 02 BCD SCHWARTZ ELIZABETH 82 0 45 00 50 0 1987 DOMESTIC STOCKWATER n1S 04E 02 C 01 WESTRA BERNARD S 125 0 63 00 30 0 1990 IRRIGATION YES COMMERCIAL 1S 04E 02 CA YOUNG STAN 100 0 5100 75 0 1989 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 02 0 SOUTH FORK LUMBER CO 186 0 500 0 1953 INDUSTRIAL 60 0 189 0 01 S 04E 02 DAB BELGRADE DEV CREDIT 105 0 62 00 24 0 1979 INDUSTRIAL I 1S 04E 02 DAB HOUDASHEL T JIM 810 55 00 20 0 1979 INDUSTRIAL 1S 04E 02 DAB MIKESELL KEN 79 0 58 00 30 0 1981 UNKNOWN v1S 04E 02 DAB TRIANGLE IRRIGATION 100 0 45 00 50 0 1981 UNKNOWN 01S 04E 02 DAB 01 GOMER WI LLlAM 104 0 56 00 20 0 1979 INDUSTRIAL YES n1S 04E 02 DBC 01 MONTANA READY MIX 100 0 52 00 50 0 1992 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 02 DC SCHI ANS SALES 95 0 58 00 30 0 1987 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY 1S 04E 02 DC 01 SMITH EQUIPMENT 103 0 61 00 30 0 1994 DOMESTIC YES 01S 04E 02 DO HODIS VINCENT 76 0 47 00 30 0 1961 DOMESTIC STOCKWATER 1S 04E 02 DOC 01 JUSTESN ERIC 95 0 46 00 40 0 1982 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 11 01 NELSON BOYD 43 0 12 00 100 0 1991 DOMESTIC YES ts 04E 11 A EMERSON CHET 83 0 60 00 15 0 1972 INDUSTRIAL 01S 04E 11 A NELSON BOYD 99 0 47 00 24 0 1975 DOMESTIC n1S 04E 11 AA 01 DUNN HOWARD 101 0 60 00 65 0 1990 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 11 ADA 01 MT DEPT 9F HWYS 60 4 1994 UNUSED YES BELGRADE INTERCHANGE 1 01S 04E 11 ADA 02 MT DEPT OF HWYS 59 4 37 40 1994 UNUSED YES BELGRADE INTERCHANGE 2 1S 04E 11 ADA 03 MT DEPT OF HWYS 60 7 1994 UNUSED YES BELGRADE INTERCHANGE 3 1S 04E 11 ADA 04 MT DEPT OF HWYS 60 7 1994 UNUSED YES BELGRADE INTERCHANGE 4 01S 04E 11 BC SATRE LOUIS 72 0 38 00 30 0 1978 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 11 0 BRADLEY BOB 80 0 48 00 20 0 1978 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 11 0 KRAFT KENNETH 85 0 49 00 45 0 1977 DOMESTIC 1 S 04E 11 DA BARTZ CURTIS 87 0 35 00 25 0 1965 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 11 DA PECKENPAUGH INC 78 0 32 00 30 0 1986 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 11 DA RABBIT CAR WASH 89 0 38 00 45 0 1982 DOMESTIC 78 0 80 0 1S 04E 11 DA 01 BAIRS TRUCK STOP 60 0 1990 MONITORING YES 40 0 60 0 1S 04E 11 DA 01 BAIRS TRUCK STOP 613 1990 MONITORING YES 41 0 61 0 u1S 04E 11 DA 01 BAIRS TRUCK STOPS 150 0 72 00 100 0 1992 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY YES 124 0 144 0 INC 1S 04E 11 DA 02 BAIRS TRUCK STOP 60 8 1990 MONITORING YES 41 0 610 BRW 2 1S 04E 11 DA 04 BAIRS TRUCK STOP 615 1990 MONITORING YES 42 0 62 0 01S 04E 11 DBB KESSLER ARNOLD 67 0 15 00 100 0 1974 DOMESTIC 50 0 55 0 01S 04E 11 DO HODIS RUTH 65 0 14 00 30 0 1971 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 11 DO HODIS VINCENT 80 0 57 00 48 0 1970 PUBLIC IATER SUPPLY 1S 04E 11 DO HODIS VINCENT 80 0 57 00 48 0 1970 UNKNOWN u1S 04E 11 DO HOD I S VINCENT 90 0 48 00 48 0 1972 FUBLIC WATER SUPPLY DOMESTI C 1S 04E 11 DO MORTENSON RAY 87 0 55 00 25 0 1963 DOMESTIC STOCKl ATER 1S 04E 11 DO 01 CAPE DON 80 0 35 00 40 0 1990 DOMESTIC YES 01S 04E 11 DOC WARD IOOD STOVES CO 44 0 16 00 75 0 1980 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 12 PRATT JOHN 0 105 0 48 00 20 0 1979 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 12 PRA TT JOHN D 102 0 45 00 24 0 1979 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 12 AA FISHER KENNETH 74 0 49 00 30 0 1966 DOMESTIC u1S 04E 12 AA VOEGELE S INC 95 0 44 00 48 0 1973 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY 01S 04E 12 AA VOEGELE S INC 90 0 43 00 48 0 1971 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 12 AC MILLER MARJORIE 94 0 55 00 30 0 1987 DOMESTIC STOCKWATER 1S 04E 12 AD CHANDLER E MERLE 75 0 40 00 60 0 1954 DOMESTIC STOCKl ATER 01S 04E 12 AD HALVERSON VIONE 97 0 46 00 24 0 1980 UNKNOWN 1S 04E 12 BC RELLER GLENN 79 0 40 00 20 0 1957 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 12 BCCC MORGAN HORACE 85 0 55 00 75 0 1979 DOMESTIC u1S 04E 12 C GALLATIN EQUIPMENT 100 0 38 00 95 0 1977 DOMESTIC 78 0 98 0 01S 04E 12 C KEIL CHARLES M 82 0 40 00 60 0 1902 DOMESTIC n1S 04E 12 C MARSHALL ROBERT 910 5 00 20 0 1975 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 12 C RICHARDSON KEN 92 0 35 00 30 0 1974 DOMESTIC ---PAGE BREAK--- v1S 04E 14 M LENEHAN ARTHUR 68 0 38 00 20 0 1973 OMESTIC 01S 04E 14 M LENEHAN ARTHUR H 66 0 38 00 20 0 1972 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 M PRETZ MARVIN W 110 0 23 00 99 0 1981 UNKNOWN 1S 04E 14 MD LENEHAN ARTHUR M 102 0 33 00 48 0 1972 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 ABA RASH BILL JR 70 0 35 00 30 0 1985 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 14 ABA RASH WI LLlAM 65 0 14 00 25 0 1971 DOMESTIC I 01S 04E 14 ABBB SMART ED 50 0 22 00 150 0 1979 DOMESTIC 23 0 41 0 I RR I GATlON 1S 04E 14 ABD NEELEY ROBERT 85 0 30 00 25 0 1977 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 AC 01 MONFORTON DOUG 86 0 9 50 60 0 1993 DOMESTIC YES 76 0 86 0 01S 04E 14 ACA MORGAN DAN 71 0 26 00 30 0 1973 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 ACA MORGAN DAN 710 26 00 30 0 1973 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 ACB INGERSOLL EARL 60 0 26 00 50 0 1983 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 ACC BOUGHTON HARRY 610 19 00 30 0 1975 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 14 ACD 01 HALL IRA 80 0 28 00 60 0 1994 DOMESTIC YES 01S 04E 14 B THOMAS EDWARD 59 0 40 00 30 0 1973 DOMESTIC f 1S 04E 14 B 01 MCKENNEY STANLEY 58 0 9 00 48 0 1971 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 14 B 02 MOLYNEAUX CHARLES 85 0 12 00 40 0 1981 UNKNOWN YES 1S 04E 14 B 02 MURRAY JIM 62 0 30 00 15 0 1977 DOMESTIC YES 01S 04E 14 B 04 THOMAS ED DIANA 59 0 40 00 30 0 1973 DOMESTIC YES n1S 04E 14 BC 01 REHER MARK 60 0 8 00 60 0 1993 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 14 C F I NNEGAt HUGH 40 0 10 0 1890 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 C SWARTZ WILLIAM 43 0 2100 14 0 1974 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 14 CA BERTA CHARLES 72 0 12 00 20 0 1971 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 14 CC BARHAM RAY 110 0 25 00 35 0 1973 DOMESTIC 105 0 110 0 1S 04E 14 CC 01 GUESMAN GENE 50 0 18 00 40 0 1993 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 14 CCC 01 COPENHAGEN LEE OR 63 0 23 00 30 0 1994 DOMESTIC YES KATHY 01S 04E 14 CD LEVENO GENE 32 0 12 00 60 0 1979 DOMESTIC IRRIGATION 1S 04E 14 DB JOHNSON BOB 50 0 3 00 45 0 1978 UNKNOWN 1S 04E 14 DO MERCER HENRY 58 0 12 00 24 0 1975 DOMESTI C 02S 04E 11 DO LAWRENCE LUCIA 100 0 17 00 150 0 1988 DOMESTIC 40 0 60 0 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY 96 records listed TOTAL STATI C PERF PERF DEPTH WATER YIELD WATER LITHOLOGY FROM TO OCATlON SITE NAME FEET LEVEL FT GPM YEAR USE PRESENT FT FT 01S 05E 07 01 PIONEER REDI MIX 100 0 33 00 100 0 1994 UNKNOWN YES 01S 05E 07 ABB GALLATIN CTY AIRPORT 62 0 33 00 50 0 1975 DOMESTIC S 05E 07 B CITY OF BOZEMAN 63 0 43 00 30 0 1961 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY 1S 05E 07 B GALLATIN FIELD AIRPO 65 0 30 00 65 0 1975 UNKNOWN 60 0 65 0 1S 05E 07 BA GALLATIN FLD AIRPORT 59 0 18 00 30 0 1973 UNKNOWN 01S 05E 07 C FIGGINS WILLIE 115 0 60 00 350 0 1974 INDUSTRIAL 105 0 115 0 01S 05E 07 CM CITY OF BOZEMAN 130 0 19 00 40 0 1981 UNKNOWN 1S 05E 07 OM 01 WESTERN PLUMBING 150 0 33 00 100 0 1988 DOMESTIC YES 0 0 0 0 ORGANIZ MAINT SHOP 01S 05E 07 DC 01 PIONEER REDI MIX 60 0 28 00 90 0 1994 OTHER YES S 05E 07 DO JELMELAND B K 66 0 10 00 30 0 1956 DOMESTIC 1S 05E 18 CHESLEY DAN 55 0 20 00 20 0 1978 DOMESTIC 1S 05E 18 A FEDDES LENA 40 0 60 0 DOMESTIC STOCKWATER 2 records listed TOTAL STATI C PERF PERF DEPTH WATER YIELD WATER LITHOLOGY FROM TO CATlON SITE NAME FEET LEVEL FT GPM YEAR USE PRESENT FT FT 1N 04E 35 A 01 KID KART INC 83 0 38 00 60 0 1994 INDUSTRIAL YES 01N 04E 35 ODD 01 BELGRADE BASEBALL 82 0 4100 30 0 1993 DOMESTIC YES INC records listed ---PAGE BREAK--- 1S 04E 12 CA DEVRIES JOHN 80 0 32 00 25 0 1977 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 12 CB SPRUNGER ELMER 910 32 00 20 0 1972 DOMESTIC n1S 04E 12 CB 01 HAUGEN BRET 103 0 39 00 60 0 1994 UNKNOWN YES 1S 04E 12 eBB SUPER 8 MOTEL 160 0 43 00 110 0 1985 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 12 CC C W 87 0 60 00 32 0 1973 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 12 CC BACKLIN CLARENCE 46 0 19 00 18 0 1972 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 12 CC MERCER ERLENE 103 0 62 00 20 0 1989 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 12 COO DEVRIES JOHN 73 0 25 00 30 0 1973 DOMESTIC 1 S 04E 12 0 DAVIS DALE H 76 0 42 00 30 0 1968 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 12 DA MILLER CARL M 79 0 50 00 25 0 1972 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 A DAVIS BILL 83 0 32 00 20 0 1979 STOCKWATER COMMERCIAL 1 S 04E 13 A DAVIS DALE H 72 0 50 0 1900 STOCKWATER DOMESTIC U1S 04E 13 A DAVIS DALE H 89 0 34 00 25 0 1966 STOCKWATER 01S 04E 13 AD DAVIS BILL 80 0 28 00 50 0 1989 DOMESTIC 1 S 04E 13 B CHRISTENSEN PAUL S 54 0 20 00 50 0 1987 DOMESTIC 1 S 04E 13 B 01 HARDAWAY GORDON 110 0 26 50 33 0 1991 DOMESTIC YES 89 5 100 0 1S04E13BC 01 JENSEN BERNIE 100 0 22 00 50 0 1994 DOMESTIC YES 01S 04E 13 BCC KINGDOM HALL OF 40 0 15 00 40 0 1976 DOMESTIC n1S 04E 13 C JOOS ARTHUR ARMINA 75 0 28 00 70 0 1982 UNKNOWN 55 0 73 0 1S 04E 13 C NEHL THEODORE C 510 23 00 30 0 1984 DOMESTIC 1 S 04E 13 C SCHAFER DENNIS 46 0 17 00 20 0 1984 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 C ZIGAN DAVE 44 0 10 00 20 0 1983 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 CBB 01 FANDRICH NORVILLE 60 0 15 00 75 0 1992 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 13 CC FANDRICK GIL 49 0 3 00 30 0 1976 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 13 CC STEWART CLARENCE 20 0 1967 DOMESTIC STOCKWATER 01S 04E 13 CC 01 CLARK EDWARD AND 62 0 15 00 85 0 1993 DOMESTIC YES ELAINE 1S 04E 13 CCC PARMER GREG 45 0 3 00 40 0 1974 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 13 0 DETHLEFSEN TONY 42 0 12 00 80 0 1983 DOMESTIC u1S 04E 13 0 DONAHUE WILL 510 10 00 25 0 1983 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 0 KAHLER WALLACE 52 0 12 00 25 0 1983 DOMESTIC A1S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 63 0 42 00 20 0 1986 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 72 0 40 00 30 0 1986 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 72 0 49 00 18 0 1986 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 55 0 9 00 60 0 1989 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 510 2100 20 0 1984 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 57 0 32 00 15 0 1984 DOMESTIC 1 S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 59 0 32 00 20 0 1984 DOMESTIC u1S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 63 0 46 00 20 0 1985 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 65 0 49 00 20 0 1985 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 13 0 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 102 0 24 00 70 0 1984 OTHER 90 0 100 0 1S 04E 13 0 MCMILLAN WARREN 50 0 20 00 30 0 1983 DOMESTIC 1 S 04E 13 0 ROBINSON ROY 54 0 30 00 20 0 1984 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 0 SCHAUER RUSSEL 57 0 39 00 20 0 1984 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 0 01 KRUSHENSKY JERRY 79 0 42 00 7 0 1990 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 13 0 01 NALL RANDY 63 0 29 00 45 0 1991 DOMESTIC YES 1S 04E 13 DA KRUSHENSKY JERRY 58 0 27 00 60 0 1986 DOMESTIC u1S 04E 13 DA SIMPSON E F 58 0 10 00 24 0 1974 DOMESTIC 01 S 04E 13 DAB KRUSHENSKY JERRY 63 0 20 00 90 0 1986 DOMESTIC A1S 04E 13 DAB 01 NOLL RANDY 82 0 38 00 20 0 1992 DOMESTIC YES 1 S 04E 13 DC MORETZ WAYNE H 60 0 35 00 18 0 1980 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 13 DC RICHARDSON DELMAR 60 0 35 00 20 0 1980 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 13 DC 01 VANDERVOSS ALVIN 60 0 30 00 35 0 1993 DOMESTIC YES 01S 04E 13 DO KRUSHENSKY JERRY 52 0 12 00 50 0 1987 DOMESTIC STOCKWATER 1S 04E 13 DO KRUSHSENSKY JERRY 58 0 23 00 40 0 1987 DOMESTIC u1S 04E 13 DO MCM I LLI N WARREN 49 0 22 00 30 0 1977 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 14 BRASTRUP RICH R 68 0 20 00 40 0 1973 DOMESTI C 63 0 68 0 1S 04E 14 CHRISTIANSEN GLEN DI 61 0 9 00 20 0 1972 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 COMMUNITY CHAPEL 44 0 8 00 25 0 1983 DOMESTIC IRRIGATION 01 S 04E 14 GRIFFIN BUD 92 0 42 00 15 0 1972 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 14 HAVERLUK PETE 74 0 35 00 12 0 1975 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 MAINWARING RICH B 69 0 26 00 15 0 1971 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 SCHRAMM JOHN 40 0 14 00 30 0 1979 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 SHELDON JACK C 32 0 1100 48 0 1974 DOMESTIC 01S 04E 14 SIESS RICHARD T 57 0 10 00 40 0 1974 DOMESTIC n1S 04E 14 WEGLING THOMAS 45 0 10 00 40 0 1975 DOMESTIC 1S 04E 14 WILHELM TRICH 45 0 10 00 45 0 1977 DOMESTIC ---PAGE BREAK--- co W CI a o H 0 llIlH W ilia H Ollll UU III W Q III WQ U llIl 1 o III WIG llIl CI 1 H llIliI Ll X OCl llIl WllIl X WI llIl J a w Q N III llIl J N 0 llIl ON a W llIlo Q WI III HI o o a III llIl LI IZ o W U llIlI o III o llIl 5 IG H llIl Q w xi I x U W III W W LI U IGI U U Z H x III Z o I I t l CI t l H llIl llIl W J Q W LI llIl w W I o Z X X llIl 1II 1 IXJ X 1II a llIl l xa IL1 J J ZllIl J Z IWa a Ia LI Z llIlO Z Q x I W x I n a I Q Z I w w I a III w x llIl IZ QZ Iu W Z IIII HIIII llIlOZZLl llIl j Q 5ffi 5 g j ng g gj ggffi WH I I HXOW C H IOllll C OH O QQ ICC J CI IX UIGXLl X UI I aX I U IX ClU llIl J a Q IQCI I CI IIIQ Q J QXIII WWUllIlW Z C LU o I U I o III 11I11I Z 1 1 00 ZZ 11I11I zz zz IZ Z 11I11I o 0 1 1Z ww Z LUWZZI I HllIl l 11I11I1 10 11I11I U ww Ollll UH WWWx x I WWlIIllIlW I I I I IIIw jj j tt aa 55ii llIl aa W x Z llIl w Jo W x Z w U llIlI o III II Z U wt l ZCI o a III J llIll Wu 11I Q Z l ou III I ZllIl 1 oa a W X l I o wI llIl W IIII CI IIIl CIw I J I I I 1 1 l Ll LI Ll LI LI CI o oWIIl 1Il H CI I I Z x x XXI X I I 1 1 1 a Il 1l Il I1l W W ww lw Q 0 OQ O u 1 1 ww J J I 1 11 1 I 1 1 11I 1 w J J J J J J J CICI ww 00 CI t lClt lClUU W 03 03 03 03 o OOOQOO 11I11I 4 00 III 11I11I11I11I11I11I 4 4 4 o 0010000 03 03 J J ZZ W J ZZ W J ZIII J J J NwWW Z ZIIIWZZZ J NWN J LU III J IIlW ZIII N 3N 3 3 Z3 III 0 co COIll III Ill 4 CO III III 4 III III N N III 4 t lt l t l t lt l t l t l CI co 00 o 00 CI 0 Ct OCt 0 a 0 co 0 0 NN N IIIN N 4 o X lC QQ alC CI OOOOLl O I lC o 00 00 I CO III IIIN III CO4 40 J U I N 0 0 o U 000000 0 000000 0 t I I I CO 41Il1ll03 1Il 4 CJlo O O f1 1Il 03 4I1l NIIl 000000 0 UI UUIU U XX 4 Clt l X 44 03 03 lClIIICl CI X 4 II W J CI W 03 o III W Z W III 3 Z l Ll co4 X lll W o I I w J CI w 03 o III 4 o 03 W Z W III JZ IIIN N t l o o co N CII o t 0 0 o U X 4 03t l l Ll co4 Il W Q I I w J CI W o III 4 o W Z W III N Z III t l o o III N lC Q coo I 4 COo 4 o U X 4 CI l Ll CO III 1 1 1 I Ll Ll LI LI cooo C 1Il 4 4 I I X lll W Q Il Il Il Il WWW W 000 0 I I W J 11 I1 wWLU 3 J 3 CI W 03 o t lt lCl WWW 03 000 III o 11I11I11I 44 000 03 W Z w III L I III WWLU ZZZ WW3 11I11I11I wNW 1113Z o III 4 00 It IIt IIIl 44 t l t lt lt l o o 0 0 o N III III III N 4N lC Q 000 o o N 0 0 III o U 00 00 I I I CO 00 1t I0 CO COCO It IIt IItI 0 UUU X 4 03 CI eXX 44 03 CICICI I I W 3 U W o III o W Z 3 III 3 III o It I 4 CI o N zo o o I CON 4 4 U X 4 CI I I LU 3 CI w 03 o III 4 co 3 Z W Z CO CO N t l o o CON CI I o o I N N o U X 4 CI I I W 3 CI W 03o III 4 o 3 Z w Z W Z o ItI 4 t l o o o 4 lC Q o o Io 03 N o U e4 CI I 1 1 LI Ll LI 0 1t Icr e X I 11 Il IlIl W WW Q QO j I W 3 CI W 03 o III 4 o 3 Z W Z N Z o ItI t l o o ItI 4 z o o o ItI 4 ItI It Io U X CI I 1 1 WW 33 CICI WW 00 11I11I 00 33 ZZ 33 ZZ 00 1IlItI 4 t lt l 0 00 1t I0 N z z 00 00 0 I I O 4 oN N 0 UU ex CICI I l Ll LI o X X I l ll lI W w o 0 I I W 3 CI W o III 3 Z 3Z 3Z N t l CIC H I CO0 04 o U e 04 CI 11 ww J 3 CICI wW 04 0 11I11I 04 04 3 3 ZZ w3 11I11I 3w 11I11I 00 00 tt ItII1l IIlItI D 4 4 t lCl 00 00 0 IIIN z z CC 00 I I 4N CO coer III III 0 Uw XX4 ClCI l Ll CO III lll LU C 1 1 WW 33 C1t l WW 11I11I 03 3 3 ZZ 33 11I11I LUW 11I11I Clt l 0 0 NN Z lC CC 00 0 I I 4N COCO IIlItI0 UCI XX4 CICI I I W 3 CI W III o 04 LU III LU Z W Z CI o III 4 zC o I o 4 U CI I 1 1 1 LI LI LI 04 40 01 4 X lll W o I eX 1 1 1 Il Il Il www QCC I I W 3 1 1 1 1 wwww J J 3 J 1 t l w t lt ltlt l wwww 04 04 o 00 11I11I11I11I4 0000 III o 04 04 w III J III W Z W J J J 11I11I11I11I 3 WW III ZIII W wW Z IIIZ o ItI N N 0000 It IoltlCO 0 N 0 N 4 t l t lt ltlt l co o o CO 0000 0000 01t l0 ONNO CO 4 a III o o Il az lC IIlCQH 10000 0000 I I 4OlN CO N CO o IllN 00 00 t lUUIl X CI eX e e t ---PAGE BREAK--- W U CI M ac w uu III W III a a Ill WICl ac U Z M acl i OU M ac Z wac EW ac CI W a N ac III ac 2 0 llCN ON C1 W aco a 141 III o o CI III ac M 141U ac a III o llC i llC a I U 141 III W W U ICl a u Z E g U u i U llC llC W a W M llC W Wi llCW2W CI llC EE E D lI Z 2 W W Z a W III Ill a u W 141 a acw 3 z w Ill wz lIla aw IIlIllW WO llCa jll z e QlIlzi z 5 5 i z acac OW OCl W ozw O 8oo o i llC llCO 2 u wa z uIIlO llC llC C1 llC ZCI Oa lI ZE III C1 III ww III III U Z a III a Qzz 55 llC III III I ZZZ IIlWW z awZi Q acacz 5 5555 Z III WWIIlIll wwww M llCZ WWZZIIlOO zz uu z Cl E XNN M Cl 1Il llC 0 Z M 1Il o wwe aaOOEw wW 5 IClIClZ llC uuoo 888 8 5 88 ac w So z CI w a 141 U ac a III W 2 Z U CO I z z z z z CI CI CI CI CI W wwww a aaoa W wwww 2 J WWWW 222 D U UUUU UUUU W W WWWW WWWw o 0 0000 0000 W U ac C1 lQ w u Mill Qz OU III ZllC fa W o III III o 0 W W III III N W W Z o W llC U o o o N W III i i U llC llC W 2 o o lit o U z CI III III III III 0000 WWWW III III III III WWWW ZZZZ WWIIJ ZZZ lit lit 0 litlit lit D U DUUI 00 0 0000 N NN i i er a N o U 0000 DODO I NN CO CO o CO 0000 UUUU CI z z z roI UUlUlU III III III III 0000 WWWW III III III III WWWW ZZZZ II N UUUlU 0000 0000 1000 N roIN lii 0000 0000 I I 0 lit er NNNCO COCO CO CO 0000 UUUU z z z z C1 N CO I I z z CI CI WW 00 z z CI CI W W a a W 2 W W 2 W ww 2 2 lit z CI W a N N z z CI CI W W a a W 2 WWW 2 U U U U UU U UUU W W W W WW W WWw o 0 0 CI 00 0 000 III III W III W Z W III W III W III III o W III W III III o W IIII J III III III 00 WW III III J W iSla II W o co 0 lit N U U o o N o N za i o I er o U o I er o U z z U o N I CO o U z U N i o IN o U z UlU 00 00 i 0 00 N CO 00 UU z z II o II III III 000 W II W III JZ www III III III W J II II III N N III W 0 U o o o UUU 0 0 roI i i o o I lit N CO o U 0 000 I I I roIN Ner co er 000 UUU z z z C1 N z z z CI CI CI W W W a a a W W J 00 0 I I I c c Cl LL WWW 000 W WWWW W J J J J J J U U UI UUUlU U W W W WWWW W o 0 0 DaCIa 0 II o W II 2 III roI UI o o N llC o o t er N CO o U c III o W III 2 III W II U U o o I CO CO o U c CI III o J III 141Z J III II III III III 0000 J 222 III III III III llill J NN Z J J oco o CON co U UUlUU o o 10000 0000 litlitolit zo Z 0 0000 0000 I I I lIt NCOCON N o N fOlCOCO CO 0000 UUUU o tN lit o U c fOl U C C fOl er llC 1410 ac I Z I Z Z C1 CI w w a a U c CI W a 1 1Il W WW W J w J J J UU UU U WWWW W 0000 0 III o III o 141Z W is III III II III fOl 0000 J III JII 2NWW IIl ZZ 2 WW III ZZ J W III II N N 00 0 0 0 lit 0 UI o o o UI u UUI 00 o o er o N CO CO III llC Z Z lIlua 0000 00 00 I oer er er COfOl lit0 coer o O ClO U J U J o I lit J z U o IN lit 0 o o U c U cz cz C1 C z C ---PAGE BREAK--- AREA UST LISTING ---PAGE BREAK--- PnE 1 F cility Owner Name and Address 500210 GALLATIN FLYING SERVICE INC BOX 125 BELGRADE MT 59714 600883 ARLINS AIRCRAFT SERVICE INC 36 GALLATIN FIELD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 602543 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 33 GALLATIN FIELD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 602910 MONTGOMERY JUNE 8500 SPRINGHILL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 003729 GALLATIN EQUIPMENT CO 6600 JACKRABBIT LANE BELGRADE MT 59714 j03811 RAY R L RAY S SINCLAIR 33 E MAIN BOX 298 BELGRADE MT 59714 04440 SUNBIRD AVIATION INC GALLATIN FIELD AIRPORT BOX 808 BELGRADE MT 59714 04673 PRESCOTT ROBERT 525 WEAVER RD BELGRADE MT 59714 04764 LENEHAN ART 5811 JACKRABBIT LANE BELGRADE MT 59716 05092 STOCKTON OIL CO 1607 4TH AVE N PO BOX 1756 BILLINGS MT 59103 05096 AUTOMATIC GAS DISTRIBUTORS INC 7670 S VAUGHN CT PO BOX 4197 ENGLEWOOD CO 80155 4197 05251 CIRCLE FOUR RANCH 1706 TERRACE AVE BOZEMAN MT 59715 05504 BOLINGER H A 2001 SWAMP RD BELGRADE MT 59714 i05753 MOUNTAIN STATES PETROLEUM PO BOX 20099 BILLINGS MT 59104 i05915 MILLS REPAIR 119 W MAIN BOX 989 BELGRADE MT 59714 1 06015 DUNSE JOHN 5970 PENWELL BRIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 607160 SMITH