Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Levan Town Council hears engineers’ plan to bank spring water underground to cover peak-day shortfall
Summary
At a May 14 work session, Jones & DeMille engineers outlined an Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) pilot that could help Levan cover a roughly 50 gallons-per-minute peak-day deficit by banking spring water underground; engineers estimated infrastructure costs of $100,000–$200,000 and pilot storage of 13–120 acre-feet depending on hydrology.
Levan Town Council on May 14 heard a presentation from Jones & DeMille engineers about an Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) program intended to increase the town’s ability to meet peak-day water demand.
Parker Vercimak and Kyler Nielsen of Jones & DeMille told the council the town’s ASR application to the Division of Drinking Water is nearly complete; the draft incorporated the Division’s feedback about quarterly and monthly water‑quality monitoring and is ready for final submittal. The engineers said they intend to file a change application with the Division of Water Rights after drinking-water authorization is obtained, because water-rights approval is required to carry banked water year to year.
The engineers described a one-year pilot program that would install infrastructure to inject spring water into the municipal well and operate the system for 12 months to monitor any water-quality effects before seeking a full operating permit. They said injected water, once stored, can be withdrawn at any flow rate, unlike spring diversions that are limited by the diversion cap.
Town staff reported the municipal well water table has fallen about 40 feet in recent months, which staff attributed in part to an unusually early start to agricultural pumping in the valley. The town currently uses roughly half of its annual water-rights allocation, with demand concentrated in summer; during winter pump runs the system moves about 100 gallons per minute while spring overflows go largely unused.
Engineers flagged a roughly 50 gallons‑per‑minute peak‑day shortfall: Levan’s diversion cap is 350 GPM, while the Division of Drinking Water’s peak‑day standard is about 400 GPM. They said ASR could bank water during low‑demand months (January–April) and that injected water could be withdrawn at the higher flow rates needed on peak days to close the gap.
Jones & DeMille offered storage and cost estimates: in a dry year the town could bank about 13 acre‑feet by diverting 20 GPM in the first five months; in a wet year storage could reach 80–120 acre‑feet. The engineers estimated infrastructure costs at roughly $100,000–$200,000 and characterized ASR as a strong value compared with purchasing equivalent water rights outright.
The engineers recommended periodic updates to Levan’s master plan (they said a plan can have a functional shelf life of 10–15 years depending on growth) and endorsed the town’s practice of requiring annexations to bring water rights. They also noted that even without multi‑year water‑rights approval, recharging the aquifer during low‑demand months still provides operational benefits.
The council did not take formal action on ASR at the work session; next steps identified by staff and the engineers include finalizing the Division of Drinking Water submittal and preparing the change application to the Division of Water Rights.
