Print Page   |   Contact Us   |   Sign In   |   Join the NFH
Sign In

Latest News

NFH Bend Fall Forum (Sunriver)

Water System permit
Page 1 of 1
Thread Actions

5/31/2013 at 4:05:00 PM GMT
Posts: 10
Water System permit

The Spring Creek Tract in the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, CA has been in negoatiations with the FS for over 5 years to obtain a renewal of our 20-yr permit.  After lots of neogitations and discussions, we finally have received the decision memo approving our new permit.  This is an extensive document with many more clauses and conditions in it than the previous document.  It also includes approval for our association to finish the rehabilitation and replacmeent of our over 50-yr old water pipelines withina  5-yr period.


I'd appreicate it if I could send a copy of the new permit over to someone to look at for comment. It has been mailed to our tract president for signature and our water committee is discussing it in committee presently. Our president is awaiting direction from us on proceeding forth with signature and ultimately FS siganture approving our water system for the next 20 years.

Do you have time to review this for us in a relatively short turn-around period of time?

Attached is the document.




Jay Tripathi

NFH Board Member

SCTA Past President, Water Committee Chair

 Attached Files: 

6/2/2013 at 9:52:20 PM GMT
Posts: 2
Water System Permit


I have a few comments on the maintenance and operation of the water system under this permit.  You might contact Richard Burrows to see if he would look at the water rights section.

George Davis


Comments on Water System Permit: Spring Creek Track Lake Tahoe


"Once the new tank is constructed, water usage and storage will be monitored and reduced to minimal use needs. During high recreation residence use and potential fire suppression needs,

water storage may be increased to the 80,000 gallon capacity of the tank.”  Not allowing the tank to be maintained at 80,000 gallons except when needed is not reasonable as no one knows when a fire will occur and the capacity of the well is inadequate to provide fireflow on an instantaneous basis.  The amount of water in storage has no correlation to the amount of water being used, no cabin owner checks the amount of water in the tank and decides to waste water on that basis.  I would think the fire department would want to comment on this requirement.


"All repairs to water leaks will begin only after approval is received from the Forest Service.”  Not being able to repair leaks without FS approval guarantees water will be wasted.  Since there is no approval timeframe for the FS to comply a major leak could significantly impact the yearly water allotment as well as create environmental damage.  This wording should be changed to allow emergency repairs with notification after the fact.


"Vehicles cannot be driven on dirt roads when the ground is so wet that tracks are made or mud adheres to vehicle tires.”  This restriction could pose a significant problem if repairs or other work must be performed any other time of the year except summer.  Even a big rain storm could cause a violation during the summer.  The wording could be revised so that the roads could be used for repair and maintenance activities and restrict recreational use during wet periods.


"The holder shall prepare and annually revise an operating plan every five years.”  Not sure how annually and every five years works.


"Prior to revocation or suspension, other than immediate suspension under clause VI.B,”  I believe the reference should be VII.B.

6/3/2013 at 11:41:46 PM GMT
Posts: 10

Hi George,

Thanks for getting back to me.  The water rights will be repurposed by the FS to use for environmental needs (whatever that means). We're have used wells for decades for our water system and there isn't a water right specifically associated with wells.  Instead, our permit covers the land that the wells sit upon. The FS Hydrologists came up with the amount of water we could pump out of the aquifer and originally the permit stated 15 gpm maximum but we protested because our pump pumps at 45 gpm and it made no sense to throttle it down to meet this condition.

I've gone over the issue about storing water in the tank with the FS so many times my head hurts. It makes no sense to have a water tank capable of storing 80,000 gal and not skeeping it full especially in the fire season. We've tried to make them see that we're only filling the tank completely once and, barring fire, it would only be used for domestic use. We've offered to lower the level int he tank during the winter months because the tank is in a known avalanche zone. But you're correct, there's no way that we could supply the 1000 gal/min required at the hydrants using our well pump.  The tank must be full to give us any chance of putting a cabin fire out in a timely manner. I know that Lake Valley Fire District will also agree.

Our operating plan will address the leak repair process because currenlty it takes way too long for the FS to respond.  They've agreed in concept to a normal set of requirements and conditions so I'm hoping this doesn't become a huge battle.

I'll look into the correct area for the clause to be put into.  I started this process of renewing the water permit and getting approval for a new tank system over 5 years ago so I must admit to being pretty worn downafter all that time.

Thanks again, I'll keep you posted on progress,  Jay


6/3/2013 at 11:43:23 PM GMT
Posts: 10


Also I've discussed the raod issue with the FS and they agree that the raod must be accessible if there's need.  We'll just have to do BMP's to control erosion, etc. That will also be part of our oeprating plan.


3/31/2016 at 11:14:19 PM GMT
Posts: 1
how many cabin lease holders in the Spring Creek Tract get access to the 80,000 gallon storage tank?

4/1/2016 at 3:30:55 PM GMT
Posts: 10
There are 137 cabins in the tract and all of those cabins have access to the water system. No other users, other than the FS or Lake Valley Fire, have access to the water.