C SPENCER 5155 HIGH ST BELGRADE MT 59714 1 607788 WYOMING ALASKA CO INC 11 14 20 19 JUN 1995 Location Name No and Address Tanks GALLATIN FLYING SERVICE INC AIRPORT BELGRADE MT 59714 GALLATIN FIELD BELGRADE MT 59714 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 33 GALLATIN FIELD BELGRADE MT 59714 MONTGOMERY JUNE 8500 SPRINGHILL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 GALLATIN EQUIPMENT CO 6600 JACKRABBIT LANE BELGRADE MT 59714 RAY R L RAY S SINCLAIR 33 E MAIN BOX 298 BELGRADE MT 59714 SUNBIRD AVIATION INC GALLATIN FIELD AIRPORT BOX 808 BELGRADE MT 59714 PRESCOTT ROBERT 525 WEAVER RD BELGRADE MT 59714 LENEHAN ART 5811 JACKRABBIT LANE BELGRADE MT 59716 KWIK WAY 34 101 W MAIN BELGRADE MT 59714 CHALET MARKET 6410 JACKRABBIT LN BELGRADE MT 59714 CIRCLE FOUR RANCH 1706 TERRACE AVE BELGRADE MT 59714 BOLINGER H A 2001 SWAMP RD BELGRADE MT 59714 BArRS TRUCK STOP I 90 HWY 291 BOX 1290 BELGRADE MT 59714 MILLS REPAIR 119 W MAIN BOX 989 BELGRADE MT 59714 DUNSE JOHN 5970 PENWELL BRIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 SMITH C SPENCER 5155 HIGH ST BELGRADE MT 59714 TRAILSIDE GENERAL STORE 1 1 1 1 1 4 7 1 o 3 3 1 1 5 5 1 3 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- JE 2 cility OWner Name and Address PO BOX 667 CENTERVILLE UT 84014 1 607803 OLSEN CLAYTON PO BOX 816 BELGRADE MT 59714 308137 BRAINARD RONALD 26580 DRY CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 08138 BRAINARD WALTER 325 MAUDLOW W R BELGRADE MT 59714 08941 MAZZA ROBERT 2330 AMSTERDAM RD BELGRADE MT 59714 09940 GOWIN DONALD 7970 MCGUIRE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 09968 FRANCE GARY GRACE 4350 AIRPORT RD BELGRADE MT 59714 10345 SEIFERT EDWIN A JR 11980 SPRING HILL RD PO BOX 121 BELGRADE MT 59714 10417 DOLAN JAMES W 3501 AIRPORT RD BELGRADE MT 59714 10496 GUIOT CHARLES 5857 SWAMP RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 110693 BATCHELDER WILLIAM FRANCES 3845 BATCH WEAVE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 611002 PARKER RICHARD T 6160 PENWELL BRIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 611027 LUTES DAVID 1750 E BASELINE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 611041 ANDERSON MIKE 5485 SPAULDING BRIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 11044 BARRETT BRUCE BOX 355 GOTHENBURG NE 69138 i11136 DRINGLE JOE 1480 BOLINGER RD BELGRADE MT 59714 i11159 KALLESTAD ARNOLD 3860 W DRY CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 i1l207 CROUSE LESTER E JR 704 N 17TH BOZEMAN MT 59715 11 14 23 19 JUN 1995 Location Name No and Address Tanks 350 E MAIN BELGRADE MT 59230 HALL CLAYTON PO BOX 816 BELGRADE MT 59714 BRAINARD RONALD 26580 DRY CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 BRAINARD WALTER 325 MAUDLOW W R BELGRADE MT 59714 MAZZA ROBERT 2330 AMSTERDAM RD BELGRADE MT 59714 GOWIN DONALD T 7970 MCGUIRE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 FRANCE GARY GRACE 4350 AIRPORT RD BELGRADE MT 59714 SEIFERT EDWIN A 11980 SPRING HILL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DOLAN JAMES W 3501 AIRPORT RD BELGRADE MT 59714 GUIOT CHARLES 5857 SWAMP RD BELGRADE MT 59714 BATCHELDER WILLIAM FRANCES 3845 BATCH WEAVE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 PARKER RICHARD T 6160 PENWELL BRIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 LUTES DAVID 1750 E BASELINE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 ANDERSON MIKE 5485 SPAULDING BRIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 DAVIS ROBERT BOX L RANCH 2180 AIRPORT ROAD BELGRADE MT 59714 DRINGLE RANCH 1480 BOLINGER RD BELGRADE MT 59714 KALLESTAD ARNOLD 3860 W DRY CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 CROUSE RANCH 9720 WALKER ROAD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- rnE 3 Facility OWner Name and Address 11254 SCHULTZ HAROLD L 1611 FOSTER CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 611287 MILLER ROBERT S 17850 DRY CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 611363 SOWERWlNE FRED 16355 FRONTAGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 611517 ESSEX LESLIE D 3977 WEAVER RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 011525 CLARK CLYDE 0 4152 PENNELL BRIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 311542 WEED WALKER TIll RR 5 BOX 449 BRATTLEBORO VT 05301 511551 DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AFFAIRS ATTN ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICE 1100 N MAIN HELENA MT 59601 1 011566 SHEPERD H E 5280 E GALLATIN RD BELGRADE MT 59714 511569 GEE RICHARD W 3733 REESE CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 511576 DAVIS ROBERT J 8281 MCGUIRE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 511593 ESTES RUSSELL E 2380 AIRPORT RD BELGRADE MT 59714 511606 PICOZZI ED AND MANDY 260 WEAVER RD BELGRADE MT 59714 11630 WEED WALKER TIll RR 5 BOX 449 BRATTLEBORO VT 05301 11656 BESSIE GEE FARM ATTN JAMES H MOODY 10720 GEE NORMAN RD BELGRADE MT 59714 11676 LIGHT JEROME T JR 23A HOLLIS ST SHERBORN MA 01770 11679 TREVITHICK PAUL L 2490 ORO LANE BELGRADE MT 59714 l 11686 LARSON TERRY 3740 BATCH WEAVE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 11114 27 19 JUN 1995 Location Name No and Address Tanks SCHULTZ HAROLD L 1611 FOSTER CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 MILLER ROBERT S 17850 DRY CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 FOUR DOT RANCH 16355 FRONTAGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 ESSEX LESLIE D 3977 WEAVER RD BELGRADE MT 59714 CLARK CLYDE 0 4152 PENNELL BRIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 RENTAL HOME 8685 FORSWALL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE SHOP BELGRADE MT 59714 SHEPERD H E 5280 E GALLATIN RD BELGRADE MT 59714 GEE RICHARD W 3733 REESE CREEK RD BELGRADE MT 59714 DAVIS ROBERT J 8281 MCGUIRE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 ESTES RUSSELL E 2380 AIRPORT RD BELGRADE MT 59714 PICOZZI ED AND MANDY 260 WEAVER RD BELGRADE MT 59714 RENTAL HOME 7823 SPRINGHILL COMMUNITY RD BELGRADE MT 59714 GEE MARGARET E 10720 GEE NORMAN RD BELGRADE MT 59714 LIGHT JEROME T JR 9433 CORBLEY GULCH RD BELGRADE MT 59714 RESIDENCE 2490 ORO LANE BELGRADE MT 59714 LARSON TERRY 3740 BATCH WEAVE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- t E 4 facility OWner Name and Address 511783 CARLSON STEVE MAXINE 14323 ROCKY MOUNTAIN RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 611816 BIGGS ARNOLD L BETTY J 8370 FORSWALL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 611817 BIGGS ARNOLD L BETTY J 8370 FORSWALL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 611818 CITY OF BELGRADE 88 N BROADWAY BELGRADE MT 59714 1 1511935 FULKER MARGUERITE P 409 W BEALL BOZEMAN MT 59715 1 612101 GALLATIN FARMERS CO PO BOX 129 BELGRADE MT 59714 1 612417 DYK GIL 13715 SPRINGHILL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 1 012551 THEISEN D 9333 THEISEN RD BELGRADE MT 59714 12556 HALLADAY J AND BETHEL L 225 CACTUS RD BELGRADE MT 59714 12952 STORY DISTRIBUTING CO 300 E GRIFFIN DR PO BOX 1201 BOZEMAN MT 59715 13425 DAVID RUTLEDGE DISTRIBUTING CO 318 W GRIFFIN DR BOZEMAN MT 59715 13529 STEVENS HAZEL 13787 SPRINGHILL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 13625 TOWN PUMP INC 600 S MAIN ST BUTTE MT 59701 0 Records Processed 11 14 30 19 JUN 1995 Location Name No and Address Tanks CARLSON STEVE MAXINE 14323 ROCKY MOUNTAIN RD BELGRADE MT 59714 RESIDENCE PENWELL BRIDGE RD BELGRADE MT 59714 BIGGS ARNOLD L BETTY J 8370 FORSWALL ROAD BELGRADE MT 59714 CITY OF BELGRADE WATER WELL 4 BELGRADE MT 59714 FULKER MARGUERITE P 5440 SALES RD BELGRADE MT 59714 GALLATIN FARMERS CO 350 JACKRABBIT LANE BELGRADE MT 59714 ROBERT MENGEL 13725 SPRINGHILL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 THEISEN D 9333 THEISEN RD BELGRADE MT 59714 HALLADAY J AND BETHEL L 225 CACTUS RD BELGRADE MT 59714 GALLATIN FIELD CARDLOCK GALLATIN FIELD MAINTENANCE SHOP BELGRADE MT 59714 ME AND JAN S CONOCO 206 W MADISON BELGRADE MT 59714 STEVENS HAZEL 13787 SPRINGHILL RD BELGRADE MT 59714 TOWN PUMP 206 W JEFFERSON BELGRADE MT 59714 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 2 1 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- EMERGENCY RESPONSE ---PAGE BREAK--- I j WATER QUALITY BUREAU SPILL RESPONSE PROCEDURES November 12 1991 I CONTAlNMENT AND CLEANUP OF SPILLS All spills or releases of haza rdous materials or other wastes regardless of size that pollute or threaten to pollute state waters must be contained removed and disposed of to protect water quality This policy is written under the authority of the Montana Water Quality Act 75 5 101 MCA and ARM 16 20 1025 The purpose of the Spill Response Procedures is to provide guidance and information to Water Quality Bureau staff on spill notification requirem nts and response protocol ll NOTIFlCATION REQUJRE1 IENTS All spills except as noted below shall be reported immediately to the state s DES 24 hour phone number [PHONE REDACTED] or during business hours to WQB [PHONE REDACTED] The following types of spills are not reauired to be reported provided the spill does not enter or threaten to enter surface water and it is immediatelv contained removed and properly disposed 1 Ten barrels 420 gallons or less of crude oil produced water injection water or combination thereof 2 Twenty five 25 gallons or less of refined crude oil products including but not limited to gasoline diesel fuel aviation fuel asphalt road oil kerosene fuel oil and derivatives of mineral animal or vegetable oils m WQB RESPONSE LEVEL LEVEL 1 IMMEDIATE RESPONSE ASAP daylight hours but day or night if a critical situation CRITERIA 1 Any significant quantity of hazardous materials or other wastes present in surface water or in a positio that immediately threatens surface water 2 Any railcars transport trucks or pipeline leaks in surface water ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 Large spills of soluble toxic materials near a public water supply well 4 Any report of dead or affected fish or animals WQB RESPONSE 1 Contact local health office Attempt to have local health officer sanitarian examine site immediately and report In absence of local health officer utilize Sheriff fire dept DES or DFWP personnel Inform SHWB if hazardous material Inform SHWB UST if 25 gallons spilled from underground tank over fill or leak Inform Mt Dept of Ag if agri chemicals pesticide or fertilizer 2 Send WQB investigator to site as soon as possible and review field response checklist 3 Work with responsible party to ensure appropriate cleanup and monitorinr 4 Require report from responsible party to describe release document cleanup and provide results of monitoring 5 All level 1 spills should be identified ASAP on the WQB Spill BoardII LEVEL 2 WORKDAY RESPONSE CRITERIA 1 Any significant quantity of hazardous material or other waste on the surface not in a position that immediately threatens surface water 2 Any spill of soluble material that may migrate to ground or surface water not considered a Level 1 Response WQB RESPONSE 1 Contact local health office Attempt to have local health officer sanitarian examine site and report Inform SHWB if hazardous material Inform SHWB UST if 25 gallons spilled from underground tank over fill or leak Inform Mt Dept of Ag if agri chemicals pesticide or fertilizer 2 If groundwater use may be impacted conduct site visit when possible 3 Work with responsible party to ensure appropriate clean up and monitoring ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 Address relevant field response considerations i e sampling o document cleanup ask local contact to verify cleanup if WQB not on site i j 5 Require report from responsible party to describe releas document cleanup and results of monitoring LEVEL 3 LOW PRIORITY RESPONSE CRITERIA 1 Any release of other materials on to the surface that does not threaten surface or groundwater 2 Produced water or crude oil spills at production or injection sites WQB RESPONSE 1 Contact local health office on the status of cleanup Inform SHWB if hazardous material Inform SHWB UST if 25 gallons spilled from underground tank overfill or leak Inform Mt Dept of Ag if agri chemical pesticide or fertilizer 2 Work with responsible party to ensure cleanup in a timely manner 3 Require report to document cleanup VI FJRl n RESPONSE CHECKT TST 1 Determine Initial site Conditions Utilize appropriate safety gear hard hat gloves etc Accurate location maps mileage measurements topography Determine responsible parties contacts Land ownership Identify pollutants Material Data Safety Sheets bill of lading shipping papers Evaluate source control and containment activities Determine need for outside contractors Determine public and environmental impacts and threats to water users nearby wells aquatic life etc 2 Field Verification of Pollution Document weather conditions site description Photographic documentation Sample waste or contaminated soil Sample receiving waters and nearby wells ---PAGE BREAK--- J I 3 Information Relay Contact responsible party to confirm facts Contact office and report 4 Monitor Cleanuo and Disoosal Collect additional samples over time Document cleanup and disposal Sample cleaned or treated soils and water j Jo C I c t ---PAGE BREAK--- i HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CHECKLIST SECTJON I j 1 J NirJAL JNFORMAT ION A Current Dat e B Current Time C Name of C Hlei D Agency b E Telephone Number or other means of imrnediatecontact F Da te of Incident c i H Location of Incident G Time oi Incident I SECTION Il PRODUCT INFORMATION A MATERIAL PRODUCT INVOLVED 1 Common Trade Name If the name of the material is unknown try to obtain the fOlloWing information Gas Liquid Solid I I I I I I Odor Color Powder Granule Gel Other Physical characterist1cs B How wasmater1al ident1iied 1 Placard UN 2 3 Shipping documents Other 10 06 89 HazMat 1 tz e I ---PAGE BREAK--- c ontainer s J c l 1 Type rr J W a Railcar b Truck identificatio n license flee c Capaci y J 2 DamagEf Sus airfed Me ho f of Release qO 3 Ra eJEs imated Qu riti y l sed s 1 D BehaYior of Ma erial UponRelease 1 No reaction 2 3 Became Waterborn Became Airborne 4 Caused contribu ed to explosion 5 Caused con ributed o fire 6 Movemen oi ma erial direc tion rate E Shipper Manuiac urer Consignee Consignor Shipper Manufac urer Name Name Phone Phone POC 1 q POC I l I I I Consignor Consignee Name Name Phone Phone poe I poe I 10 06 89 HazMat 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- SECTJ ON J J J ASSESSMENT X A Threat to People Injuries 1 2 Fatalities 3 Occupied afe reqUiring evacuation B Threat id property environment SECTJ ON IV 0 RESPONSE A Inciden Command 1 Activated r r yes no If no 1 is yes Inciden commander agency Loca ion of IC Means of contac ing IC B Responding Agencies on scene Fire Law Enforcement Ambulance Health DES Responsible Party Road Dep C Initial ac ions aken ocon ain clean up 00 D EOC Activa ed yes no E Emergency Response Guidebook Numoer Used 10 06 89 HazMa 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 I V ASSISTANCE REQUESTED Aerial Reconnaissance Area Security HazMat 1 D Medical suppor Traffic Con rol Clean up Crow Con rol Evacua ion Assistance Pa ient Transp rt Public Info Release Other SECTION VI NOTIFICATIONS Contro1 Agency Assigned A Disaster and Emergency Services 1 Local DES Coordinator Date Time 2 Distric Repre entative Date Time B Dep of Health Environmental Sciences MANDATORY Date Time Person Contacted C If a stream river or lake is or may be affec ed Dept of Fis Wildlife Parks Date Time Person Contacted D If the incident involves pes icides contact Dept at Agriculture Date Time Person Contac ed PERSON TAKING REPORT 10 06 89 HazMat 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- ROCEDUREI FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SITE EVALUATION It RESPONSE lNlT1ATlON i 6 Enter the site when you know enough and Have the resources to do so safely 1 Secure the site control traffic 2 Notify area office give location 7 Area office will Notify the l E P C local Emergency Planning Committee phone Notify S E R C State Emergency Response Commission State D E S 444 6911 Continuously update l E P C incident commander and S E R C State D E S 3 Protect yourself use a safe approach Approach from upwind if possible Do not walk in or touch any spilled material Avoid inhaling fumes smoke or vapors Do not assume that no noticeable smell indicates safety 8 On scene coordinator will Coordinate State agency response Coordinate with local incident commander Assume control ot hazardous material incident until relieved by local government 4 Identify the hazard Relay information to area oftice Ask yourself Is rescue your immediate problem Is rescue really pOSSible with the resources you have 51 Request further aid and assistance trom area ottice a ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix D WaterCAD Information & Results ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material P-620 133 4 Ductile Iron PF-99A 215 4 Ductile Iron P-89 265 6 Ductile Iron P-301 336 6 Ductile Iron P-304 406 6 Ductile Iron P-306 271 6 Ductile Iron P-307 193 6 Ductile Iron P-308 273 6 Ductile Iron P-309 275 6 Ductile Iron P-310 280 6 Ductile Iron P-311 287 6 Ductile Iron P-314 330 6 Ductile Iron P-315 39 6 Ductile Iron P-316 101 6 Ductile Iron P-340 498 6 Ductile Iron P-341 273 6 Ductile Iron P-342 604 6 Ductile Iron P-343 111 6 Ductile Iron P-344 720 6 Ductile Iron P-350 259 6 Ductile Iron P-351 252 6 Ductile Iron P-358 306 6 Ductile Iron P-359 324 6 Ductile Iron P-360 238 6 Ductile Iron P-361 204 6 Ductile Iron P-362 585 6 Ductile Iron P-364 102 6 Ductile Iron P-365 337 6 Ductile Iron P-367 263 6 Ductile Iron P-370 223 6 Ductile Iron P-395 143 6 Ductile Iron P-396 231 6 Ductile Iron P-397 330 6 Ductile Iron P-405 508 6 Ductile Iron P-406 243 6 Ductile Iron P-409 48 6 Ductile Iron P-410 267 6 Ductile Iron P-411 324 6 Ductile Iron P-413 117 6 Ductile Iron P-414 188 6 Ductile Iron P-415 447 6 Ductile Iron P-416 271 6 Ductile Iron P-419 212 6 Ductile Iron P-438 165 6 Ductile Iron P-439 583 6 Ductile Iron P-445 285 6 Ductile Iron P-456 374 6 Ductile Iron EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM Existing Pipe System 1 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-457 305 6 Ductile Iron P-464 292 6 Ductile Iron P-465 272 6 Ductile Iron P-470 57 6 Ductile Iron P-471 564 6 Ductile Iron P-488 334 6 Ductile Iron P-501 305 6 Ductile Iron P-504 374 6 Ductile Iron P-522 414 6 Ductile Iron P-530 321 6 Ductile Iron P-533 224 6 Ductile Iron P-537 303 6 Ductile Iron P-544 311 6 Ductile Iron P-548 347 6 Ductile Iron P-549 339 6 Ductile Iron P-553 309 6 Ductile Iron P-562 359 6 Ductile Iron P-569 351 6 Ductile Iron P-570 424 6 Ductile Iron P-584 200 6 Ductile Iron P-586 706 6 Ductile Iron P-587 461 6 Ductile Iron P-588 370 6 Ductile Iron P-589 372 6 Ductile Iron P-590 368 6 Ductile Iron P-591 362 6 Ductile Iron P-595 368 6 Ductile Iron P-596 374 6 Ductile Iron P-597 270 6 Ductile Iron P-624 323 6 Ductile Iron P-625 309 6 Ductile Iron P-627 335 6 Ductile Iron P-633 370 6 Ductile Iron P-634 185 6 Ductile Iron P-635 448 6 Ductile Iron P-636 245 6 Ductile Iron P-637 298 6 Ductile Iron P-648 328 6 Ductile Iron P-662 72 6 Ductile Iron P-667 208 6 Ductile Iron P-668 401 6 Ductile Iron P-675 306 6 Ductile Iron P-676 233 6 Ductile Iron P-677 353 6 Ductile Iron P-678 356 6 Ductile Iron P-686 104 6 Ductile Iron P-685 153 6 Ductile Iron Existing Pipe System 2 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-698 289 6 Ductile Iron P-699 401 6 Ductile Iron P-705 548 6 Ductile Iron P-704 193 6 Ductile Iron P-719 85 6 Ductile Iron P-720 84 6 Ductile Iron PF-131 148 6 Ductile Iron PF-168 194 6 Ductile Iron PF-174 147 6 Ductile Iron P-349 292 6 Ductile Iron P-335 253 6 Ductile Iron P-734 22 6 Ductile Iron P-735 287 6 Ductile Iron PH-1044 10 6 Ductile Iron P-497 201 6 Ductile Iron P-368 244 6 Ductile Iron P-352 508 6 Ductile Iron P-354 425 6 Ductile Iron P-357 425 6 Ductile Iron P-355 506 6 Ductile Iron P-369 628 6 Ductile Iron P-348 508 6 Ductile Iron P-346 423 6 Ductile Iron P-717 212 6 Ductile Iron P-706 288 6 Ductile Iron P-436 274 6 Ductile Iron P-640 396 6 Ductile Iron P-696 383 6 Ductile Iron P-502 428 6 Ductile Iron P-540 422 6 Ductile Iron P-505 359 6 Ductile Iron P-524 905 6 Ductile Iron P-520 491 6 Ductile Iron P-535 605 6 Ductile Iron P-529 570 6 Ductile Iron P-538 359 6 Ductile Iron P-523 363 6 Ductile Iron P-681 712 6 Ductile Iron P-671 245 6 Ductile Iron P-384 477 6 Ductile Iron P-507 367 6 Ductile Iron P-398 143 6 Ductile Iron P-391 47 6 Ductile Iron