Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Firm Yield Methodology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Engineer questions firm-yield methodology for Somerset permit renewal; grant staff to follow up
Summary
A participant raised concerns that USGS firm-yield estimator 2.0 treats reservoirs as separate entities and may not match local system operations; grant staff pointed to the RFR requirement to use estimator 2.0 and said they would check availability and follow up.
A participant raised a technical concern during the RFR Q&A about firm-yield studies required for permit renewals in Somerset, saying the town was not included in USGS analyses and asking whether older methodologies would be acceptable.
"So, Beth has told me that Somerset needs to do a firm yield study," the participant said, describing that the original permit was issued in 2005 and that USGS work published in 2011 did not include Somerset. The participant argued the USGS estimator 2.0 treats multiple reservoirs as independent units even when systems operate as combined sources, and questioned whether estimator 1.0 would be acceptable where 2.0 data are not available.
Jen Dershow, the grant administrator, pointed to the RFR and said applicants are required to use the firm yield estimator 2.0 named on page 4 of the RFR. "That is listed in the RFR as what is, the, the firm yield estimator 2.0 that is what we require to be used," she said. Dershow added she would check whether version 2.0 tools are broadly available and follow up with the participant; staff offered to schedule a separate discussion on methodology outside the RFR forum.
No formal change was announced to RFR requirements during the webinar; staff committed to follow up with written guidance in the Q&A posted to COMMBUYS and to route permit-specific questions to the permit writer (Beth McCann) for direct response.
