ELDORADO AREA WATER & SANITATION DISTRICT
 
2 North Chamisa Drive, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87508-9483
 

There are several technical reports relating to the EAWSD system and local geohydrology assessments and evaluations. This page includes links to the four primary reports.
 
Utility Master Plan Preliminary Engineering Report, Eldorado Area Water and Sanitation District; Souder, Miller & Associates; Santa Fe, NM; March 2013. 
The 2013 Utility Master Plan analyzes and prioritizes proposed water system improvements for EAWSD, considering a 20-year planning horizon from the end of 2012 through 2032.  Included in the evaluation of alternatives are considerations for the condition and operation/management of existing water facilities, and current and projected population.  Alternatives for water system improvements focus on meeting projected demands, improving utility operation and management and recommendations for capital improvements. Capital improvements recommended by the study include:

• Replacement of Well No. 2, $319,000

• Rehabilitation of Well No. 13, $88,000

• Santa Fe County Interconnection, $905,000

• Replacement of Well No. 13, $342,000

• Pressure Zone Optimization, $375,000

• Active Tank Mixing, $144,000

• Storage Tank Corrosion Protection, $61,000

• Water Transmission Infrastructure, $1,741,000

• Distribution Pipeline Replacement, $9,082,000

 

Specific information and data can be found in the report.
 
Preliminary Engineering Report, Eldorado Area Water and Sanitation District System; D. B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.; Albuquerque, NM; November, 2007.
The DBSA study included a hydraulic evaluation of the existing system with a water system distribution model and the Preliminary Engineering Report (PER). Results from the model and PER indicated that the current water distribution system is adequate for customer needs, and some minor improvements would ensure that the distribution system would continue to provide water for consumption and fire protection, including areas for planned expansion. The recommended improvements identified from the model and study included:

Specific data and information can be found in the report.
 
M. Chudnoff and M. Hodgins; Long-Term Water Availability and Well Field Management Study Report; Glorieta Geoscience, Inc. Santa Fe, NM; July, 2007; Executive Summary.
The 2007 GGI report utilized previous data and technical reports to assess the local hydrology and water availability and to develop a computerized mathematical groundwater flow model of the well fields, primarily towards predicting production of future water. The report contains extensive data and modeling of existing EAWSD wells and local aquifers. Results of the modeling indicated that:

Other technical information and data can be found in the executive summary of the report (see link at right).
 
J. W. Shomaker, S. T. Finch, and M. A. Jones; Hydrogeology, Ground-Water Flow Model, and Model-Based Drawdown and Streamflow Depletion, Eldorado Area, Santa Fe County, New Mexico; John Shomaker & Associates, Albuquerque, NM; April, 2001; Executive Summary.
The 2001 Shomaker report was a comprehensive assessment of the local aquifers, hydrology, and groundwater flow, with use of data from many previous reports and other publications. A computerized mathematical model of the hydrologic system, based on the USGS MODFLOW model with parameters specific to the Eldorado area, was developed to predict groundwater flow and well drawdowns. Results of the modeling indicated that:

Other specific information, results, and technical details can be found in the executive summary of the report (see link at right).

• Adding 610 ft of distribution pipeline at a cost of $29,200,

• Adding a booster pump station at a cost of $92,500, and

• Replacing 8,000 ft of existing pipeline with 8 inch line at a cost of $442,200 (2007 dollars).

• Additional pumping capacity via new wells must be added to meet current demand levels.

• There is sufficient recoverable groundwater underlying the Eldorado area to meet current demand of 600 afy for a period of, at least, 100 years, with the addition of 6 new wells for required pumping capacity, including approximately 200 gpm of reserve capacity.

• Local water level and well yield declines are due primarily to local drawdown effects caused by pumping from the wells themselves, rather than due to widespread water level declines in the aquifer.

• Future production of water is limited by the well capacities and the pumping effects on the local aquifer from the existing wells, rather than the overall aquifer hydrology.

• New wells are needed to meet both declining yields from older wells and any increased utility demand.

​