p-399 636 6 Ductile Iron P-1170 357 6 Ductile Iron P-1173 465 6 Ductile Iron P-1174 302 6 Ductile Iron Existing Pipe System 3 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-1175 345 6 Ductile Iron P-1176 380 6 Ductile Iron P-1177 301 6 Ductile Iron P-1179 302 6 Ductile Iron P-1181 609 6 Ductile Iron P-1184 107 6 Ductile Iron P-725 625 6 Ductile Iron P-1202 35 6 Ductile Iron P-469 293 6 Ductile Iron P-467 577 6 Ductile Iron P-938 653 6 Ductile Iron P-1459 383 6 Ductile Iron Ph-664 1921 6 Ductile Iron P-1472 290 6 Ductile Iron P-1479 249 6 Ductile Iron P-1495 354 6 Ductile Iron P-3 412 6 Ductile Iron P-10 241 6 Ductile Iron P-11 171 6 Ductile Iron P-12 147 6 Ductile Iron P-83 205 8 Ductile Iron P-128 76 8 Ductile Iron P-129 104 8 Ductile Iron P-302 375 8 Ductile Iron P-303 125 8 Ductile Iron P-305 320 8 Ductile Iron P-319 228 8 Ductile Iron P-320 251 8 Ductile Iron P-321 403 8 Ductile Iron P-322 390 8 Ductile Iron P-323 273 8 Ductile Iron P-324 261 8 Ductile Iron P-325 126 8 Ductile Iron P-326 448 8 Ductile Iron P-327 259 8 Ductile Iron P-328 251 8 Ductile Iron P-329 257 8 Ductile Iron P-338 673 8 Ductile Iron P-339 50 8 Ductile Iron P-508 350 8 Ductile Iron P-511 57 8 Ductile Iron P-514 363 8 Ductile Iron P-517 494 8 Ductile Iron P-518 367 8 Ductile Iron P-519 375 8 Ductile Iron P-527 367 8 Ductile Iron P-551 56 8 Ductile Iron Existing Pipe System 4 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-558 252 8 Ductile Iron P-563 244 8 Ductile Iron P-565 826 8 Ductile Iron P-583 256 8 Ductile Iron P-495 386 8 Ductile Iron P-700 348 8 Ductile Iron P-701 66 8 Ductile Iron P-868 388 8 Ductile Iron P-1008 89 8 Ductile Iron P-1009 119 8 Ductile Iron P-515 314 8 Ductile Iron PH-870 153 8 Ductile Iron P-371 157 8 Ductile Iron P-499 381 8 Ductile Iron P-690 113 8 Ductile Iron P-688 410 8 Ductile Iron P-774 274 8 Ductile Iron P-512 360 8 Ductile Iron P-924 276 8 Ductile Iron P-927 63 8 Ductile Iron P-944 355 8 Ductile Iron P-945 665 8 Ductile Iron P-1490 761 8 Ductile Iron P-1484 353 8 Ductile Iron P-1499 173 8 Ductile Iron P-104 316 10 Ductile Iron P-123 100 10 Ductile Iron P-124 194 10 Ductile Iron P-127 210 10 Ductile Iron P-330 88 10 Ductile Iron P-331 395 10 Ductile Iron P-332 256 10 Ductile Iron P-333 418 10 Ductile Iron P-334 230 10 Ductile Iron P-394 427 10 Ductile Iron P-407 308 10 Ductile Iron P-408 417 10 Ductile Iron P-426 362 10 Ductile Iron P-427 365 10 Ductile Iron P-428 555 10 Ductile Iron P-429 430 10 Ductile Iron P-453 62 10 Ductile Iron P-454 180 10 Ductile Iron P-455 375 10 Ductile Iron P-460 177 10 Ductile Iron P-134 281 10 Ductile Iron P-567 49 10 Ductile Iron Existing Pipe System 5 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-568 278 10 Ductile Iron P-611 361 10 Ductile Iron P-639 470 10 Ductile Iron P-641 311 10 Ductile Iron P-650 225 10 Ductile Iron P-135 375 10 Ductile Iron P-654 600 10 Ductile Iron P-655 452 10 Ductile Iron P-713 168 10 Ductile Iron P-721 350 10 Ductile Iron P-722 281 10 Ductile Iron P-642 406 10 Ductile Iron P-1079 70 10 Ductile Iron P-1080 348 10 Ductile Iron P-1083 362 10 Ductile Iron P-710 202 10 Ductile Iron P-715 408 10 Ductile Iron P-390 385 10 Ductile Iron P-653 403 10 Ductile Iron P-483 495 10 Ductile Iron P-484 361 10 Ductile Iron P-1178 361 10 Ductile Iron P-929 29 10 Ductile Iron P-1482 133 10 Ductile Iron P-1486 438 10 Ductile Iron P-53 30 10 Ductile Iron P-54 40 10 Ductile Iron P-94 738 12 Ductile Iron P-95 271 12 Ductile Iron P-113 775 12 Ductile Iron P-393 21 12 Ductile Iron P-711 364 12 Ductile Iron P-430 349 12 Ductile Iron P-434 24 12 Ductile Iron P-608 100 12 Ductile Iron P-917 188 12 Ductile Iron P-1203 22 12 Ductile Iron P-126 0 36 Ductile Iron P-402 447 6 PVC P-420 55 6 PVC P-421 234 6 PVC P-422 387 6 PVC P-423 144 6 PVC P-577 348 6 PVC P-579 348 6 PVC P-638 274 6 PVC P-664 307 6 PVC Existing Pipe System 6 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-665 477 6 PVC P-893 65 6 PVC P-894 342 6 PVC P-930 294 6 PVC P-931 310 6 PVC P-936 311 6 PVC P-937 300 6 PVC P-941 304 6 PVC P-951 366 6 PVC P-952 349 6 PVC P-953 311 6 PVC P-959 308 6 PVC P-972 130 6 PVC P-975 187 6 PVC P-977 302 6 PVC P-978 300 6 PVC P-999 318 6 PVC P-1003 281 6 PVC P-1004 280 6 PVC P-925 296 6 PVC P-1017 228 6 PVC P-1016 55 6 PVC P-1022 250 6 PVC P-1028 103 6 PVC P-1029 201 6 PVC P-1030 94 6 PVC P-1031 352 6 PVC P-1034 295 6 PVC P-1035 365 6 PVC P-1036 417 6 PVC P-1037 333 6 PVC P-1040 412 6 PVC P-1042 102 6 PVC P-1045 466 6 PVC PH-911 75 6 PVC P-496 430 6 PVC P-1050 48 6 PVC P-1051 19 6 PVC P-1091 207 6 PVC P-1092 271 6 PVC P-1093 159 6 PVC P-594 265 6 PVC P-560 312 6 PVC P-890 304 6 PVC P-892 246 6 PVC P-842 378 6 PVC P-923 379 6 PVC Existing Pipe System 7 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-921 394 6 PVC P-928 375 6 PVC P-926 401 6 PVC P-939 368 6 PVC P-948 366 6 PVC P-947 352 6 PVC P-960 368 6 PVC P-417 365 6 PVC P-723 485 6 PVC P-424 477 6 PVC P-1056 123 6 PVC P-1082 90 6 PVC P-1014 282 6 PVC P-1046 459 6 PVC P-1025 257 6 PVC P-1043 322 6 PVC P-1023 235 6 PVC P-1020 660 6 PVC P-1038 259 6 PVC P-1032 518 6 PVC P-1180 294 6 PVC P-1182 134 6 PVC P-1026 282 6 PVC P-1483 788 6 PVC P-1485 145 6 PVC P-1493 147 6 PVC P-1500 530 6 PVC P-1526 859 6 PVC P-1527 817 6 PVC P-1528 777 6 PVC P-1529 778 6 PVC P-14 616 6 PVC P-105 68 8 PVC P-300 338 8 PVC P-373 130 8 PVC P-376 803 8 PVC P-377 77 8 PVC P-379 61 8 PVC P-380 406 8 PVC P-381 412 8 PVC P-382 361 8 PVC P-388 543 8 PVC P-389 396 8 PVC P-392 944 8 PVC P-432 308 8 PVC P-443 756 8 PVC P-444 399 8 PVC Existing Pipe System 8 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-449 546 8 PVC P-450 477 8 PVC P-451 344 8 PVC P-452 46 8 PVC P-472 336 8 PVC P-485 47 8 PVC P-486 178 8 PVC P-489 108 8 PVC P-490 318 8 PVC P-491 664 8 PVC P-532 353 8 PVC P-534 424 8 PVC P-554 382 8 PVC P-566 324 8 PVC P-572 348 8 PVC P-573 310 8 PVC P-575 408 8 PVC P-582 594 8 PVC P-599 313 8 PVC P-601 318 8 PVC P-602 56 8 PVC P-604 293 8 PVC P-605 464 8 PVC P-606 411 8 PVC P-610 439 8 PVC P-614 819 8 PVC P-615 277 8 PVC P-618 405 8 PVC P-619 538 8 PVC P-643 318 8 PVC P-644 64 8 PVC P-645 294 8 PVC P-727 116 8 PVC P-318 117 8 PVC P-728 123 8 PVC P-600 302 8 PVC P-363 66 8 PVC P-431 29 8 PVC P-433 54 8 PVC P-768 239 8 PVC P-776 337 8 PVC P-782 240 8 PVC P-783 406 8 PVC P-803 288 8 PVC P-772 475 8 PVC P-773 365 8 PVC P-806 528 8 PVC Existing Pipe System 9 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-870 279 8 PVC P-875 148 8 PVC P-881 304 8 PVC P-882 429 8 PVC P-884 244 8 PVC P-885 419 8 PVC P-886 433 8 PVC P-897 164 8 PVC P-899 157 8 PVC P-900 159 8 PVC P-901 357 8 PVC P-902 159 8 PVC P-903 159 8 PVC P-904 101 8 PVC P-905 65 8 PVC P-906 330 8 PVC P-907 7 8 PVC P-908 39 8 PVC P-909 265 8 PVC P-912 133 8 PVC P-911 113 8 PVC P-915 76 8 PVC P-916 197 8 PVC P-966 250 8 PVC P-967 93 8 PVC P-980 435 8 PVC P-983 364 8 PVC P-984 237 8 PVC P-985 259 8 PVC P-986 327 8 PVC P-987 279 8 PVC P-988 252 8 PVC P-989 353 8 PVC P-990 265 8 PVC P-993 321 8 PVC P-994 421 8 PVC P-995 295 8 PVC P-996 167 8 PVC P-997 45 8 PVC P-998 145 8 PVC P-1001 354 8 PVC P-1005 373 8 PVC P-1013 155 8 PVC P-950 312 8 PVC P-1074 108 8 PVC P-1075 756 8 PVC P-1076 202 8 PVC Existing Pipe System 10 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-1077 825 8 PVC P-1087 277 8 PVC P-1088 93 8 PVC P-1089 787 8 PVC P-1090 289 8 PVC P-1010 363 8 PVC P-557 310 8 PVC P-564 292 8 PVC P-1019 265 8 PVC P-965 218 8 PVC P-571 170 8 PVC P-895 159 8 PVC P-879 379 8 PVC P-918 396 8 PVC P-968 404 8 PVC P-448 539 8 PVC P-613 947 8 PVC P-374 365 8 PVC PH-944 479 8 PVC P-669 278 8 PVC P-742 359 8 PVC P-754 550 8 PVC PH-821 274 8 PVC PH-808 363 8 PVC P-801 319 8 PVC P-791 446 8 PVC P-797 388 8 PVC P-795 240 8 PVC P-799 250 8 PVC P-679 399 8 PVC P-683 251 8 PVC P-477 255 8 PVC P-1055 330 8 PVC P-1085 335 8 PVC P-556 560 8 PVC P-913 255 8 PVC P-476 68 8 PVC P-1157 173 8 PVC P-1158 229 8 PVC P-1159 231 8 PVC P-1160 360 8 PVC P-1161 367 8 PVC P-1162 389 8 PVC P-1165 480 8 PVC P-1166 640 8 PVC P-1167 648 8 PVC P-1168 642 8 PVC Existing Pipe System 11 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-1186 67 8 PVC P-1187 284 8 PVC P-1189 291 8 PVC P-1195 32 8 PVC P-1198 30 8 PVC P-607 352 8 PVC P-71 227 8 PVC P-11 797 8 PVC P-41 261 8 PVC P-108 295 8 PVC P-9 401 8 PVC P-13 397 8 PVC P-25 192 8 PVC P-34 192 8 PVC P-10 486 8 PVC P-33 559 8 PVC P-72 399 8 PVC P-14 99 8 PVC P-107 282 8 PVC P-36 320 8 PVC P-946 468 8 PVC P-1505 354 8 PVC P-1511 494 8 PVC P-1503 368 8 PVC P-1506 265 8 PVC P-1504 751 8 PVC P-1432 206 8 PVC P-1433 180 8 PVC P-1434 187 8 PVC P-1435 174 8 PVC P-1436 180 8 PVC P-1440 446 8 PVC P-1441 865 8 PVC P-1442 174 8 PVC P-1443 865 8 PVC P-1444 446 8 PVC P-1445 180 8 PVC P-1446 865 8 PVC P-1447 651 8 PVC P-1448 206 8 PVC P-1463 660 8 PVC P-1468 543 8 PVC P-784 674 8 PVC P-777 660 8 PVC P-790 657 8 PVC P-1492 158 8 PVC P-1515 1557 8 PVC Existing Pipe System 12 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-1516 1227 8 PVC P-1517 336 8 PVC P-1518 317 8 PVC P-1519 296 8 PVC P-1520 272 8 PVC P-1522 706 8 PVC P-1523 1093 8 PVC P-1524 217 8 PVC P-1525 1305 8 PVC P-2 137 8 PVC P-4 479 8 PVC P-5 224 8 PVC P-6 217 8 PVC P-7 164 8 PVC P-8 424 8 PVC P-9 154 8 PVC P-13 82 8 PVC P-15 365 8 PVC P-22 182 8 PVC P-23 463 8 PVC P-24 236 8 PVC P-25 125 8 PVC P-27 935 8 PVC P-29 776 8 PVC P-30 1101 8 PVC P-34 255 8 PVC P-35 267 8 PVC P-36 1159 8 PVC P-37 286 8 PVC P-38 836 8 PVC P-58 66 8 PVC P-59 1216 8 PVC P-67 607 8 PVC P-68 229 8 PVC P-1 786 10 PVC P-509 78 10 PVC P-516 545 10 PVC P-528 777 10 PVC PH-918 677 10 PVC P-1059 2520 10 PVC P-1061 411 10 PVC P-1062 1395 10 PVC P-1063 1459 10 PVC P-1065 587 10 PVC P-1066 707 10 PVC P-1068 1842 10 PVC P-1069 826 10 PVC Existing Pipe System 13 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-1071 924 10 PVC P-1072 605 10 PVC P-1078 441 10 PVC P-1081 391 10 PVC P-1095 159 10 PVC P-1096 83 10 PVC P-1052 258 10 PVC PH-662 1848 10 PVC P-612 1154 10 PVC P-1185 480 10 PVC P-1190 366 10 PVC P-1192 476 10 PVC P-1094 65 10 PVC P-934 127 10 PVC P-935 338 10 PVC P-16 311 10 PVC P-7 317 10 PVC P-40 217 10 PVC P-22 60 10 PVC P-8 127 10 PVC P-59 185 10 PVC P-19 214 10 PVC P-26 236 10 PVC P-39 163 10 PVC P-69 302 10 PVC P-37 415 10 PVC P-23 144 10 PVC P-21 279 10 PVC P-18 324 10 PVC P-38 421 10 PVC P-17 75 10 PVC P-75 57 10 PVC p-5 430 10 PVC P-15 351 10 PVC P-955 430 10 PVC P-1058 1059 10 PVC P-1475 337 10 PVC P-1502 469 10 PVC P-41 95 10 PVC P-48 59 10 PVC P-49 320 10 PVC P-52 162 10 PVC P-72 348 10 PVC P-73 297 10 PVC P-101 253 12 PVC P-27 418 12 PVC P-28 83 12 PVC Existing Pipe System 14 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM P-111 100 12 PVC P-114 824 12 PVC P-142 309 12 PVC P-545 60 12 PVC P-546 522 12 PVC P-30 74 12 PVC P-674 151 12 PVC P-673 263 12 PVC P-547 380 12 PVC P-919 123 12 PVC P-63 341 12 PVC P-4 362 12 PVC P-3 411 12 PVC P-64 221 12 PVC P-949 412 12 PVC P-956 657 12 PVC P-1411 1605 12 PVC P-1498 522 12 PVC P-1510 319 12 PVC P-1419 1150 12 PVC P-1507 350 12 PVC P-1421 2676 12 PVC P-1509 343 12 PVC P-1422 820 12 PVC P-1497 931 12 PVC P-1403 2456 12 PVC P-1424 2139 12 PVC P-957 46 12 PVC P-969 336 12 PVC P-1390 534 12 PVC P-1394 370 12 PVC P-1395 1653 12 PVC P-1401 6567 12 PVC P-1425 1981 12 PVC P-1438 865 12 PVC P-1439 446 12 PVC P-1450 750 12 PVC P-1449 828 12 PVC P-1451 991 12 PVC P-1514 340 12 PVC P-21 192 12 PVC P-32 448 12 PVC P-33 1199 12 PVC P-46 3888 12 PVC P-50 907 12 PVC P-130 0 36 PVC P-132 0 36 PVC Existing Pipe System 15 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Material EXISTING PIPE SYSTEM PH-663 0 36 PVC P-56 141 36 PVC P-116 8 10 Steel P-131 360 10 Steel P-39 63 10 Steel P-40 164 10 Steel P-133 200 12 Steel Existing Pipe System 16 of 16 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone B2-1 FH-618 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-1 FH-620 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-1 FH-621 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-1 FH-641 4,444.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-1 FIRE-151 4,445.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-1 J-1092 4,440.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-1 J-406 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-1 J-408 4,440.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-1 PH-1048 4,445.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-13 FH-763 4,475.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-13 FH-765 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-13 FH-771 4,479.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-3 J-1070 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-3 J-1071 4,471.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-3 J-1073 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-3 J-1075 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-3 J-1076 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-3 J-1081 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 FH-637 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 FH-690 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 FIRE-12 4,456.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 FIRE-157 4,459.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 FIRE-159 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 FIRE-161 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 FIRE-17 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 FIRE-174 4,454.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 J-1049 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 J-1056 4,462.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 J-1088 4,457.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 J-1089 4,456.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 J-1091 4,451.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 J-85 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 FH-636 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 FIRE-7 4,453.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 FIRE-86 Hec and Claw 4,451.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 J-431 4,452.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 J-445 4,455.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 J-455 4,456.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 J-459 4,459.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 J-555 4,452.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 J-556 4,454.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-1 J-68 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-2 FIRE-13 4,458.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B3-2 J-470 4,458.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-500 4,472.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-506 4,485.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-512 4,489.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LIST OF JUNCTION NODES Junction Nodes 1 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES FH-515 4,477.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-519 4,484.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-521 4,486.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-537 4,403.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-538 4,406.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-539 4,406.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-540 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-542 4,407.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-543 4,406.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-544 4,406.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-545 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-546 4,450.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-550 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-552 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-554 4,408.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-557 4,406.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-578 4,410.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-591 4,417.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-593 4,416.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-595 4,415.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-596 4,412.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-598 4,411.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-603 4,409.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-604 4,412.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-608 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-610 4,420.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-612 4,419.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-619 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-632 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-638 4,461.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-639 4,456.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-642 4,441.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-643 4,439.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-673 4,415.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-676 4,471.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-685 4,429.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-691 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-693 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-694 4,457.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-720 4,402.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-721 4,395.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-725 4,386.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-732 4,390.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-733 4,390.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-734 4,390.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-735 4,386.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-736 4,390.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Junction Nodes 2 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES FH-737 4,388.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-738 4,388.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-739 4,388.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-741 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-742 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-746 4,414.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-747 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-748 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-751 4,400.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-752 4,400.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-753 4,400.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-755 4,394.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-761 4,455.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-771 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-774 4,414.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-775 4,412.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-780 4,416.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-781 4,417.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-782 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-783 4,420.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FH-784 4,419.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-106 4,444.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-110 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-118 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-120 4,426.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-124 4,425.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-136 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-146 4,419.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-156 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-158 4,458.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-16 4,456.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-160 4,462.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-168 4,428.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-170 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-171 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-175 4,453.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-176 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-18 4,469.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-22 4,472.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-26 4,472.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-28 4,475.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-31 4,471.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-32 4,471.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-33 4,477.