Laserfiche WebLink
~* <br />~~ <br />1` <br /> <br /> <br />f <br />~' ~r <br />~~ <br />,ry C` <br />Ll <br />~ ~7 <br />cz <br />Constant Block <br />NON-METRO WATER RATE ST~4Tf~STI~~ <br />WATER SYSTEM RATE STRUCTURES <br />USED BY NON-METRO SURVEY PARTICIPANTS <br />Inclining Block <br />~ 29% <br />Declining Block 73% <br />Not Reported ~ 1% <br />0% 70% 20% -_-~---~-_-~ <br />56Y° <br />-~ I <br />90% 700% <br />Efforts to promote conservation have been taken by many systems in the region in recent years, one <br />of which is the use of an inclining block rate structure. [n 2010, approximately 30 percent ofnon- <br />metro survey respondents reported the use of an inclining block tiered structure. The variability in the <br />differential between the first and second tier and the first and third tierrs shown below. The charts show <br />that the difference between the first and second tier for the utilities responding to the survey ranges from <br />three percent to 233 percent. Similarly, the differential between the second and third tiers ranged from <br />eight percent to 300 percent. <br />PRICE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND VOLUMETRIC WATER RATE <br />TIERS FOR NON-METRO RATE SURVEY PARTICIPANTS <br />20% <br />^ 1.0-1.05 <br />®1.06-1.1 <br />11.11-1.2 <br />1.21-1.3 <br />^>1.3 <br />PRICE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN FIRST AND THIRD VOLUMETRIC WATER RATE TIERS <br />FOR NON-METRO RATE SURVEY PARTICIPANTS <br />6% <br />27% <br />~lapyright©Y010 AF2S-All Rlghls Reserved <br />^ 1.0-1.2 <br />® 1.21-1.3 <br />1.31-1.5 <br />~>1.5 <br />1010 North Central Otili~y Rate Survey Poge 45 <br />~. <br />~- <br />n <br />w <br />z <br />t9 <br /> <br />_--_-----__----- 40% <br />