Sutter Creek – The Amador Water Agency board of directors on Thursday will look at staff studies of running a small diameter pipeline in the Upper Amador Canal. Engineer Erik Christeson in a report prepared for the meeting has requested the board to direct staff to continue evaluating pipeline options in the canal. Studies include funding, environmental review, engineering pre-design, hydrology, community workshops, easements and “development of an agricultural rate schedule as part of the financial update for the Amador Water System.” Last month, staff gave an overview of potential options that would allow continued water service to customers along the Upper Canal, between Lake Tabeaud and New York Ranch Reservoir. Christeson in the report said public health concerns were an issue and that AWA had signed a “compliance agreement” which “requires the agency to explore alternatives to eliminate untreated water service for customers that receive raw water for domestic use through the Amador Water System.” The agreement, signed with California Public Health in 2001 also required providing an “economic assessment of the feasibility of providing treated potable water through a piped distribution system.” The state was worried about customers using untreated water as domestic supply, and about high contamination levels of coliform and fecal coliform. Christeson said the existing canal lost “a significant amount of water to leakage, non-metered usage and evaporation.” A July analysis found 1.43 units of total metered raw water usage. On July 24th, the study found a total water loss of 3.5 cubic feet per second in the Upper Canal. Water entered at a rate of 4.88 cubic feet per second and flowed into New York Ranch Reservoir at a rate of 1.38 cubic feet per second. Christeson in the report offered 5 options for pipelines. Option 1 was a raw pipeline for the duration of the Upper Canal, costing $3.2 million, but California Public Health and the U.S. Department of Agriculture both will not fund a raw water pipeline. Option 2 was a treated pipeline for the entire Upper Canal at a cost of $4.4 million. Option 3 was having both raw and treated, at a cost of $6.8 million. Options 4 was a treated line for the entire upper canal, except for a small raw line to Boggs and Marz properties, at a total cost of $4.4 million. The study said AWA is losing $136,000 annually in its operation of the Upper Canal. Customer rate revenue is $43,000 annually, while operations cost $179,000 a year. The study’s option 5 was no action and continued operation of the Upper Canal. Story by Jim Reece This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.