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-36 4,475.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-49 4,465.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-56 4,469.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Junction Nodes 3 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES FIRE-58 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-6 4,451.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-60 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-61 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-65 4,455.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-66 4,447.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-67 4,446.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-82 4,442.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-89 4,453.70 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-94 4,452.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-96 4,446.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade FIRE-97 4,443.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1005 4,412.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1017 4,412.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1028 4,445.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1051 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1060 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1062 4,458.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1072 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1074 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1077 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-1082 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-16 4,419.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-17 4,420.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-18 4,419.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-19 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-20 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-21 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-22 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-23 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-25 4,416.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-26 4,395.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-300 4,468.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-306 4,419.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-308 4,420.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-310 4,417.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-315 4,420.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-319 4,420.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-321 4,421.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-328 LS 4212 Spooner 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-359 4,425.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-363 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-366 4,426.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-369 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-371 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-400 4,422.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-410 4,437.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Junction Nodes 4 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES J-412 4,420.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-421 4,429.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-429 4,441.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-443 4,445.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-446 4,446.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-453 4,447.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-457 4,456.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-469 4,458.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-521 4,469.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-53 4,469.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-535 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-539 4,462.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-547 4,451.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-549 4,464.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-550 4,464.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-551 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-559 4,434.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-560 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-561 4,428.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-572 Redigeview 4,444.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-59 4,471.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-608 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-615 4,428.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-67 4,458.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-74 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-75 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-76 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-920 4,403.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-928 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-932a 4,407.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-938 4,409.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-950 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade J-999 4,416.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FH-517 4,483.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FH-534 4,404.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FH-547 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FH-580 4,408.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FH-600 4,409.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FH-629 4,429.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FH-687 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Leakage FIRE-104 4,443.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FIRE-11 4,454.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Leakage FIRE-116 4,428.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Leakage FIRE-122 4,426.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Leakage FIRE-130 4,428.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FIRE-141 4,417.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Leakage FIRE-152 4,448.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Junction Nodes 5 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES LEAKAGE FIRE-155 4,465.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FIRE-166 4,431.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FIRE-2 4,457.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FIRE-30 4,473.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FIRE-44 4,473.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FIRE-72 4,438.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE FIRE-75 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Leakage FIRE-83 4,441.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Leakage FIRE-95 4,452.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE J-1066 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE J-1069 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade LEAKAGE J-302 4,473.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Leakage J-338 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-16 FH-742 4,440.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-3 FH-625 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-4 FH-622 4,446.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-4 FIRE-15 4,454.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-4 J-466 4,450.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-4 J-634 4,448.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-4 J-635 4,450.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-5 FIRE-42 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-5 FIRE-51 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-5 FIRE-91 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-5 J-607 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-6 FH-22 4,483.10 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-6 J-1 4,479.42 Zone 2 - Belgrade M1-6 J-31 4,490.24 Zone 2 - Belgrade M2-1 FH-640 4,451.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M2-1 FH-689 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade M2-1 FH-692 4,450.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK FH-678 4,475.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK FIRE-46 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK FIRE-92 Grain Elevator 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK FIRE-99A 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK J-1002 4,417.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK J-1054 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK J-323 4,421.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK J-378 4,447.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK J-540 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PARK J-57 4,478.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PH-1047 4,445.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PH-616 4,412.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-1 J-1059 4,454.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-1 J-1061 4,456.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-1 J-1063 4,465.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-1 J-1064 4,472.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-1 J-1068 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Junction Nodes 6 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES PLI-1 J-72 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-2 FIRE-135A 4,422.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-2 FIRE-75B 4,425.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-2 J-398 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-2 J-414 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-2 J-423 4,428.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-3 FIRE-101 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-3 FIRE-77 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-3 FIRE-79 4,440.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-4 J-437 4,447.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-5 FIRE-93 4,452.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade PLI-5 J-63 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-12 FH-729 4,386.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-12 FH-740 4,388.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-2 FIRE-132 4,428.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-2 FIRE-137 4,429.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-3 FH-677 4,474.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-3 FH-679 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-3 FH-681 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-3 J-1098 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-4 FH-626 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-4 FH-630 4,431.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-4 FH-631 4,426.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-4 FH-634 4,423.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-4 J-618 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-4 J-620 4,425.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-8 FH-773 4,417.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-8 FH-779 4,414.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-9 FH-722 4,400.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-9 FH-749 4,394.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R1-9 FH-754 4,395.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-11 FH-579 4,409.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-11 FIRE-139A 4,417.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-11 J-627 4,423.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-15 FH-769 4,478.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-15 FH-770 4,478.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-16 FH-758 4,435.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-16 FH-760 4,450.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-18 FH-741 4,445.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 FH-605 4,413.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 FH-606 4,417.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 FH-607 4,417.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 FH-611 4,419.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 FH-616 4,411.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 FIRE-148 4,420.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 FIRE-149 4,421.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 FIRE-150 4,422.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Junction Nodes 7 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES R2-3 J-1003 4,412.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 J-1020 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-3 J-998 4,416.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FH-531 4,441.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-102 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-103 4,441.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-105 4,443.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-107 4,446.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-108 4,449.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-109 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-111 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-112 4,429.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-113 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-114 4,431.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-115 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-117 4,428.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-119 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-121 4,425.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-123 4,425.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-125 4,426.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-126 4,427.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-127 4,424.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-128 4,426.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-129 4,426.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-131 4,430.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-69 4,442.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-84 4,448.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-85 4,444.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-87 4,450.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-88 4,451.90 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-90 4,456.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-98 4,437.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 FIRE-99 4,434.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-316 4,446.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-334 4,440.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-335 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-339 4,431.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-361 4,428.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-362 4,428.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-372 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-376 4,443.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-379 4,449.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-393 High School 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-438 4,447.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-4 J-71 4,457.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-5 FH-627 4,428.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-6 FIRE-20 4,471.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Junction Nodes 8 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES R2-6 FIRE-25 4,471.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-6 FIRE-27 4,473.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-6 J-60 4,471.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-6 J-61 4,469.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-7 FIRE-37 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-7 FIRE-38 4,475.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-8 FH-516 4,481.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-8 FH-518 4,485.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-8 FH-520 4,484.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-8 FH-522 4,487.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-8 FH-525 4,483.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2-8 J-800 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2D-1 FH-551 4,409.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2D-1 J-1025 4,411.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2D-1 J-939 4,408.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-545 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-553 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-555 4,405.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-559 4,402.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-576 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-577 4,407.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-581 4,412.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-582 4,411.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-584 4,414.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-587 4,417.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-590 4,415.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-592 4,417.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-594 4,415.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-597 4,412.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-599 4,411.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-617 4,415.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FH-623 4,414.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FIRE-138 4,421.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FIRE-139 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FIRE-140 4,421.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FIRE-142 4,420.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 FIRE-144 4,420.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 J-1018 4,413.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 J-1023 4,420.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 J-312 4,418.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 J-918 4,405.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 J-919 4,404.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 J-944 4,407.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 J-946 4,406.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-1 J-985 4,414.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 FIRE-154 4,464.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 FIRE-172 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Junction Nodes 9 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES R2M-2 FIRE-35 4,471.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 FIRE-43 4,472.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 FIRE-45 4,471.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 FIRE-52 4,462.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 FIRE-53 4,468.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 FIRE-54 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 FIRE-55 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 J-489 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R2M-2 J-519 4,472.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-10 FH-503 4,480.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-10 FH-505 4,484.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-10 FH-507 4,487.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-10 FH-509 4,489.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-10 FH-513 4,486.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-10 FH-523 4,488.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-10 J-850 4,489.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-2 FH-601 4,411.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-2 FH-602 4,410.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-2 FH-609 4,417.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-2 FIRE-145 4,421.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-2 FIRE-147 4,421.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-2 J-318 4,419.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-3 J-444 4,446.