_________________________________________________________

SUMMARY

The Water Use & Conservation Bureau of the State Engineer Office has reviewed the 40-Year Water Plan for the Village of Ruidoso ("the Village"), dated February 2004, and has found that it is not acceptable.

It is necessary that additional efforts be undertaken to:

1) characterize available water supply and water sustainability over the 40-year period.

2) re-calculate the projected water demand/diversion over the 40-year period;

3) develop a water audit program, a leak detection/repair program, and a system maintenance program aimed to reduce and deep the system water loss within a reasonable amount,

4) prepare a water conservation plan, which includes new conservation measures that the Village will develop, schedule for their implementation, and identification of the methods that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of each measure,

5) prepare a drought management plan, which will include trigger criteria, a phased management strategy and level of response, actions that will be taken in each phase, and establishment of a drought task force to coordinate communication, mitigation and emergency actions.

SPECIFIC COMMENTS

The 40-year water plan for the Village of Ruidoso provides a description of the water rights, of the water distribution system, and the history of water demand and production for the past nine (9) years. It should also contain a description of the drinking water treatment plants and of the wastewater treatment plant.

Section 4.1 contains a list of the sources of water supply in the Eagle Creek and in the Rio Ruidoso basins. It also includes statements such as "11 active wells capable of together producing peak production capacity of approximately six mission gallons per day", and "sustainable well capacity from the existing wells under normal or non-drought conditions". These are troubling statements, in light of the fact that the Plan does not contain any specific technical data about surface and

groundwater sources to substantiate the estimates, and nowhere in the Plan there is a discussion of their sustainability over the planning period. Further, speaking of sustainable capacity of the wells under "normal or non-drought conditions" is not technically sound and not helpful for the understanding of the sustainability of the water sources.

The Plan should contain, at a minimum, geological cross sections, thickness of th water bearing formations, history of annual water levels and yields of the Village wells, aquifer characteristics, response to climatic conditions, monthly stream flows and maximum-average-median-minimum flows, relationship between precipitation and runoff, monthly reservoirs levels, watershed management practices.

The Plan states that the Village total water use has declined approximately 9% from 2000 to 2003. It is not clear (as noted on page 1-8) if the decline is due to adopted water conservation measures, to the measures aimed to restrict outdoor watering during drought years, or to drought conditions and forest fires which kept away part-time residents and visitors.

The Plan states (pages 1-29) that Ruidoso has enacted a number of measures to effectively reduce water use over the past eight years, but then it describes only waterline replacement program, citizen information through announcements, and encouragements to conserve water by sighs and messages in hotels.

The Plan describes an ordinance that restricts outdoor use of water under three (3) sets of conditions, which are: Phase 1-Normal Conditions )odd-day outdoor watering, but not between 10 AM and 3 PM), Phase 2 - Drought conditions (outdoor watering only one day per week, but not between the aforementioned hours), and Phase 3 - Extreme Drought Conditions (all outdoor watering is prohibited). Although this ordinance is listed as one of the water conservation measures, in reality it only regulates landscape irrigation during "normal" conditions, and prohibits it during periods of extreme drought. Also, it does not describe which criteria the managers use to determine the three different "conditions", and what triggers the two drought phases.

The Plan states that the Village's goal is to reduce by 15% the per capita water use during the next 40 years. Water conservation measures currently being developed include modifications to the current water rate structure (which is not described), and a rebate incentive program ("water bucks") that would provide rebates or credits for installation/retrofit of water-saving appliances, fixtures, landscaping, etc.

This is not a water conservation plan, it is just a list of conservation measures outlined in general terms, without any explanations as to why they have been chosen and how effective they will be. For instance, while one of the listed planned measures is "retrofit of landscaping". the Plan does not contain a breakdown of indoor and outdoor residential and commercial water use, and therefore it is not possible to estimate how much water will be save by reducing turf areas if the current outdoor water use is not known.

It is essential that the Village identify the conservation measures best suited for the local setting, through the analysis of the current water uses. Then the Village can proceed to prepare a practical water conservation plan, which includes selected actions, schedules of implementation, and identification of methods that will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of each action.

It is also essential that the Village prepare a drought management plan, which will be implemented when droughts occur. the plan must include:

* Trigger criteria

* A phased management strategy and level of response

* Actions that will be taken in each phase

* Establishment of a drought task force to coordinate communications, mitigation and emergency actions.

The Plan contains the history of "billed/metered water use" (Table 3.2) for the time-period 1997 thru 2003, and of "produced treated water" (Table 3.3) for the time-period 1995 through 2003. Based on these two tables, the Plan concludes that the water losses decreased from 41.8% in 1998 to30.3% in 2003.

The Plan does not include the annual diversion records for the same period of record, and the breakdown into diverted water, produced water, and billed water. Also it does not include a description of the drinking water treatment plants, and therefore it is not know now much water is "lost" during the treatment process. In short, it does not provide the whole picture of how much water enters the system, and where and why and how much water is lost.

The Plan state (page 1-30) that the reduction from 41.8% to 30.3% is due to the waterline replacement program started in 1996, and that "over the long term water leakage reduction due to this program will be significant". However, this statement is contradicted by other statements, tables, and projections contained in the Plan.

More specifically, the Plan re-names the very same losses "Production Losses" in Table 3.5 (page 1-15). This table shows a reduction from 41.8% in 1998 to 30.3% in 2003, but it indicates that the "Production Losses" will increase to 37.5% in 2004, and will stabilize to this level all the way to 2044. Furthermore, Table 3.7 (page 1-17) ads to the 37.5% losses another 9.5% of "Diversion Losses". Incidentally, this boils down to the fact that currently 30.3% of the Village's water is not billed, and that the Village anticipates that around 47% of the water diverted in 2044 will not be billed. This is not acceptable.

The consultants do not explain, in the Plan, what they mean with the terms "production, diversion, and total, water losses.

It is essential that the Village undertake a serious water audit program, to identify and quantify the "real water losses" and the "apparent water losses". Real losses are the physical losses of water from the distribution system, and include water "lost" in the drinking treatment process, tank overflow, and leakage of pipes. Apparent losses (or "paper losses") include customer meter

inaccuracies, billing errors, all unauthorized consumption (such as meter tampering, unauthorized tapping into service mains, illegally opening fire hydrants, etc.), data analysis errors, and poor accounting.

Having a reliable water audit is the foundation of proper resource management for drinking water utilities, and will enable the Village to develop a sound water accounting program, and a water loss control program, which will reduce and keep the losses to a reasonable (unavoidable) amount.

The Plan contains population projections for the next 40 years, water demand and water production projections for the years 2004-2040 without additional conservation measures, and with15% additional conservation measures.

Table 3.7 (page 1-17) illustrates projected metered use, "diversion water losses" (9.5%). and "total water production" without additional conservation measures in five (5) years intervals for the next 40 years. However, as discussed in the previous section, the "total water production" includes also another 37.5% losses. In this way, the total metered (billed) water use is projected to be 4,261.6 acre-feet in 2044, while the total diversion is projected to be 7,466 acre-feet.

Table 5.1 (page 1-33) illustrates the projected water production foreseen for the next 40 years, with 15% "further" reduction due to additional conservation measures. The Plan estimates that approximately 6, 000 acre-feet of water will have to be diverted in the year 2044. However, it has been calculated by taking 7,466 acre-feet (which includes a total of 47% water losses) as a starting figure.