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-4 J-62 4,455.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 FIRE-164 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 FIRE-19 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 FIRE-23 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 FIRE-24 4,469.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 FIRE-57 4,466.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 FIRE-59 4,464.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 FIRE-62 4,461.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 FIRE-63 4,460.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 FIRE-64 4,456.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 J-471 4,469.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 J-475 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 J-486 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-5 J-530 4,462.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-7 FIRE-34 4,475.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R3-9 FIRE-39 4,474.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-1 FH-546 4,406.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-1 FH-548 4,407.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-2 FH-628 4,429.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-2 FH-633 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-2 FH-635 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-2 J-401 4,422.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-2 J-631 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 FH-682 4,422.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade Junction Nodes 10 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES R4-3 FH-684 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 FH-686 4,431.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 FH-688 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 FIRE-133 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 FIRE-134 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 FIRE-135 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 FIRE-145A 4,422.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 FIRE-165 4,429.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 FIRE-167 4,432.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-3 J-420 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-4 FIRE-152A 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-4 FIRE-70 4,440.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-4 FIRE-71 4,436.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-4 FIRE-74 4,427.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-4 FIRE-74A 4,420.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-4 FIRE-75A 4,424.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-4 FIRE-75C 4,437.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-4 FIRE-76 Triple Crown Middle School 4,430.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-4 FIRE-78 4,437.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-5 J-479 4,464.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-5 J-484 4,462.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-7 FIRE-40 4,472.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-7 FIRE-41 4,470.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-7 FIRE-47 4,468.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-7 FIRE-48 4,467.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-7 FIRE-50 4,462.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-7 J-497 4,464.50 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-7 J-64 4,461.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-8 FIRE-21 4,475.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-8 FIRE-29 4,476.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-8 J-52 4,474.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4-8 J-77 4,478.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade R4T-1 FIRE-73 4,434.00 Zone 2 - Belgrade B2-4 FH-1 4,478.52 Zone 1 - New B2-4 FH-4 4,480.01 Zone 1 - New B2-4 FH-6 4,478.04 Zone 1 - New B2-4 J-8 4,477.06 Zone 1 - New FH-12 4,488.62 Zone 1 - New FH-14 4,481.96 Zone 1 - New FH-15 4,483.15 Zone 1 - New FH-18 4,484.09 Zone 1 - New FH-20 4,490.72 Zone 1 - New FH-23 4,484.16 Zone 1 - New FH-24 4,489.72 Zone 1 - New FH-26 4,482.94 Zone 1 - New J-1 4,455.43 Zone 1 - New J-14 4,483.53 Zone 1 - New Junction Nodes 11 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES J-2 4,445.05 Zone 1 - New J-21 4,491.70 Zone 1 - New J-24 4,487.12 Zone 1 - New J-27 4,466.00 Zone 1 - New J-28 4,471.07 Zone 1 - New J-28 4,480.32 Zone 1 - New J-3 4,445.00 Zone 1 - New J-30 4,471.43 Zone 1 - New J-30 4,480.19 Zone 1 - New J-32 4,490.45 Zone 1 - New J-4 4,432.56 Zone 1 - New J-40 4,485.08 Zone 1 - New J-5 4,430.00 Zone 1 - New J-6 4,427.29 Zone 1 - New J-7 4,462.03 Zone 1 - New LEAKAGE FH-11 4,486.02 Zone 1 - New LEAKAGE FH-29 4,480.81 Zone 1 - New LEAKAGE FH-7 4,480.23 Zone 1 - New M1-10 FH-3 4,482.56 Zone 1 - New M1-10 J-7 4,484.57 Zone 1 - New M1-9 FH-10 4,483.68 Zone 1 - New R3-8 FH-9 4,483.48 Zone 1 - New B2-11 FH-626 4,540.00 Future B2-12 FH-621 4,494.00 Future B2-14 FH-616 4,498.00 Future B2-4 FIRE-162 4,464.00 Future B2-5 FH-615 4,506.00 Future B2-5 FH-617 4,492.00 Future B2-5 FH-620 4,495.00 Future B2-5 FH-622 4,504.00 Future B2-7 FH-586 4,520.00 Future B2-7 FH-587 4,521.00 Future B2-8 FH-576 4,541.00 Future B2-8 FH-585 4,540.00 Future B2PUD-1 FH-644 4,465.00 Future B2PUD-2 FH-636 4,460.00 Future BP10-1 FH-533 4,412.00 Future BP10-2 FH-679 4,390.00 Future BP10PUD FH-744 4,468.00 Future FH-532 4,405.00 Future FH-535 4,412.00 Future FH-536 4,408.00 Future FH-548 4,389.75 Future FH-549 4,397.00 Future FH-551 4,398.00 Future FH-553 4,395.50 Future FH-555 4,401.00 Future Junction Nodes 12 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES FH-558 4,410.00 Future FH-560 4,389.50 Future FH-561 4,389.75 Future FH-562 4,414.50 Future FH-564 4,420.75 Future FH-565 4,422.00 Future FH-566 4,418.00 Future FH-568 4,420.75 Future FH-575 4,519.00 Future FH-599 4,503.00 Future FH-641 4,400.00 Future FH-645 4,389.00 Future FH-646 4,389.50 Future FH-647 4,389.00 Future FH-648 4,391.00 Future FH-649 4,392.00 Future FH-650 4,394.00 Future FH-651 4,398.00 Future FH-652 4,399.00 Future FH-653 4,402.75 Future FH-654 4,404.50 Future FH-655 4,412.00 Future FH-656 4,411.25 Future FH-657 4,405.50 Future FH-658 4,405.00 Future FH-659 4,391.00 Future FH-660 4,393.00 Future FH-661 4,394.00 Future FH-662 4,395.00 Future FH-663 4,395.00 Future FH-664 4,396.00 Future FH-665 4,396.00 Future FH-666 4,399.75 Future FH-667 4,400.00 Future FH-668 4,402.00 Future FH-669 4,402.50 Future FH-670 4,406.00 Future FH-671 4,392.00 Future FH-672 4,394.00 Future FH-674 4,395.50 Future FH-675 4,399.00 Future FH-677 4,401.00 Future FH-678 4,404.00 Future FH-682 4,390.00 Future FH-684 4,392.50 Future FH-686 4,395.00 Future FH-688 4,396.00 Future Junction Nodes 13 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES FH-689 4,400.50 Future FH-690 4,403.00 Future FH-692 4,405.00 Future FH-695 4,405.50 Future FH-696 4,408.50 Future FH-697 4,411.00 Future FH-698 4,412.25 Future FH-699 4,414.00 Future FH-700 4,416.75 Future FH-701 4,418.00 Future FH-702 4,420.25 Future FH-703 4,421.00 Future FH-704 4,416.00 Future FH-705 4,415.00 Future FH-706 4,395.50 Future FH-707 4,395.50 Future FH-708 4,398.00 Future FH-709 4,398.00 Future FH-710 4,399.00 Future FH-711 4,401.00 Future FH-712 4,403.00 Future FH-713 4,419.75 Future FH-714 4,416.25 Future FH-715 4,418.00 Future FH-716 4,411.00 Future FH-717 4,409.00 Future FH-718 4,412.00 Future FH-719 4,423.00 Future FH-740 4,404.00 Future FH-745 4,402.00 Future FIRE-163 4,467.00 Future Future Park FH-588 4,523.00 Future Future Park FH-618 4,504.00 Future Future Park FH-635 4,462.00 Future J-32 4,453.82 Future J-33 0 Future J-34 4,470.49 Future J-35 0 Future J-36 4,526.71 Future J-474 4,464.00 Future J-478 4,463.00 Future M1-1 FH-546 4,399.00 Future M1-12 FH-613 4,541.00 Future M1-13 FH-634 4,537.00 Future M1-14 FH-614 4,515.00 Future M1-2 FH-541 4,403.00 Future M2-1 FH-637 4,458.00 Future Junction Nodes 14 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- Label Elevation (ft) Zone LIST OF JUNCTION NODES Park-Prescott FH-740 4,395.00 Future R-1 FH-571 4,498.00 Future R-1 FH-590 4,501.00 Future R1-11 FH-623 4,521.00 Future R1PUD-1 FH-570 4,476.00 Future R2-1 FH-681 4,392.00 Future R2-13 FH-572 4,522.00 Future R2-13 FH-573 4,541.00 Future R2-13 FH-574 4,527.00 Future R2-14 FH-633 4,537.00 Future R2-17 FH-611 4,542.00 Future R2-17 FH-627 4,540.00 Future R2-19 FH-743 4,426.00 Future R3-1 FH-556 4,407.00 Future R3-1 FH-559 4,404.00 Future R3PUD-1 FH-597 4,483.00 Future R3PUD-2 FH-594 4,483.00 Future RSM-3 FH-640 4,442.00 Future B2-4 FH-13 4,489.22 NOT BUILT B2-4 FH-19 4,492.08 NOT BUILT B2-4 FH-2 4,478.36 NOT BUILT B2-4 FH-21 4,488.31 NOT BUILT B2-4 FH-25 4,485.75 NOT BUILT B2-4 FH-28 4,482.34 NOT BUILT B2-4 FH-30 4,488.45 NOT BUILT B2-4 J-1050 4,460.00 NOT BUILT B2-4 J-16 4,488.00 NOT BUILT B2-4 J-22 4,491.30 NOT BUILT B2-4 J-34 4,484.15 NOT BUILT FH-27 4,481.63 NOT BUILT J-27 4,482.40 NOT BUILT M1-9 FH-16 4,487.19 NOT BUILT Junction Nodes 15 of 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: CITY PARK WELL PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 MOUNTAIN VIEW PARK WELL TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES- MAXIMUM DAY 7-16 7-15 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: CITY PARK WELL FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 MOUNTAIN VIEW PARK WELL AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS- MAXIMUM DAY 7-17 7-16 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: W. CENTRAL AVE PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 W. CENTRAL AVE. 10" MAIN UPGRADES TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES- MAXIMUM DAY 7-18 7-17 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: W. CENTRAL AVE FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 W. CENTRAL AVE. 10" MAIN UPGRADES AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS- MAXIMUM DAY 7-19 7-18 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: NE LOOP TIE PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 N.E. LOOP TIE TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES- MAXIMUM DAY 7-22 7-19 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: NE LOOP TIE FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 N.E. LOOP TIE AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS- MAXIMUM DAY 7-23 7-20 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: NEW WELL MAIN UPGRADE PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 NEW WELL MAIN UPGRADES TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES- MAXIMUM DAY 7-24 7-21 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: NEW WELL MAIN UPGRADE FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 NEW WELL MAIN UPGRADES AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS- MAXIMUM DAY 7-25 7-22 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: COMM.PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 S. CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT MAIN REPLACEMENT TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES- MAXIMUM DAY 7-26 7-23 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: COMM.FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 S. CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT MAIN IMPROVEMENTS AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS- MAXIMUM DAY 7-27 7-24 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: W. LOOP PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 WEST CROSSING LOOP TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES- MAXIMUM DAY 7-28 7-25 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: W. LOOP FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 WEST CROSSING LOOP AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS- MAXIMUM DAY 7-29 7-26 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: PRESCOTT PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 PRESCOTT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPEMENT TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES - 2028 MAXIMUM DAY 7-30 7-27 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: PRESCOTT FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 PRESCOTT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPEMENT AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS - 2028 MAXIMUM DAY 7-31 7-28 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: SPOONER RD.PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 SPOONER ROAD MAIN REPLACEMENT TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES- 2028 MAXIMUM DAY 7-32 7-29 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: SPOONER RD.FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 SPOONER ROAD MAIN REPLACEMENT AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS- 2028 MAXIMUM DAY 7-33 7-30 ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 50 60 80 90 110 110 JUNCTION LEGEND PRESSURE, PSI > = < = < = < = < = < = < = WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: E.LOOP PRESSURES NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 EAST CROSSING LOOP TYPICAL OPERATING PRESSURES- 2028 MAXIMUM DAY 7-34 7-31 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 < = < = < = < = < = < = < = JUNCTION LEGEND FIRE FLOWS, GPM WELL WATER TANK NOT TO SCALE QUALITY CHECK: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CAD NO. JOB NO. DATE: E.LOOP FIRE FLOW NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION [PHONE REDACTED] • tdhengineering.com Engineering 234 E. BABCOCK ST., SUITE 3 • BOZEMAN, MONTANA 59715 BELGRADE WATER MASTER PLAN BELGRADE, MONTANA MM KW JLB B16-048 APRIL 2017 EAST CROSSING LOOP AVAILABLE FIRE FLOWS- 2028 MAXIMUM DAY 7-35 7-32 ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well Max day demands (2770 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,599.66 4,604.15 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,599.66 4,604.15 end 4,603.99 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,603.99 4,604.50 end 4,577.36 4,586.69 tank min 4,577.36 4,586.69 % Full 0.0 50.5 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,577.36 4,586.69 end 4,603.99 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,603.99 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) TABLE 8-3 NEW WELL ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well Max day demands (2770 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,579.65 4,593.74 tank min 4,579.65 4,593.74 % Full 8.4 70.1 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,579.65 4,593.74 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-4 MOUNTAIN VIEW PARK WELL ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well Max day demands (2770 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,579.65 4,593.75 tank min 4,579.65 4,593.75 % Full 8.4 70.1 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,579.65 4,593.75 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-5 W. CENTRAL AVE. 10 IN ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well Max day demands (2770 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,579.65 4,593.75 tank min 4,579.65 4,593.75 % Full 8.4 70.1 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,579.65 4,593.75 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-6 4 IN TO 8 IN ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well Max day demands (2770 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,579.64 4,593.75 tank min 4,579.64 4,593.75 % Full 8.4 70.1 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,579.64 4,593.75 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-7 N.E. LOOP TIE ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well Max day demands (2770 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,579.64 4,593.75 tank min 4,579.64 4,593.75 % Full 8.4 70.1 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,579.64 4,593.75 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-8 NEW WELL MAIN UPGRADES ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well Max day demands (2770 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,582.13 4,595.36 tank min 4,582.13 4,595.36 % Full 17.6 74.6 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,582.13 4,595.36 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-9 BROADWAY WELL IMPROVEMENTS - 1000 GPM ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well Max day demands (2770 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,582.16 4,595.34 tank min 4,582.16 4,595.34 % Full 17.7 74.6 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,582.16 4,595.34 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-10 S. CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well Max day demands (2770 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,584.81 4,591.28 tank min 4,584.81 4,591.28 % Full 27.5 63.6 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,584.81 4,591.28 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-11 WEST CROSSING LOOP ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well 2028 Max day demands (3546 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,587.77 4,593.41 tank min 4,587.77 4,593.41 % Full 38.4 69.2 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,587.77 4,593.41 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-12 PRESCOTT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well 2028 Max day demands (3546 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,587.80 4,593.40 tank min 4,587.80 4,593.40 % Full 38.5 69.2 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,587.80 4,593.40 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-13 SPOONER RD. ---PAGE BREAK--- Belgrade Water Model 2017 Extended Run Pattern 1 Diurnal curve from max day 2013 Pattern 2 Initial Settings: Both tanks 3/4 full All pumps on except Shop Well 2028 Max day demands (3546 gpm) Day 1 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,597.71 4,595.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 2 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 3 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,588.72 4,592.14 tank min 4,588.72 4,592.14 % Full 41.8 65.7 Day 4 0.9 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,588.72 4,592.14 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 Day 5 0.8 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 Tank 1 Tank 2 start 4,604.50 4,604.50 end 4,604.50 4,604.50 3-hr, 3,000 gpm demand at high school (hr 20-23) 1.0 Max Day - all nodes pattern 1 except FH-545 (high school) TABLE 8-14 EAST CROSSING LOOP ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix E Fees and Ordinances ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF BELGRADE WATER RATES METERED WATER RATES- PER MONTH 0-5,000 gallons Over 5,000 gallons $18.19 $1.37 per 1,000 gallons ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2007- 11 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELGRADE, MONTANA AMENDING CHAPTER 3.10 OF THE BELGRADE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING IMPACT FEES PREAMBLE WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is appropriate to amend Chapter 3.10 of the Belgrade Municipal Code regarding impact fees to promote the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Belgrade. IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Belgrade, Montana, that Section 3.10, Belgrade Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: Chapter 3.10 IMPACT FEES Sections: 3.10.010 Legislative findings. 3.10.020 Authority and applicability. 3.10.030 Intent. 3.10.040 Definitions. 3.10.050 Street impact fees. 3.10.060 Fire protection impact fees. 3.10.070 Water impact fees. 3.10.080 Sewer impact fees. 3.10.090 Park impact fees. 3.10.100 Administrative fee. 3.10.110 Credits against impact fees. 3.10.120 Appeal. 3.10.130 Miscellaneous provisions 3.10.010 Legislative findings. The city council of the city of Belgrade, Montana finds that: A. Capital improvements to streets, fire protection, water and sewer systems, and parks are ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 necessary to accommodate continued growth within the city to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the city. B. New residential and nonresidential development imposes increased and excessive demands upon existing city facilities. C. New development often overburdens existing public facilities and the tax revenues generated from new development often do not generate sufficient funds to provide public facilities to serve the new development. D. New development is expected to continue, and will place ever-increasing demands on the city to provide public facilities to serve new development. E. The creation of an equitable impact fee system would enable the city to impose a proportionate share of the costs that are reasonably related to the capital improvement demands of new development. F. The impact fee study, dated February 14, 2007, and as updated, prepared by TischlerBise Fiscal, Economic & Planning Consultants, set forth reasonable methodologies and analysis for determining the impacts of various types of development on the city's street, fire protection, water and sewer systems, and parks necessary to meet the demands for such services created by new development. G. The city establishes as city standards the assumptions and service standards referenced in the impact fee studies as part of its current plans for the major street system and for the city's fire protection, water and sewer systems and parks. H. The impact fees described in this chapter are based on the impact fee study, and do not exceed the maximum impact fee determined by the impact fee study. I. The impact fees adopted in this chapter are reasonably related to and reasonably attributable to the development's share of the cost of infrastructure improvements made necessary by the new development. J. After the consideration of the need for capital improvements required to served new development, and after consideration of the payments for capital improvements reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of the development in the form of user fees, debt service payments, taxes and other available sources of funding the capital improvements, the city council determined that the impact fees adopted in this chapter do not exceed a proportionate share of the costs incurred or to be incurred by the city in accommodating the development and are reasonably related to the benefits accruing to the development paying the impact fees. K. The types of infrastructure included in the impact fee study all have citywide service areas. Therefore, impact fees will be imposed on a citywide basis with one benefit district comprised of all land within the city limits of Belgrade. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 L. This chapter creates a system by which impact fees will be used to expand or improve the city street, fire protection, water and sewer systems, and parks in ways that benefit the development that paid each fee within a reasonable period of time after the fee is paid. M. This chapter creates a system under which development impact fees shall not be used to cure existing deficiencies in public facilities. N. This chapter does not hold new development to a higher level of service than existing users unless there is a mechanism in place for the existing users to make improvements to the existing system to match the higher level of service. O. It is in the best interests of the city and new development to include an administrative surcharge, not to exceed five percent of the total impact fee, to help cover impact fee expenses. P. The capital improvement plan for growth related projects adopted by the city must cover at least a five year period, and must be reviewed and updated at least every two years. Q. This chapter adopts policies and procedures related to site specific credits or developer reimbursements that are reasonably designed to avoid double payment for growth related capital improvements. 3.10.020 Authority and applicability. A. This chapter is enacted pursuant to the city's general police power, the authority granted to the city by the Montana State Constitution, Section 7-1-101, and Title 7, Chapter 6, Part 16, of Montana Code Annotated B. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all of the territory within the limits of the city. C. The provisions of this chapter related to water impact fees shall also apply to all properties located outside the city that are connected to the city water system, if any. D. The provisions of this chapter related to sewer impact fees shall also apply to all properties located outside the city that are connected to the city sewer system, if any. 3.10.030 Intent. A. It is the intent of this chapter to adopt impact fees that are reasonably related to and reasonably attributable to the development's share of the cost of infrastructure improvements made necessary by the new development. ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 B. It is the further intent of this chapter to adopt impact fees that do not exceed a proportionate share of the costs incurred or to be incurred by the city in accommodating the development. C. It is the intent of this chapter that impact fees collected under the provisions of this chapter not be used to correct existing deficiencies in a public facility. D. It is the intent of this chapter that new development not be held to a higher level of services than existing users unless there is a mechanism in place for the existing users to make improvements to the existing system to match the higher level of service. E. It is the intent of this chapter that any monies collected from any impact fee and deposited in an impact fee fund shall not be co-mingled with monies from a different impact fee fund or ever be used for a type of facility or equipment different from that for which the fee was paid. 3.10.040 Definitions. As used in this chapter, the following definitions apply: "Capital improvements" means improvements, land, and equipment with a useful life of 10 years or more that increase or improve the service capacity of a public facility. The term does not include consumable supplies. "Connection charge" means the actual cost of connecting a property to a public utility system and is limited to the labor, materials, and overhead involved in making connections and installing meters. "Development" means construction, renovation, or installation of a building or structure, a change in use of a building or structure, or a change in the use of land when the construction, installation, or other action creates additional demand for public facilities. "Governmental entity" means the city of Belgrade, Montana. "Impact fee" means any charge imposed upon development by a governmental entity as part of the development approval process to fund the additional service capacity required by the development from which it is collected. An impact fee may include a fee for the administration of the impact fee not to exceed 5% of the total impact fee collected. The term does not include: ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 a charge or fee to pay for administration, plan review, or inspection costs associated with a permit required for development; (ii) a connection charge; (iii) any other fee authorized by law, including but not limited to user fees, special improvement district assessments, fees authorized under Title 7 for county, municipal, and consolidated government sewer and water districts and systems, and costs of ongoing maintenance; or (iv) onsite or offsite improvements necessary for new development to meet the safety, level of service, and other minimum development standards that have been adopted by the governmental entity. "Proportionate share" means that portion of the cost of capital system improvements that reasonably relates to the service demands and needs of the project. A proportionate share must take into account the limitations provided in 7-6-1602, M.C.A. "Public facilities" means: a water supply production, treatment, storage, or distribution facility; a wastewater collection, treatment, or disposal facility; a transportation facility, including roads, streets, bridges, rights-of-way, traffic signals, and landscaping; a storm water collection, retention, detention, treatment, or disposal facility or a flood control facility; a police, emergency medical rescue, or fire protection facility; and other facilities for which documentation is prepared as provided in 7-6-1602 that have been approved as part of an impact fee ordinance or resolution by a two- thirds majority of the city council for the city of Belgrade. "Person" means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality, public corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity, other than the city of Belgrade, Montana. 3.10.050 Street impact fees. A. Imposition of Street Impact Fees. 1. On or after the effective date of this ordinance, any person who seeks to obtain a building permit, or an extension of a building permit that was issued before the ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 effective date of this chapter, is required to pay a street impact fee in the amount specified in this chapter. 2. No building permit shall be issued, or extension granted, until the street impact fee described in this chapter has been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by subsection F of this section. B. Amount of Street Impact Fee. 1. The amount of the street impact fee shall be Fifty Five Percent (55%) of the amounts set forth in the following Street Impact Fee Schedule: Street Impact Fee Schedule Residential (per housing unit) 210 Single Family Detached $3,856 230 All Other Housing Types $2,361 Nonresidential (per Sq Ft of floor area) 820 Commercial / Shop Ctr $6.94 770 Business Park $1.68 720 Medical-Dental Office $7.21 710 General Office $2.66 610 Hospital $3.50 151 MiniWarehouse $0.49 150 Warehousing $0.99 140 Manufacturing $0.76 110 Light Industrial $1.39 520 Elementary School $1.91 Nonresidential (per unique demand indicator) 620 Nursing Home (per bed) $473 565 Day Care (per student) $429 530 Secondary School (per student) $245 520 Elementary School (per student) $170 320 Lodging (per room) $1,124 C. Payment of Street Impact Fee. 1. Any person who applies for a building permit or for an extension of a building permit that was issued before the effective date of this chapter, shall pay the street impact fee required by this chapter to the city prior to the issuance or extension of a permit. 2. All funds paid by a person pursuant to this subchapter shall be identified as street impact fees and shall be deposited in the street impact fee fund described in subsection D of this section. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 D. Street Impact Fee Funds. 1. A single street impact fee fund is created, and such fund shall be maintained in an interest bearing account. 2. Such fund shall contain only those street impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. E. Use of Street Impact Fee Funds. 1. The monies in the street impact fee fund shall be used for capital improvements that are reasonably related to the benefits accruing to the development paying the impact fees for streets. 2. Street impact fees may be used to reimburse the city for costs of excess capacity in existing capital facilities, when the excess capacity has been provided in anticipation of the needs of new development, for that portion of the facilities constructed for future users. The need to recoup costs for excess capacity must have been documented pursuant to 7-6-1602, M.C.A., in a manner that demonstrates the need for the excess capacity. The city may continue to assess an impact fee that recoups costs for excess capacity in an existing facility. Street impact fees used to reimburse the city for the costs to provide the excess capacity must be based on the actual cost of acquiring, constructing, or upgrading the facility and must be no more than a proportionate share of the costs to provide the excess capacity. F. Exemptions from Street Impact Fee. 1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the street impact fee: a. Alterations or expansions of existing buildings where the use is not changed, no additional residential or commercial units are created, and no additional vehicle trips will be produced over and above those produced by the existing use; b. Construction of accessory buildings or structures that will not produce additional vehicle trips over and above those produced by the primary building or land use; c. The replacement of a destroyed or partially destroyed building or structure with a new building or structure of the same size and use where no additional vehicle trips will be produced over and above those produced by the original building or structure; d. Any other type of development for which the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed land use and development will produce no more vehicle trips from such site over and above the trips from such site prior to the proposed development, or for which the applicant can show that a street impact fee for such site has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the street impact fee that would be required by this chapter for such development. 2. Any such claim for exemption must be made no later than the time when the applicant applies for the building permit, or for an extension of a building permit that was issued before the effective date of this chapter, and any claim for ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 exemption not made at or before that time shall have been waived. 3. The city manager or his designee shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in subsection of this section. G. Site-Specific Credits and Developer Reimbursements. 1. The city council shall adopt policies and procedures related to site-specific credits or developer reimbursements for street impact fees. Project improvements normally required as part of the development approval process are not eligible for credits against impact fees. 3.10.060 Fire protection impact fees. A. Imposition of Fire Protection Impact Fees. 1. On or after the effective date of this ordinance, any person who seeks to obtain a building permit, or an extension of a building permit that was issued before the effective date of this chapter, is required to pay a fire protection impact fee in the amount specified in this chapter. 2. No building permit shall be issued, or extension granted, until the fire protection impact fee described in this chapter has been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by subsection F of this section. B. Amount of Fire Protection Impact Fee. 1. The amount of the fire protection impact fee shall be Fifty Five Percent (55%) of the amounts set forth in the following Fire Protection Impact Fee Schedule: Fire Protection Impact Fee Schedule Residential (per housing unit) 210 Single Family Detached $917 230 All Other Housing Types $639 Nonresidential (per Sq Ft of floor area) 820 Commercial / Shop Ctr $0.70 770 Business Park $0.15 720 Medical-Dental Office $0.66 710 General Office $0.21 610 Hospital $0.32 151 MiniWarehouse $0.04 150 Warehousing $0.09 140 Manufacturing $0.07 110 Light Industrial $0.12 520 Elementary School $0.17 Nonresidential (per unique demand indicator) ---PAGE BREAK--- 9 620 Nursing Home (per bed) $43 565 Day Care (per student) $39 530 Secondary School (per student) $22 520 Elementary School (per student) $15 320 Lodging (per room) $104 C. Payment of Fire Protection Impact Fee. 1. Any person who applies for a building permit, or for an extension of a building permit that was issued before the effective date of this chapter, shall pay the fire protection impact fee required by this chapter to the city prior to the issuance or extension of a permit. 2. All funds paid by a person pursuant to this subchapter shall be identified as fire protection impact fees and shall be deposited in the fire protection impact fee fund described in subsection D of this section. D. Fire Protection Impact Fee Funds. 1. A single fire protection impact fee fund is created, and such fund shall be maintained in an interest bearing account. 2. Such fund shall contain only those fire protection impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. E. Use of Fire Protection Impact Fee Funds. 1. The monies in the fire protection impact fee fund shall be used for capital improvements that are reasonably related to the benefits accruing to the development paying the impact fees for fire protection. 2. Fire protection impact fees may be used to reimburse the city for costs of excess capacity in existing capital facilities, when the excess capacity has been provided in anticipation of the needs of new development, for that portion of the facilities constructed for future users. The need to recoup costs for excess capacity must have been documented pursuant to 7-6-1602, M.C.A., in a manner that demonstrates the need for the excess capacity. The city may continue to assess an impact fee that recoups costs for excess capacity in an existing facility. Fire protection impact fees used to reimburse the city for the costs to provide the excess capacity must be based on the actual cost of acquiring, constructing, or upgrading the facility and must be no more than a proportionate share of the costs to provide the excess capacity. F. Exemptions from Fire Protection Impact Fee. 1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the fire protection impact fee: a. Reconstruction or replacement of a previously existing residential or commercial unit that does not create any additional units. b. Construction of unoccupied accessory units related to a residential unit. c. The replacement of a destroyed or partially destroyed building or structure with a new building or structure of the same size and use where no greater demand for fire protection will be produced over and above those produced ---PAGE BREAK--- 10 by the original building or structure. d. Projects for which a fire protection impact fee has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the fire protection impact fee that would be required by this chapter. e. Any other type of development for which the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed land use and development will produce no more demand for fire protection from such site over and above the fire protection for such site prior to the proposed development, or for which the applicant can show that a fire protection impact fee for such site has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the fire protection impact fee that would be required by this chapter for such development. 2. Any such claim for exemption must be made no later than the time when the applicant applies for the building permit, or the extension of a building permit issued before the effective date of this chapter, for the proposed development, and any claim for exemption not made at or before that time shall have been waived. 3. The city manager or his designee shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in subsection of this section. G. Site-Specific Credits and Developer Reimbursements. 1. The city council may adopt policies and procedures related to site-specific credits or developer reimbursements for fire protection impact fees. Project improvements normally required as part of the development approval process are not eligible for credits against impact fees. 3.10.070 Water impact fees. A. Imposition of Water Impact Fees. 1. On or after the effective date of this ordinance, any person who applies for a building permit, or for the extension of a building permit that was issued prior to the effective date of this chapter, or seeks to obtain a water service connection, is required to pay a water impact fee in the amount specified in this chapter. 2. No building permit shall be issued, or extension granted, or water service connection allowed, until the water impact fee described in this chapter has been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by subsection F of this section. B. Amount of Water Impact Fee. 1. The amount of the water impact fee shall be Fifty Five Percent (55%) of the amounts set forth in the following Water Impact Fee Schedule: Water Impact Fee Schedule Residential (per housing unit) 210 Single Family Detached $5,128 230 All Other Housing Types $3,574 ---PAGE BREAK--- 11 Nonresidential (based upon meter size) Meter Size(inches) Capacity Ratio 0.75 Displacement 1.0 $5,128 1.00 Displacement 1.7 $8,717 1.50 Displacement 3.3 $16,922 2.00 Compound 5.3 $27,178 3.00 Compound 10.7 $54,869 4.00 Compound 16.7 $85,637 Fees for meters larger than four inches will be based on annualized average day demand and the net capital cost per gallon of capacity. C. Payment of Water Impact Fee. 1. Any person who applies for a building permit, or applies for the extension of a building permit issued prior to the effective date of this chapter, or applies for a water connection, shall pay the water impact fee required by this chapter to the city prior to the issuance or extension of any such permit. 2. All funds paid by a person pursuant to this subchapter shall be identified as water impact fees and shall be deposited in the water impact fee fund described in subsection D of this section. D. Water Impact Fee Funds. 1. A single water impact fee fund is created, and such fund shall be maintained in an interest bearing account. 2. Such fund shall contain only those water impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. E. Use of Water Impact Fee Funds. 1. The monies in the water impact fee fund shall be used for capital improvements that are reasonably related to the benefits accruing to the development paying the impact fees for water. 2. Water impact fees may be used to reimburse the city for costs of excess capacity in existing capital facilities, when the excess capacity has been provided in anticipation of the needs of new development, for that portion of the facilities constructed for future users. The need to recoup costs for excess capacity must have been documented pursuant to 7-6-1602, M.C.A., in a manner that demonstrates the need for the excess capacity. The city may continue to assess an impact fee that recoups costs for excess capacity in an existing facility. Water impact fees used to reimburse the city for the costs to provide the excess capacity must be based on the actual cost of acquiring, constructing, or upgrading the facility and must be no more than a proportionate share of the costs to provide the excess capacity. F. Exemptions from Water Impact Fee. 1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the water impact fee: ---PAGE BREAK--- 12 a. Reconstruction or replacement of a previously existing residential or commercial unit that does not create any additional residential units. b. Construction of unoccupied accessory units related to a residential unit. c. The replacement of a destroyed or partially destroyed building or structure with a new building or structure of the same size and use where no greater demand for water will be produced over and above those produced by the original building or structure. d. Projects that the applicant can demonstrate will produce no greater demand for water from such land than existed prior to issuance of such permit. e. Projects for which a water impact fee has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the water impact fee that would be required by this chapter. f. Any other type of development for which the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed land use and development will produce no more demand for water from such site over and above the water demand for such site prior to the proposed development, or for which the applicant can show that a water impact fee for such site has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the water impact fee that would be required by this chapter for such development. 2. Any such claim for exemption must be made no later than the time when the applicant applies for the building permit, or for the extension of a building permit issued prior to the effective date of this chapter, or for a water connection, for the proposed development, and any claim for exemption not made at or before that time shall have been waived. 3. The city manager or his designee shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in subsection of this section. G. Site-Specific Credits and Developer Reimbursements. 1. The city council may adopt policies and procedures related to site-specific credits or developer reimbursements for water impact fees. Project improvements normally required as part of the development approval process are not eligible for credits against impact fees. 3.10.080 Sewer impact fees. A. Imposition of Sewer Impact Fees. 1. On or after the effective date of this ordinance, any person who applies for a building permit, or for the extension of a building permit that was issued prior to the effective date of this chapter, or seeks to obtain a sewer service connection, is required to pay a sewer impact fee in the amount specified in this chapter. 2. No building permit shall be issued, or extension of a building permit granted, or sewer service connection allowed, until the sewer impact fee described in this chapter has been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by subsection F of this section. B. Amount of Sewer Impact Fee. ---PAGE BREAK--- 13 1. The amount of the sewer impact fee shall be Fifty Five Percent (55%) of the amounts set forth in the following Sewer Impact Fee Schedule: Sewer Impact Fee Schedule Residential (per housing unit) 210 Single Family Detached $2,708 230 All Other Housing Types $1,887 Nonresidential (based upon water meter size) Water Meter Size Capacity Ratio (inches) 0.75 Displacement 1.0 $2,708 1.00 Displacement 1.7 $4,604 1.50 Displacement 3.3 $8,937 2.00 Compound 5.3 $14,354 3.00 Compound 10.7 $28,979 4.00 Compound 16.7 $45,229 Nonresidential sewer fees are based on water meter size. Fees for water meters larger than four inches will be based on annualized average day demand and the net capital cost per gallon of capacity. C. Payment of Sewer Impact Fee. 1. Any person who applies for a building permit, or applies for the extension of a building permit that was issued prior to the effective date of this chapter, or applies for a sewer connection, shall pay the sewer impact fee required by this chapter to the city prior to the issuance or extension of any such permit. 2. All funds paid by a person pursuant to this subchapter shall be identified as sewer impact fees and shall be deposited in the sewer impact fee fund described in subsection D of this section. D. Sewer Impact Fee Funds. 1. A single sewer impact fee fund is created, and such fund shall be maintained in an interest bearing account. 2. Such fund shall contain only those sewer impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. E. Use of Sewer Impact Fee Funds. 1. The monies in the sewer impact fee fund shall be used for capital improvements that are reasonably related to the benefits accruing to the development paying the impact fees for sewer or wastewater service. 2. Sewer impact fees may be used to reimburse the city for costs of excess capacity in existing capital facilities, when the excess capacity has been provided in anticipation of the needs of new development, for that portion of the facilities constructed for future users. The need to recoup costs for excess capacity must ---PAGE BREAK--- 14 have been documented pursuant to 7-6-1602, M.C.A., in a manner that demonstrates the need for the excess capacity. The city may continue to assess an impact fee that recoups costs for excess capacity in an existing facility. Sewer impact fees used to reimburse the city for the costs to provide the excess capacity must be based on the actual cost of acquiring, constructing, or upgrading the facility and must be no more than a proportionate share of the costs to provide the excess capacity. F. Exemptions from Sewer Impact Fee. 1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the sewer impact fee: a. Reconstruction or replacement of a previously existing residential or commercial unit that does not create any additional units. b. Construction of unoccupied accessory units related to a residential unit. c. The replacement of a destroyed or partially destroyed building or structure with a new building or structure of the same size and use where no greater demand for sewer capacity will be produced over and above those produced by the original building or structure. d. Projects that the applicant can demonstrate will produce no greater demand for sewer capacity from such land than existed prior to issuance of such permit. e. Projects for which a sewer impact fee has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the sewer impact fee that would be required by this chapter. f. Any other type of development for which the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed land use and development will produce no more demand for sewer capacity from such site over and above the sewer capacity for such site prior to the proposed development, or for which the applicant can show that a sewer impact fee for such site has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the sewer impact fee that would be required by this chapter for such development. 2. Any such claim for exemption must be made no later than the time when the applicant applies for the building permit, or for the extension of a building permit, or for a sewer connection, for the proposed development, and any claim for exemption not made at or before that time shall have been waived. 3. The city manager or his designee shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in subsection of this section. G. Site-Specific Credits and Developer Reimbursements. 1. The city council may adopt policies and procedures related to site-specific credits or developer reimbursements for sewer impact fees. Project improvements normally required as part of the development approval process are not eligible for credits against impact fees. 3.10.090 Park impact fees. ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 A. Imposition of Park Impact Fees. 1. On or after the effective date of this ordinance, any person who applies for a residential building permit, or for the extension of a residential building permit issued before the effective date of this chapter, is required to pay a park impact fee in the amount specified in this chapter. 2. No residential building permit shall be issued, or no extension of a residential building permit that was issued before the effective date of this chapter shall be allowed, until the park impact fee described in this chapter has been paid, unless the development for which the permit is sought is exempted by subsection F of this section. B. Amount of Park Impact Fee. 1. The amount of the park impact fee shall be Fifty Five Percent (55%) of the amounts set forth in the following Park Impact Fee Schedule: Park Impact Fee Schedule Residential (per housing unit) 210 Single Family Detached $831 230 All Other Housing Types $579 C. Payment of Park Impact Fee. 1. Any person who applies for a residential building permit, or applies for the extension of a residential building permit that was issued prior to the effective date of this chapter, shall pay the park impact fee required by this chapter to the city prior to the issuance or extension of any such permit. 2. All funds paid by a person pursuant to this subchapter shall be identified as park impact fees and shall be deposited in the park impact fee fund described in subsection D of this section. D. Park Impact Fee Funds. 1. A single park impact fee fund is created, and such fund shall be maintained in an interest bearing account. 2. Such fund shall contain only those park impact fees collected pursuant to this chapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. E. Use of Park Impact Fee Funds. 1. The monies in the park impact fee fund shall be used for capital improvements that are reasonably related to the benefits accruing to the development paying the impact fees for parks. 2. Park impact fees may be used to reimburse the city for costs of excess capacity in existing capital facilities, when the excess capacity has been provided in anticipation of the needs of new development, for that portion of the facilities constructed for future users. The need to recoup costs for excess capacity must have been documented pursuant to 7-6-1602, M.C.A., in a manner that demonstrates the need for the excess capacity. The city may continue to assess an ---PAGE BREAK--- 16 impact fee that recoups costs for excess capacity in an existing facility. Park impact fees used to reimburse the city for the costs to provide the excess capacity must be based on the actual cost of acquiring, constructing, or upgrading the facility and must be no more than a proportionate share of the costs to provide the excess capacity. F. Exemptions from Park Impact Fee. 1. The following types of development shall be exempted from payment of the park impact fee: a. Reconstruction or replacement of a previously existing residential unit that does not create any additional residential units. b. Construction of unoccupied accessory units related to a residential unit. c. The replacement of a destroyed or partially destroyed building or structure with a new building or structure of the same size and use where no greater demand for parks will be produced over and above those produced by the original building or structure. d. Projects that the applicant can demonstrate will produce no greater demand for parks from such land than existed prior to issuance of such permit. e. Projects for which a park impact fee has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the park impact fee that would be required by this chapter. f. Any other type of development for which the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed land use and development will produce no more use of parks from such site over and above the use of parks for such site prior to the proposed development, or for which the applicant can show that a park impact fee for such site has previously been paid in an amount that equals or exceeds the park impact fee that would be required by this chapter for such development. 2. Any such claim for exemption must be made no later than the time when the applicant applies for the building permit, or for the extension of a building permit issued prior to the effective date of this chapter, for the proposed development, and any claim for exemption not made at or before that time shall have been waived. 3. The city manager or his designee shall determine the validity of any claim for exemption pursuant to the criteria set forth in subsection of this section. G. Site-Specific Credits and Developer Reimbursements. 1. The city council may adopt policies and procedures related to site-specific credits or developer reimbursements for park impact fees. Project improvements normally required as part of the development approval process are not eligible for credits against impact fees. 3.10.100 Administrative fee. A. Imposition of Impact Fee Administrative Fees. 1. Any person who is responsible to pay an impact fee under this ordinance shall also pay a fee for the administration of the impact fee to the city when the impact fee is ---PAGE BREAK--- 17 paid. B. Amount of Impact Fee Administrative Fee. 1. The amount of the impact fee administrative fee shall be five percent of the impact fee paid. C. When Impact Fee Administrative Fee Paid. 1. Any person who pays an impact fee under this ordinance shall also pay the impact fee administrative fee to the city when the impact fee is paid. 2. All funds paid by a person pursuant to this subchapter shall be identified as impact fee administrative fees and shall be deposited in the impact fee administrative fee fund described in subsection D of this section. D. Impact Fee Administrative Fee Funds. 1. A single impact fee administrative fee fund is created, and such fund shall be maintained in an interest bearing account. 2. Such fund shall contain only those impact fee administrative fees collected pursuant to this subchapter and any interest which may accrue from time to time on such amounts. E. Use of Impact Fee Administrative Fee Funds. 1. The monies in the impact fee administrative fee fund shall be used for the administration of impact fees pursuant to the provisions in Title 7, Chapter 6, Part 16, M.C.A. 3.10.110 Credits Against Impact Fees. A. After the effective date of this chapter, all mandatory or voluntary monetary contributions for, land or easement dedications for, or acquisition or construction of, capital improvements by an applicant in connection with a proposed development shall result in a pro rata credit against the impact fee for the same type of service or facility otherwise due for such development, except that no such credit shall be awarded for: 1. Projects not listed on the impact fee capital improvements program; or 2. Land or easement dedications for, or acquisition or construction of, project-related improvements required as a condition of preliminary plat approval, or other approval, of a development or subdivision; or 3. Any voluntary land or easement dedications not accepted by the city; or 4. Any voluntary acquisition or construction of improvements not approved in writing by the city prior to commencement of the acquisition or construction. B. In order to obtain a credit against development impact fees otherwise due, an applicant must submit a written offer to make a specific monetary contribution for, to dedicate to the city specific parcels of qualifying land or easements, or to acquire ---PAGE BREAK--- 18 or construct, specific capital improvements in accordance with all applicable state or city design and construction standards, and must specifically request a credit against such impact fees. Such written request must be made on a form provided by the city, must contain a statement under oath of the facts that qualify the applicant to receive a credit, must be accompanied by documents evidencing those facts, and must be filed not later than the initiation of construction of improvements or the acceptance by the city of monetary contributions, land or easement dedications, or the applicant's claim for the credit shall be waived. The granting of credit shall not occur without the approval of the city council. C. The credit due to an applicant shall be calculated and documented as follows: 1. Credit for qualifying land or easement dedications shall, at the applicant's option, be valued at: a. One hundred percent of the most recent assessed value for such land as shown in the records of the city assessor; or b. That fair market value established by a private appraiser acceptable to the city in an appraisal paid for by the applicant. 2. In order to receive credit for qualifying acquisition or construction of capital improvements, the applicant shall submit complete engineering drawings, specifications, and construction cost estimates to the city. The city shall determine the amount of credit due based on the information submitted, or, if it determines that such information is inaccurate or unreliable, then on alternative engineering or construction costs acceptable to the city. D. Approved credits shall become effective at the following times: 1. Approved credit for land or easement dedications shall become effective when the land has been conveyed to the city in a form acceptable to the city, and at no cost to the city, and has been accepted by the city council. When such conditions have been met, the city shall note that fact in the credit record maintained by the city finance department. Upon request of the credit holder, the city shall send the credit holder a letter stating the credit balance available to him (or her). 2. Approved credits for the acquisition or construction of capital improvements shall generally become effective when: a. All required construction has been completed and has been accepted by the city; and b. A suitable maintenance and warranty bond has been received and approved by the city; and c. All design, construction, inspection, testing, bonding, and acceptance procedures have been completed in compliance with all applicable city and state procedures. ---PAGE BREAK--- 19 However, approved credits for the construction of improvements may become effective at an earlier date if the applicant posts security in the form of a performance bond, irrevocable letter of credit, or escrow agreement, and the amount and terms of such security are accepted by the city. At a minimum, such security must be in the amount of the approved credit or an amount determined to be adequate to allow the city to construct the improvements for which the credit was given, whichever is higher. When such conditions have been met, the city shall note that fact in the credit record maintained by the city finance department. Upon request of the credit holder, the city shall also send the credit holder a letter stating the credit balance available to him (or her). E. Approved credits may be used to reduce the amount of impact fees due from any proposed development for the same type of service or facility for which the applicant made a monetary contribution, dedicated land or easements, or acquired or constructed improvements, until the amount of the credit is exhausted. Each time a request to use credit from a mandatory or voluntary contribution, dedication, acquisition, or construction is presented to the city, the city shall reduce the amount of the impact fee of the same type otherwise due from the applicant and shall note in the city records the amount of credit remaining, if any. In the case of a mandatory contribution, dedication, acquisition, or construction, any credit in excess of the amount of the impact fee otherwise due under this chapter shall be deemed excess credit that is remaining and available for use by the applicant. In the case of a voluntary contribution, dedication, acquisition, or construction, any credit in excess of the amount of the impact fee of the same type and applicable to the project, shall be deemed excess credit that is remaining and available for use by the applicant. Upon request of the credit holder, the city shall also send the credit holder a letter stating the amount of credit remaining to him (or her). F. Approved credit shall only be used to reduce the amount of development impact fees of the same type otherwise due under this chapter and shall not be paid to the applicant in cash or in credit against any impact fees for a different type of facility or service or against any other monies due from the applicant to the city, except as described in Subsection G of this section. G. If the amount of approved credit for a mandatory contribution, dedication, acquisition, or construction exceeds the amount of the impact fees of the same type otherwise due under this chapter, the applicant may request in writing that the city provide for reimbursement of any excess credit to the applicant in cash. Such written request must be filed not later than the initiation of construction of improvements, or the acceptance by the city of contributions or land or easement dedications, or the applicant's claim shall be waived. Upon receipt of such a written request, the city may, at its discretion: ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 1. Arrange for the reimbursement of such excess credit from the impact fee fund for the same type of service or facility from impact fees paid by others; or 2. Reject the request for cash and provide credit. Such excess credit shall be valued at one hundred percent of actual developer costs for the excess improvements, or at the actual appraised value of such excess improvements, at the city's option. H. Credit may be transferred from one holder to another by any written instrument clearly identifying the credit issued under Subsection C of this section that is to be transferred, provided that such instrument is signed by both the transferor and transferee, and that the document is delivered to the City for registration of the change in ownership. I. The city council shall determine a means and method of valuation of the proposed dedication or constructions to establish credits against future impact fee revenue if the dedication of land or construction of public facilities is of worth in excess of the impact fee due from an individual development. 3.10.120 Appeal. A. Right to Appeal. 1. The person charged an impact fee under the provisions of this ordinance may appeal the charge if the person believes an error has been made. B. Appeal Procedure. 1. The person making the appeal shall file with the city a written notice of appeal that sets forth the basis for the appeal including the alleged error. 2. The person making the appeal shall pay the city an appeal fee of one hundred dollars at the time of filing the written notice of appeal. 3. The city manager shall fix a time and place for hearing the appeal, and the city shall mail notice of the hearing to the appellant at the address given in the notice of appeal. The hearing shall be conducted at the time and place stated in such notice given by the city. The determination of the city council shall be final. 4. The appeal shall be heard and determined by the city council within sixty days of the filing of written notice of appeal. 3.10.130 Miscellaneous provisions. A. Interest earned on monies in any impact fee fund shall be considered part of such fund, and shall be subject to the same restrictions on use applicable to the impact fees deposited in such fund. B. No monies from any impact fee fund shall be spent for operations or maintenance of any facility or to cure deficiencies in public facilities existing on the effective date of this chapter. C. Nothing in this chapter shall restrict the city from requiring an applicant to construct ---PAGE BREAK--- 21 reasonable project improvements required to serve the applicant's project, whether or not such improvements are of a type for which credit is available under Section 3.10.120. D. The city shall maintain accurate records of impact fees paid, including the name of the person paying such fees, the project for which the fees were paid, the date of payment of each fee, the amounts received in payment for each fee, and any other matters that the city deems appropriate or necessary to the accurate accounting of such fees, and such records shall be available for review by the public during city business hours. E. At least once during each fiscal year of the city, the city manager shall present to the city council a proposed capital improvements program for the major street system, the city fire protection system, the city water and wastewater systems, and the city park system, and such capital improvements program shall assign monies from each impact fee fund to specific projects and related expenses for improvements to the type of facilities or services for which the fees in that fund were paid. Any monies, including any accrued interest, not assigned to specific projects within such capital improvements program and not expended shall be retained in the same impact fee fund until the next fiscal year. The impact fee capital improvements program shall be adopted by the city council as a supplemental document to the city budget. The impact fee capital improvements program shall anticipate project expenditures and fund revenues for a five year period. The individual fee funds shall maintain a positive fiscal balance. The program may be amended by a majority vote of the city council. F. If an impact fee has been calculated and paid based on a mistake or misrepresentation, it shall be recalculated. Any amounts overpaid by an applicant shall be refunded by the city to the applicant within thirty days after the city's acceptance of the recalculated amount, with interest at the rate of five percent per annum since the date of such overpayment. Any amounts underpaid by the applicant shall be paid to the city within thirty days after the city's acceptance of the recalculated amount, with interest at the rate of five percent per annum since the date of such underpayment. In the event the underpayment is caused by an error attributed solely to the city, the applicant shall pay the recalculated amount without interest. In the case of an underpayment to the city, the city shall not issue any additional permits or approvals for the project for which the development impact fee was previously paid until such underpayment is corrected, and if amounts owed to the city are not paid within such thirty day period, the city may also repeal any permits issued in reliance on the previous payment of such impact fee and refund such fee to the then current owner of the land. G. The impact fees described in this chapter and the administrative procedures and manual of this chapter shall be updated at least once every two fiscal years to ensure that the demand and cost assumptions underlying such fees are still valid, the resulting fees do not exceed the actual cost of constructing improvements that are of the type for which the fee was paid and that are required to serve new development, the monies collected or to be collected in each impact fee fund have been and are expected to be spent for improvements of the type for which such fees were paid, and that such ---PAGE BREAK--- 22 improvements will benefit those developments for which the fees were paid. H. The section titles used in this chapter are for convenience only, and shall not affect the interpretation of any portion of the text of this chapter. I. Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside or annul the reasonableness, legality or validity of any impact fee must be filed within ninety days following the date of imposition of the fee or the final determination of the city council, whichever is the later. Passed by the City Council of the City of Belgrade, Montana, at regular session thereof held on the 17th day of December, 2007. Russell C. Nelson Russell C. Nelson, Mayor (SEAL) ATTEST: Marilyn Foltz Marilyn Foltz, Director of Finance Passed, adopted and approved by the City of Belgrade, Montana, on second reading at a regular session held on the 7th day of January, 2008. Russell C. Nelson Russell C. Nelson, Mayor (SEAL) ATTEST: Marilyn Foltz Marilyn Foltz, Director of Finance ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- RESOLUTION 2009-28 A RESOLUTION TO ADJUST AND ESTABLISH WATER AND SEWER FEES FOR PERIPHERAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF BELGRADE, MONTANA WHEREAS, the City of Belgrade owns and operates a municipal water and sewer system. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Belgrade has the responsibility and authority to fix and establish water and sewer rates pursuant to Section 7-13-4304, M.C.A. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following fees are hereby established for water and sewer peripheral services: 1. The fee for turning on or off water services to residential or non-residential property during the hours of 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays, shall be $46.00. 2. The fee for turning on or off water services to residential or non-residential property during the hours of 4:31 p.m. to 7:29 a.m., Monday through Friday, or anytime on Saturday, Sunday or legal holidays shall be $95.00. 3. The fee for turning on or off water services to a yard hydrant during the hours of 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays shall be $36.00. 4. The fee for turning on or off water services to a yard hydrant during the hours of 4:31 p.m. to 7:29 a.m., Monday through Friday, or anytime on Saturday, Sunday or legal holidays, shall be $95.00. 5. A fee of $17.00 shall be assessed for mailing written notice that a utility account is past due. 6. A fee of $27.00 shall be assessed for posting written notice that a utility account is past due. 7. All fees for water or sewer services previously established shall remain if full force and effect unless specifically amended hereby. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND APPROVED BY THE DEPUTY MAYOR this 2nd day of November, 2009. Mark A. Criner, Deputy Mayor Attest: Marilyn Foltz, Director of Finance ---PAGE BREAK--- ORDINANCE NO. 2013- 4 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELGRADE, MONTANA AMENDING TITLE 1 CHAPTER 8B PART 5 OF THE BELGRADE CITY CODE REGARDING THE IMPACT FEE ADVISORY COMMITTEE PREAMBLE WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is appropriate to amend Title 1 Chapter 8B Part 5 of the Belgrade City Code regarding the impact fee advisory committee to promote the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Belgrade. IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Belgrade, Montana, that Title 1 Chapter 8B Part 5 of the Belgrade City Code is hereby amended as follows: Portions of the ordinance that are deleted are indicated by strikeout and portions that are added are underlined. 1-8B-5: Impact Fee Advisory Committee: A. Created: An Impact Fee Advisory Committee is created for the purpose of advising the City Council regarding the process of calculating, assessing and spending impact fees. B. Membership: The Impact Fee Advisory Committee shall consist of seven members to be appointed by the City Council. The members shall be: the City Manager; the City Finance Director, a certified public accountant who shall hold no other public office or employment, a builder or land developer; and three citizens of Belgrade not employed in the development industry, as selected by the City Council. C. Terms: Upon the creation of the Committee, the members shall be appointed for the following terms: public officers and employees during the terms of their office, two members that hold no public office or employment for a term of two years, three members that hold no public office or employment for a term of three years. The terms shall expire on January 1 of the second and third year, respectively, following appointment. Thereafter, as terms expire, each new appointment shall be for a term of two years. D. Residency: All members must be residents of the City of Belgrade. The member of the impact fee advisory committee who is a certified public accountant does not need to be a resident of the City of Belgrade. The member of the impact fee advisory committee who is a builder must be a resident of the City of Belgrade. E. Compensation: Members shall serve without compensation for their time and service. ---PAGE BREAK--- F. Meetings: Meetings of the board shall be conducted in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations of the City and any adopted bylaws of the committee. G. Training: The City shall may provide, and the members shall attend, training in the necessary subject matter which will in the judgment of the City enable informed participation by members of the Committee. Such training shall may be provided as deemed necessary by the City Manager. on an annual basis and shall be provided prior to the Impact Fee Advisory Committee, or any individual member thereof, making any recommendation to the City Commission. H. Functions: The Impact Fee Advisory Committee shall perform its functions conterminously with the City use of impact fees. Passed by the City Council of the City of Belgrade, Montana, at regular session thereof held on the 20th day of May, 2013. Russell C. Nelson, Mayor ATTEST: Wernikowski, Director of Finance Passed, adopted and approved by the City of Belgrade, Montana, on second reading at a regular session held on the 17th day of June, 2013. Russell C. Nelson, Mayor ATTEST: Wernikowski, Director of Finance ---PAGE BREAK--- ORDINANCE NO. 2013- 5 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELGRADE, MONTANA AMENDING TITLE 1 CHAPTER 8B PART 13 OF THE BELGRADE CITY CODE REGARDING IMPACT FEES PREAMBLE WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is appropriate to amend Title 1 Chapter 8B Part 13 of the Belgrade City Code regarding impact fees to promote the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Belgrade. IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Belgrade, Montana, that Title 1 Chapter 8B Part 13 of the Belgrade City Code is hereby amended as follows: Portions of the ordinance that are deleted are indicated by strikeout and portions that are added are underlined. 1-8B-13: Miscellaneous Provisions. A. Interest Earned: Interest earned on monies in any impact fee fund shall be considered part of such fund, and shall be subject to the same restrictions on use applicable to the impact fees deposited in such fund. B. Use of Funds: No monies from any impact fee fund shall be spent for operations or maintenance of any facility or to cure deficiencies in public facilities existing on the effective date of this chapter. C. Project Improvements: Nothing in this chapter shall restrict the city from requiring an applicant to construct reasonable project improvements required to serve the applicant's project, whether or not such improvements are of a type for which credit is available under Section 3.10.120. D. Records: The city shall maintain accurate records of impact fees paid, including the name of the person paying such fees, the project for which the fees were paid, the date of payment of each fee, the amounts received in payment for each fee, and any other matters that the city deems appropriate or necessary to the accurate accounting of such fees, and such records shall be available for review by the public during city business hours. E. Annual Proposed Capital Improvement Program: At least once during each fiscal year of the city, the city manager shall present to the city council a proposed capital improvements program for the major street system, the city fire protection system, the city water and wastewater systems, and the city park system, and such capital improvements program shall assign monies from each impact fee fund to specific projects and related expenses for improvements to the type of facilities or services for which the ---PAGE BREAK--- fees in that fund were paid. Any monies, including any accrued interest, not assigned to specific projects within such capital improvements program and not expended shall be retained in the same impact fee fund until the next fiscal year. The impact fee capital improvements program shall be adopted by the city council as a supplemental document to the city budget. The impact fee capital improvements program shall anticipate project expenditures and fund revenues for a five year period. The individual fee funds shall maintain a positive fiscal balance. The program may be amended by a majority vote of the city council. F. Mistakes Or Misprepresentations: 1. Overpayments: If an impact fee has been calculated and paid based on a mistake or misrepresentation, it shall be recalculated. Any amounts overpaid by an applicant shall be refunded by the city to the applicant within thirty (30) days after the city's acceptance of the recalculated amount, with interest at the rate of five percent per annum since the date of such overpayment. 2. Underpayments: Any amounts underpaid by the applicant shall be paid to the city within thirty days after the city's acceptance of the recalculated amount, with interest at the rate of five percent per annum since the date of such underpayment. 3. City Error: In the event the underpayment is caused by an error attributed solely to the city, the applicant shall pay the recalculated amount without interest. 4. Issuance Of Additional Permits Or Approvals: In the case of an underpayment to the city, the city shall not issue any additional permits or approvals for the project for which the development impact fee was previously paid until such underpayment is corrected, and if amounts owed to the city are not paid within such thirty day period, the city may also repeal any permits issued in reliance on the previous payment of such impact fee and refund such fee to the then current owner of the land. G. Update: The impact fees described in this chapter and the administrative procedures and manual of this chapter service area report for each public facility for which an impact fee is imposed shall be updated at least once every two five fiscal years to ensure that 1. The demand and cost assumptions underlying such fees are still valid; 2. The resulting fees do not exceed the actual cost of constructing improvements that are of the type for which the fee was paid and that are required to serve new development: 3. The monies collected or to be collected in each impact fee fund have been and are expected to be spent for improvements of the type for which such fees were paid; and 4. Such improvements will benefit those developments for which the fees were paid. ---PAGE BREAK--- H. Judicial Action Or Proceeding: Any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside or annul the reasonableness, legality or validity of any impact fee must be filed within ninety (90) days following the date of imposition of the fee or the final determination of the city council, whichever is the later. Passed by the City Council of the City of Belgrade, Montana, at regular session thereof held on the 20th day of May, 2013. Russell C. Nelson, Mayor ATTEST: Wernikowski, Director of Finance Passed, adopted and approved by the City of Belgrade, Montana, on second reading at a regular session held on the 17th day of June, 2013. Russell C. Nelson, Mayor ATTEST: Wernikowski, Director of Finance ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix F NHP Report ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK---