Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
RES 264 Draft 01 2012-2014
COUNTY OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAII RESOLUTION NO. 26ii 14 A RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SEWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR THE LONO KONA SUBDIVISION. WHEREAS, on September 8, 2011, pursuant to Section 12-10(a), Hawai'i County Code, the Hawai'i County Council ("Council") adopted Resolution No. 120-11, Draft 2, directing the Director of the Department of Environmental Management ("DEM") to prepare and submit a report on the proposed establishment of a Sewer System Improvement District ("Improvement District") including the costs of design and installation of a public sewer system for the Improvement District for the Lono Kona Subdivision ("Subdivision"); and WHEREAS, on December 17, 2013, the Council received an amended report on the proposed establishment of the Improvement District from the Director of DEM (Communication No. 492.1) dated December 11, 2013, replacing a report previously submitted on October 29, 2013, a copy of which amended report (referred to herein as the "Director's Report") is attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution, including the supporting surveys, plans, estimates, maps, and other data contained therein, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the Director's Report states, among other things, that the proposed Improvement District will provide significant benefits to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the Subdivision and that the estimated construction, acquisition, and installation costs of the Improvement District (collectively, the "Project Costs") are $6,461,800; and WHEREAS, in connection with the proposed Improvement District, DEM initiated an application to the United States Department of Agriculture (the "USDA") for grant and loan funding by the USDA Rural Utilities Service ("RUS"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to a Letter of Conditions dated August 13, 2013 (the "USDA Letter of Conditions"), from the Hawaii State Office of USDA Rural Development, the USDA has indicated that DEM's application for up to $4,024,800.00 of RUS grant funds and $2,437,000.00 of RUS loan funds for the Improvement District is being considered b y the USDA, subject to the conditions specified therein; and WHEREAS, the total amount of RUS grant and loan funds is sufficient to pay the estimated cost of the proposed Improvement District (as further discussed herein) and, in view of the potential benefits of such funding, DEM is proceeding with the actions necessary to satisfy the conditions specified in the USDA Letter of Conditions in order to obtain a firm commitment of the RUS grant and loan funds for the Improvement District; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII that upon consideration of the community interest expressed for the proposed Improvement District, the findings, conclusions and recommendations set forth in the Director's Report, and the potential benefits of the available RUS grant and loan funds, the Council has determined to proceed with further actions regarding the potential establishment and funding of the Improvement District. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 12-10(c) of the Hawai'i County Code, it proposes the making of the improvement described herein based on the following: 1. Certain Findings and Determinations. The Council hereby ratifies and confirms Resolution No. 120-11, Draft 2, approves and adopts the findings, conclusions and recommendations specified in the Director's Report (Communication No. 492.1) dated December 11, 2013, and adopts and incorporates by reference, the surveys, plans, maps, and other data reported in the Director's Report. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Council concurs with the findings and conclusions specified in the Director's Report to the effect that the establi shment of the Improvement District will provide significant benefits to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the Subdivision, including: 2 a. The installation of underground sewerlines, constructed and installed in accordance with DEM standards, will eliminate the need for privat e cesspools and septic systems, alleviate potential leachate problems to the groundwater and nearshore water quality, and provide residents with a reliable wastewater disposal system; and b. The installation of the sewer system will afford compliance with U.S. EPA notices of violations relating to large -capacity cesspools. In consideration of the foregoing, the Council further finds, in accordance with Section 12- 10(i), Hawai'i County Code, that the creation of the Improvement District encompassing the Subdivision as described in the Director's Report, and the construction, acquisition, and installation of a sewer s ystem for the Improvement District, all as contemplated in this Resolution, is in the public interest. 2. Proposal to Establish Improvement District. The Council proposes the creation of the Improvement District, which shall encompass the Subdivision, and the construction, acquisition, and installation of a sewer system for the Improvement District, upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Director's Report, incl uding the following terms and conditions: a. Special Improvements to be Opened, Constructed, or Improved. The special improvements shall be for the design, construction, acquisition, and installation of a public sewer system for the Improvement District consistent with applicable DEM standards, which shall be owned, operated, and maintained by the County. The special improvements shall include the installation of laterals for each currently existing assessment unit within the Improvement District. b. No Acquisition of Land Required; Required Easements. No acquisition of land is required for the construction and installation of the sewer system for the Improvement District. However, the construction and installation of the sewer system for the Improvement District will require the acquisition of 10' -wide easements over seven parcels as identified in the Director's Report. 3 C. Material to be Used. The materials to be used in the construction and installation of the special improvements are set forth in the Director's Report, and include, without limitation, the following: i. 5,640 Lin. Ft., 8 -inch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and fittings; ii. 360 Lin. Ft., 10 -inch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and fittings; ill. 29 Each, sewer manholes 5.0' to 9.5' deep; iv. 4 Each, lined shallow drop sewer manholes 10.0' to 14.99' deep; V. 1 Each, lined drop sewer manholes 15.00' to 20.00' deep; and vi. 110 Each, sewer lateral connection. d. Proposed Assessment Unit; Method of Assessment; Minimum Number of Installments, Preliminary Assessment Roll. i. Assessment Unit. "Assessment unit" for purposes of the Improvement District shall mean a duly subdivided parcel of land or condominium unit bearing a unique tax map key number. ii. Method of Assessment. (1) As used in this Resolution, "Net Project Costs" means the Project Costs, less any amounts which reduce the actual costs of the special improvements to the County. By way of example, assuming the Project Costs to be $6,461,800 as set forth in the Director's Report, and further assuming an RUS grant of $4,024,800 t o be applied against the Project Costs, the Net Project Costs would be $2,437,000. The Net Project Costs are equivalent to the RUS loan amount. (2) Each assessment unit existing as of the date that assessments begin to accrue on assessment units within the Improvement District (the "Commencement Date") shall be subject to an assessment calculated by (A) dividing the Net Project Costs by the total number of single-family equivalent (SFE) represented by all assessment units in the Improvement District, and (B) with respect to each assessment unit, multiplying the amount determined pursuant to (A) above by the number 11 of SFEs represented by such assessment unit. For purposes of the foregoing, SFEs shall be determined in the manner provided in the Director's Report based on each assessment unit's existing land use as of the Commencement Date; provided that if an assessment unit is vacant, the SFE for that assessment unit shall be based on existing zoning. iii. Preliminary Assessment Roll. Attached as Exhibit F to the Director's Report and incorporated by this reference is the preliminary assessment roll for the Improvement District (the "Preliminary Assessment Roll") based on information obtained from the Real Property Tax Division of the Department of Finance. The Preliminary Assessment Roll identifies the existing assessment units by tax map key number and property owner, and specifies the number of SFEs and estimated assessment amount for each assessment unit. iv. Minimum Number of Assessments. The minimum number of assessments shall be fi ve (5) annual, or sixty (60) monthly installments of principal. e. Maximum Term. The maximum term of the bonds to be issued to represent unpaid installments (the "Bonds") shall be as the Director of Finance shall determine in the Director of Finance's reasonable judgment; how ever, such term shall not exceed thirty-five years (35) years following the date of issuance thereof. f. Maximum Rate of Interest. The rate of interest to be borne by the Bonds shall be as the Director of Finance shall determine in the Director of Finance's reasonable discretion; provided, however, that such interest shall not exceed two and one eighth percent (2.125%). g. Maximum Premium. The premium to be paid on the advance payment of installments or the call and redemption of any Bond prior to its maturity shall be as the Director of Finance shall determine in the Director of Finance's reasonable judgment; provided, however, that such premium shall not exceed three percent (3%). 5 h. General Boundaries of Improvement District. The Improvement District shall be comprised of assessment units located within the Subdivision identified in the Director's Report. i. Maximum Estimated Units of Assessment. The current estimated maximum number of assessment units within the Improvement District is one hundred forty five (145). The anticipated assessment is $9,868 per SFE; the number of SFE's per assessment unit varies based on existing use or zoning, as specified in the Preliminary Assessment Roll. 3. Consultation with Department of Public Works. The Director of DEM submitted relevant documents and materials to the Director of the Department of Public Works ("DPW") for review. By letter dated October 24, 2013, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference, the Director of DPW advised the Director of DEM that upon DPW's review of the relevant materials and documents submitted to it by the Director of DEM, involvement of DPW is not required because the proposed project is strictly a sewer system and the County roads affected by the Project would be restored to their existing pavement width in accordance with DPW standards. Accordingly, the Council hereby finds that the requirements of Sections 12-10(b) and (d), Hawai'i County Code, to the extent applicable, have been satisfied without further involvement of DPW. 4. Assessed Tax Valuation. The Real Property Tax Division of the Department of Finance has confirmed that the current assessed tax valuation of the assessment units is $17,670,200 in total 2013-14 land value and $25,606,400 in 2013-14 building value, which is at least twice the estimated Net Project Costs of the sewer system for the proposed Improvement District. Accordingly, the Council finds the proposed Improvement District meets the qualifying criteria specified in Section 12-10(h), Hawai'i County Code. 5. Future Increase in Assessment Units. In accordance with the provisions of Section 12-30(c), Hawai'i County Code, in the event of an increase in the number of assessment units in the Improvement District resulting from subdivision, annexation, conversion to condominium property regime or otherwise, the Department of Finance shall m reallocate the outstanding assessments within the Improvement District among the assessment units subject to such outstanding assessments, including the resulting new assessment units. 6. Provisions Regarding Combination Hearings. a. The Council determines that the public hearings relating to the special improvements and the establishment of the Improvement District provided for under Sections 12-10 and 12-27 of the Hawaii County Code shall be combined, as permitted under Section 12-28 of the Hawaii County Code. b. The Council finds that although Section 12-28 of the Hawaii County Code contemplates that the Council, in its resolution proposing to make the improvements shall direct the Director of DEM to prepare documents and data as provided in Sections 12- 18, 12-19, and 12-27 of the Hawaii County Code, the Director's Report already contains such documents and data. In addition, although Section 12-28 also contemplates that the Council, in such resolution, shall request and direct the preparation of plans and specifications by any cooperating department, if applicable, the Council finds that such requirement is not applicable to the Improvement District based on the information provided in the letter from the Director of DPW referred to in Section 3 of this Resolution. C. As indicated in the Director's Report, the Director of DEM has determined that the map, details and plans and specifications contained in the Director's Report and the Exhibits thereto, including the Preliminary Engineering Report for Wastewater Facilities dated June 13, 2012 and updated August 1, 2012 and September 14, 2012, as prepared by Belt Collins Hawaii LLC, with PBR Hawaii & Associates, Inc. and Goodwin Consulting Group, attached as Exhibit D to the Director's Report, are in such form and contain such information as is reasonably necessary to inform the owners of assessment units and other interested parties at least generally of the nature and scope of the proposed sewer system improvements to be constructed and installed in the Improvement District. Accordingly, the Council finds that the requirements set forth in Section 12-28(a)(1) of the Hawaii County Code have been satisfied. 7 d. In light of the findings set forth in Paragraphs b and c above, the Council determines that, as provided by Section 12-28 of the Hawaii County Code: The direction by the Council to the Director for the preparation of the documents and data as provided in Sections 12-18, 12-19, and 12-27 of the Hawaii County Code shall be deemed to have been made; and ii. The delivery of the Director's Report shall be deemed to have complied with such directions and fulfilled such requests. e. A public hearing on the proposed improvements shall be held not more than sixty (60) days after the adoption of this resolution and not less than fifteen (15) days after the first publication thereof in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the County of Hawaii. Copies of the notice shall also be posted at a public place in the district in which the proposed Improvement District is located at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. The County Clerk shall assure that affidavits of publication and posting of the notice shall be filed with the Council on or before the date of the hearing. £ At or prior to the public hearing, the owners of any assessment units may file with the council written protests, objections or suggestions regarding the proposed improvements as provided in Section 12-12 of the Hawaii County Code. If the owners of assessment units having fifty percent (50%) or more of the total assessments based on SFEs file written protests, duly acknowledged by such owners, against making all or part of the proposed improvements or against the methods by which such assessments are to be made, or the inclusion of certain costs therein, then the improvements or methods of assessment shall not be made contrary to said written protests. If the protest is against the making of any improvement, the same shall not be made, and the proceedings shall not be renewed within six months from the date of closing the public hearing, unless all owners withdraw their protests. 7. Reimbursement of Expenditures. The Council expects that that the County may pay certain capital expenditures for the proposed sewer improvements prior to the issuance of the Bonds, and reasonably expects to reimburse such expenditures from the proceeds of the Bonds. The Council hereby declares that it is the official intent of the County to use proceeds of the Bonds to reimburse itself for future expenditures in connection with the proposed improvements. This resolution is adopted in part for the purpose of establishing compliance with the requirements of Section 1.150-2 of the Treasury Regulations. This resolution shall be reasonably available for inspection at the office of the County Clerk commencing within fifteen (15) days after its adoption by the Council. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Clerk of the County of Hawai'i shall transmit copies of this resolution to the Honorable Mayor William Kenoi; Finance Director Nancy Crawford; Corporation Counsel Lincoln Ashida; Real Property Tax Division Tax Administrator Stanley Sitko; Department of Environmental Management Director Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd; Environmental Management Commission Chair Anne Lee; Hawaii State Director Chris Kanazawa, USDA Rural Development; Bond Counsel Brian T. Hirai, McCorriston Miller Mukai MacKinnon LLP; and County Clerk Stewart Maeda. Dated at Kona , Hawai`i, this 22nd day of January , 2014 . COUNTY COUNCIL County of Hawaii Hilo, Hawaii I hereby certify that the foregoing RESOLUTION was by the vole indicated to the right hereof adopted by the COUNCIL of the County of Hawaii on January 22, 2014 ATTEST ,kj COUNTY CLERK INTRODUCED BY: 1 COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII ROLL, CALL VOTE Reference: C-591/Waived FC CHAIRPERSON & PRESIDING OFFICER RESOLUTION NO. 264 14 9 AYES NOES ABS EX EOFF X FORD X (LAGAN X KANUHA X KERN X ONISHI X POINDEXTER X wILLE X YOSIIIMOTO X 8 0 1 0___ Reference: C-591/Waived FC CHAIRPERSON & PRESIDING OFFICER RESOLUTION NO. 264 14 9 William P. Kenoi Mayor Walter K.M. Lau Managing Director EXHIBIT A BJ Leithead Todd Director John A. Medeiros DeputyDirector Count of 'AA�Jni' i DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 345 Kekiianao'a Street, Suite B • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Street, Suite B • Hilo, Hawai' i 96720 (808) 961-8083 • Fax (808) 961-8086 hfte://www.hawaiicounty.roy/environmental-monseement/ December 12, 2013 Council Chair J Yoshimoto N 6 f---3 D n And Hawai' i County Council Members 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI, 96720 Re: Resolution 120-11 Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District C -q North Kona, Hawai' i Communication 492 N �� Dear Chair Yoshimoto and Council Members, Please find enclosed, an amended DIRECTOR'S REPORT replacing the original report submitted to you on October 29, 2013. This report includes an updated project schedule as follows: § Submit Feasibility Report to Council— 12/13/13 § Council Resolution Proposing the Making of ID -1/22/14 § Public hearing— Mar 2014 (assuming 6 wks from Council 1/22 mtg) § HRS 343 Final EA-- Apr 2014 § Council Resolution to Define ID — Apr 2014 § Procure and complete plans & specs— Oct 2014 § Bid price determined— Nov 2014 § Ordinance to fix assessments— Jan 2015 § Bond closing— Apr 2015 § Notice to proceed— Jun 2015 § Substantial completion and hookups-- Jun 2016Comm ���.��. u j Ref. To. f /' x r1� C Re£ Date S 1 County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. Resolution 120-11 has been agendized for the December 27, 2013 Environmental Management Commission meeting. Should you have any questions or require additional infbrmation, please contract Ms. Dora Beck, P.E., Wastewater Division Chief at 961-8513 or dbeckQoo.hawafi.hius. Sincerely, BJ Leithead Todd DIRECTOR ENCLOSURE: Director's Report — Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District amended December 91, 2013 w. Billy Kenoi, Mayor Wally Lau, Managing Director Randy Kurohara, Deputy Managing Director Dora Beck, P.E., WWD Chief County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. County of Hawai'i Department of Environmental Management DIRECTOR'S REPORT Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District North Kona, Hawai'i Deceniber 11, '013 C oliteill 5 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................. 2 A. Location ........................................................................... ....................................................................2 B. Purpose and Need................................................................................................................................3 C. Project Financing ................................................ ................................................................................. 3 D. Process ......................................... ........................................................................................................4 2. Character and Extent of Proposed Improvements................................................................................ 5 3. Proposed Method of Assessment.......................................................................................................... 6 4. Land and Easements to be Acquired..................................................................................................... 8 5. Recommended Materials........................................................................................................................8 6. Improvement District Boundaries......................................................................................................... 8 7. Estimated Cost of the Improvement...................................................................................................... 8 8. Necessary Plans, Data. Detail, and Specifications.................................................................................9 9. Conclusion .............................. ................................................................................................................9 EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A. Location Map EXHIBIT B. Improvement District Boundary Map EXHIBIT C. Letter of Conditions EXHIBIT D. Preliminary Engineering Report for Lono Kona Sewer System Improvements EXHIBIT E. Engineer's opinion of Probable Cost EXHIBIT F. Proposed Assessment Roll for Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District EXHIBIT G. Lono Kona Sewer ID Easements Map 1. Introduction This report has been prepared in response to Hawai'i County Council Resolution No. 120-11 dated September 8, 2011("Resolution"). The Resolution directed the Director of the Department of Environmental Management to prepare and submit to the Council a report containing the information required by Hawai'i County Code section 12-10(a) as follows: (1) Preliminary data concerning the special improvement proposed to be opened, constructed, or improved - (2) The general character and extent of any improvement to be proposed (3) The proposed assessment unit and method of assessment; (4) Whether any new land u ill be necessary to be acquired and the estimated cost thereof and the proportion of the cost which should be borne by the County; (S) The materials recommended to meet the conditions of the in►prmement; (6) The boundaries of the proposed improvement district and any subdistricts or :ones therein as to which different portions of the cost of improvements should be charged; (7) 7be estimated cost of the improvement, the portions of the cost to be borne by the Count)-, and the portions of the cost to be assessed against the assessment units specially benefited with the marinnm► unit of assessment to be made against each assessment unit to be assessed; and (8) All necessary plans and other data, details, and specificationsfor the improvements and any other matters or details intended to apply thereto. The proposed improvement district, initiated by the Hawai'i County Council, is for the design and installation of a sewer system for the Lono Kona subdivision in North Kona that will meet the Department of Environmental Management standards ("Project"). The County will own, operate, and maintain the system. The proposed improvements consist exclusively of a sewer system including the incidental restoration of roadways, meeting the definition of a "sewer system improvement district" under Hawai'i County Code (HCC) chapter 11. A. Location The Lono Kona Subdivision is located in Kailua-Kona. ahupua'a of Ke6pu 2nd Ke6pu 3rd, and Honua'ula, North Kona District, island and County of Hawai'i ("Project Area") (see EXHIBIT A). The Project Area offers affordable housing opportunities within close proximity to the KaiIua Village core. This subdivision was created in 1962 (Subdivision No. 692-A), prior to the first section of the Kailua- Kona Sewer System installed by the County in 1965. The proposed sewer system would service 110 parcels within the Project Area (see EXHIBIT B). LONO BONA SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DIRECTOR'S REPORT The Project Area is a mix of single-family, duplex, apartment, vacant land, and commercial uses totaling approximately 43 acres (see EXHIBIT B). Most of the properties use cesspools with a few on septic systems. The Project will connect to and be part of the County's North Kona Sewer System that conveys the sewage to the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Project will be installed entirely within the existing County road rights-of-way, with the exception of downstream segments that will require easements over private property to connect to the sewer main in Hualalai Road. B. Purpose and Need The untreated cesspool leachates have a high potential to contaminate groundwater, especially in the highly permeable lava rock substrate of this area. Because the Project Area is within the Department of Health's Critical Wastewater Disposal Area and less than a mile from the shoreline, there is a probability for contaminated groundwater to seep into the nearshore coastal waters. To stem further water quality degradation from cesspools, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banned large capacity cesspools pursuant to the Underground Injection Control provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act.' The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations required all large capacity cesspools to be replaced by an alternative wastewater system by April 5, 2005. EPA started issuing violation notices to property owners within the Project Area in 2010. Several property owners within the Project Area have received such violation notices from EPA. One means to comply with EPA is to replace the cesspool with an onsite septic system. However. the Project Area is a higher density urbanized area where the lot sizes generally do not have sufficient area for onsite disposal systems that require leach fields. This, a sewer system is the most cost-effective means to comply with EPA requirements. In new developments, the County requires the developer to install the sewer system where appropriate. In this case, the Project Area is an older subdivision pre -dating sewer requirements and now needs to retrofit a sewer system The County's primary role in terms of providing sewer service is to provide the backbone components—the main transmission lines, pump stations for these main transmission lines. treatment plants and reuse/disposal systems. The local collection systems are the responsibility of the developer or property owners. However, for retrofit situations such as this Project. while government recognizes that property owners should pay for local collection systems, government can play a proactive role to organize the community, advance costs to mobilize the process, and seek subsidies as appropriate to ensure affordability. C. Project Financing The property owners connecting to the proposed sewer system will be responsible to pay for the Project development costs through the Improvement District assessments. To assist with the financing, the County applied to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development, Rural Utilities Water 1 EPA defines a cesspool to be a "large -capacity cesspool" as follows: Residential multiple -dwelling, community, or regional systems (e.g., townhouse complexes or apartment buildings) that dispose of sanitary waste, or Non- residential cesspools that have the capacity to serve 20 or more persons per day (e.g., rest areas or churches) if the cesspools receive solely sanitary waste. LUNO ISO\.A SEN1TR R1PRo E\IE\-T DiSTPJC T DIP.ECTi!R'S REPORT and Waste Disposal loan and grant program. The program offers below-market interest rates, amortization periods longer than conventional loans, and the possibility of grants to partially subsidize the costs. The USDA approved the application with a grant of $4,024,800 and loan of $2,437,000 to cover the total development costs of $6,464,800 (see EXH Brr Q. The grant constitutes 62% of the total development cost, an exceptional proportion in recognition of the public health and safety situation indicated by EPA's large capacity cesspool violation notices and the need to maintain housing affordability in this area. The lien powers under an Improvement District provide an enforceable means to address delinquencies. The County will secure loan repayment to USDA by way of a reimbursable General Obligation bond authorized through the Improvement District process. D. Process The process to construct the sewer system requires an integration of the USDA grant/loan procedures and the Improvement District procedures. The steps to integrate these two procedures involve preliminary engineering, environmental compliance, design, loan closing, and construction as follows: LO\O KOt a SEN ER IMPRON'EMENT DISTRICT DIRECTOR'S REPORT M711�'l A • County initiated Improvement District process with adoption of Resolution No. i2o-u County prepared USDA application package, including preliminary engineering report and environmental report • USDA determined that project is categorically excluded to comply kith NEPA • USDA issued Letter of Conditions approving the loan and grant -Adopt Resolution regarding feasibility of Improvement District are ixere • Hold public hearing • Process Chapter 343 Environmental Assessment to enable additional public review • Design and prepare construction documents • Bid and select contractor • Establish definitive costs and assessments 'F - Establish Improvement District by ordinance -Authorize G.O. Bond to secure loan • Close USDA loan • Execute construction contract • Issue notice to proceed 2. Character and Extent of Proposed Improvements The Project is an all gravity system with no pump stations. The sewer system consists of approximately 5,640 linear feet of 8 -inch sewer pipe. 360 linear feet of 10 -inch sewer pipe. 34 sewer manholes, sewer laterals to 110 parcels, and restoration of roadway pavements. Eiglit-inch sewer lines would be installed 1_0\0 KON-A SEWER IMPROVEMENT D11S,M:'T DIHECTO R'S REPOR U on Alahou Street, Lamaokeola Street, Alakai Street, Alanoe Place, Kalani Street, Ala Onaona Street, and within the sewer easements on private properties. The I 0 -inch portion would be installed in Hualgai Road and connect to an existing 30 -inch line in Kuakini Highway (see EXHIBIT D, Altcmative 2 layout in Appendix C of Preliminary Engineering Report). Based on the prelimamy design, five parcels on Alabou Street and Alanoe Place may be lower than the elevation of the laterals and may require private sewage pumps 3. Proposed Method of Assessment The "assessment unit" as defined by HCC chapter 11 is a subdivided parcel or condominium unit with a unique tax key number. Since the amount assessed to each assessment unit should be proportional to the special benefits conferred on the assessment unit (HCC § 12-2), the proposed assessment is proportional to the estimated wastewater generation from the assessment unit. The amount of wastewater generated by a single-fnaily dwelling differs from a duplex, apartment building, or commercial use. To account for the differences in land use, the estimated wastewater generation was converted to a "single-family equivalent" C'SFE'). The SFE was determined based on the existing land use of the assessment unit, irrespective of zoning. The existing zoning was used only if the assessment unit was vacant. The benefit based on existing use was given greater weight over a skeptical future maximum benefit based on zoning. To determine the existing use, Real Property Tax data provided the existing number of shoe fimidy, duplex or apartment units per parcel. To estimate the wastewater generation by land use, the standard of 80 gallons per capita per day was used, and a standard capita per land use was used as follows: • Single-family dwelling (RS zoning): 4 capita/unit • Duplex (RD zoning): 2.8 capita/unit • Apartment (RM zoning): 2.8 capitatunit • Commercial (CV): the engineer estimated the commercial capita as explained in PER Appendix A. The per capita assumption for each parcel was converted to a single-family equivalent (SFE) by dividing by 4. For example, a parcel with a six -unit apartment has an occupancy of 16.8 persons (6 units x 2.8 capitaAmit), resulting in a SFE of 4.2 (16.8 divided by 4 equals 4.2). The total SFEs within the proposed Improvement District is 247. Dividing the total development costs by the total SFEs results in the unit cost per SFE. The total development cost reduced by the grant amount equals the Net Project Costs which is equivalent to the USDA loan amount. The annual assessment pays the debt service on the USDA loan. The USDA Letter of Conditions (EXHIBIT C) includes the terms to calculate the debt service as follows: • Loan amount: $2,437,000 • Interest rate: 2.125% LONO KONTA SEINT.R IMPRO"VENIENT DISTRICT DTRECTOWS REPORT A A COO • Amortization: interest only for two years. amortization factor for the remaining 33 years of $42.47/$1000 • Debt service: $103,499.00 ammai payment The fixed assessment ger SFE is $9,868, as suntMarizCd in the table below. Table 1. Fixed €Ls"smat Calculation M Total SFEs 1 247 per SFE The fined and annual assessments per parcel are calculated by multiplying the fixed or annual assessment per SFE by the number of SFEs for that assessment unit. EXHBIT F, Proposed Assessment Roil, Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District, used Wou information provided by the County's Real Property Tax Division, identifies the owners of the properties, number of'SF'Es, and proposed fixed and annual assessments by assessment unit. The proposed InYprovement District includes 145 assessment traits on 110 parcels. LOWO i ONA SENVER JMPRONIE I T DISTRICT DIRLCTOR' S REPORT 7 4. Land and Easements to be Acquired The majority of the system is located in existing public rights of way. Easements through seven private properties are required (see EXH[IBIT G). These parcels are located at the downstream end of the sewer collection system and trust be crossed to gain access to the County sewer in Hualaiai Road These easements are 10' wide located in the zoning setback portions of the affected properties. The total laud area required for the easements is approximately 0.26 acres. The estimated land cost based on tax assessed values is $200,000, conservatively assuming fee simple values. 5. Recommended Materials The recommended materials for the proposed sewer systemin conformance with the Department of Environmental Management Standards, shall include but not be limited to the following: • 5,640 Lin. Ft., 8 -inch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and fittings 360 Lin. Ft., I0 -inch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and fittings • 29 Each, sewer manholes 5.0' to 9.5' deep + 4 Each, lined shallow drop sewer manholes 10.0 to 14.99' deep • 1 Each, lined drop sewer manholes 15.00' to 20.00' deep • 110 Each, sewer lateral connection. As part of the Project, the design engineer will coordinate the location of laterals to each property with the respective owner to optimize connection convenience for the owner. The property owners will be responsible for the improvements on their private property- to connect their plumbing to the lateral, as well as to close their existing cesspool or septic system The sewer lines will be installed in trenches ranging in depth froth 5' to 12'. The roadway will be restored to the existing pavement width (i.e., not limited to a patch over the trench). 5. Improvement District Boundaries The 110 lots included in the improvement District are shown in the map titled "Proposed Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District" (EXHIBIT B). 7. Estimated Cost of the Improvement The total project cosi—including design, construction, financing, and land costs is $6.4 mullion, detailed as follows: LONG KONA SEUTR IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DIRECTOR'S REPORT E �.a`„�,,.... , vr�z<.�zv�daw..u,"� ..ems-�, v„xwr2srr.�'�a«�:,,F.c� - --- <n ;� �° �.�...e,..�:sxaa��+�;:'�i/��/'9, .,�.,....,,,. l?���':� su:�crxwi� .��»�., n t�'r�;�.�.:�•s' A more detailed breakdown of the construction cost is in EXHIBIT E, Engineer's Opinion of Probable Cost. 8. Necessary flans, Data, Detail, and Specifications Alt necessary plans and other data, details and specifications for the improvenken s and any other matters or details intended to apply thereto are contained in the exhabits listed below and Winded to this report. The ingormation in this report and the exhibits are in such form and contain such information as is reasonably necessary to inform the owners of assessment units and other interested parties at least generally of the nature and scope of tate proposed sewer system improvements tobe constructed and installed in the Improvement District. 1 . EXHIBIT A. Location .p 2. EXHIBIT ei t District Boundary 3. EXHIBIT of . • 4. EXHIBrr D. Preliminary i io010 Kona Sewer System hKIPTOvements. EXHIBIT E. Engineer'Opinion of t.tCost- 6.EXHIBIT proposed Assessment' e e• Kona Sewer Improvement 7. EXHIBIT ♦o• Kona Sewer ID Easements Map. 9. Conclusion Given the public health and safety concerns associated with the existing ,cesspools and pending citations by the EFA, it is imperative that a county sewer system be constructed within the subdivision. It is the finding of this report that the proposed sewer improvement district hilly meets the "public .interest” standard specified in Chapter 12-10() of the Hawaii County Code to warrant a Council -initiated in rovement district resolution. Moreover, given that alternative measures and proposals have been studied exhaustively, and that the most feasible, enforceable and affordable pian is to implement a gravity e. .at.,,Y r aru:. ai 4h+r:ttcrh s r+rnnhinM tTIRr)A=Inant ►nt unci it C'ninwil_irvitisteA imam t _. DIRECTOR'S REPORT district, it is the recommendation of the Director of Environmental Management that the Council move forward with this effort. Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd, Director, Department of Environmental Management EXHIBIT A. Location Map EA'HIBIT B. Improvement District Boundary Alap EA`H1BIT C. Letter of Conditions EXHIBIT D. Prelinfinary Engineering Report for Lono Kona Sewer Swein Improvements EA-HIBIT E. Engineer's Opirtion of Probable Cost EXHIBIT F. ProposedAssessynew Roll jor Lonokoiia Sewer Improvement District E,YHlBIT G. Luno Kona Sewer ID Easements Afap LONK) KONA SEWER INIFIRONTMENTF DISTRICT DIRECIT )R'S REPO 10 M EXHIBIT A: 1.6 -ono Kona Sewer ID Location Map Legend North Kona Sewer System ID Boundary a 0.5 1 2 Wes A PRI Legend North Kona Sewer System ID Boundary a 0.5 1 2 Wes A Legend North Kona Sewer System ID Boundary a 0.5 1 2 Wes Lono Kona Sewer ID Boundary 0 250 500 1,000 I I I I I I I I I Feet EXHIBIT C: Letter of Conditions USDA United Stelae Department of Agriculture Rural Development August 13, 2013 Hawn, slate office Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager 154 Waianuenue Ave. County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management SuM 311 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawall 06720 Hilo, HI 96720 Voice W8.933.8390 Fax 808.933.8327 Dear Ms. Bauman: Subject: Letter of Conditions for the County of Hawaii Department of Environmental Management Wastewater Financing Lana Kona Sewer Project Loan: $2,437,000 Grant: $4,024,800 The purpose of your request of funds is to do improvements to the Lono Kona Subdivision's existing sewer system. The subdivision is under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandate to close large -capacity cesspools. This Letter of Conditions (LOC) with enclosures establishes conditions which you must understand and agree to before further consideration may be given to your application. The State staff of USDA Rural Development (RD) will administer the loan and grant on behalf of the Rural Utilities Program (RUS), Water,and Environmental Program (WEP), hereafter referred to as the Agency. iYou must report any changes in design, project cost, source of funds, scope of services, or any other significant changes in the project to the Agency for review and approval. A written amendment to this letter will be prepared for approved changes. Changes not approved by the Agency may be cause for discontinuing processing of the application. Your documents concerning the creation and legal existence of your entity are administratively acceptable; however, the documents will be reviewed further by our Office of the General Counsel (OGC) at the time your file is forwarded for closing instructions. Any changes required by OGC will be included in the closing instructions. This LOC Is not to be considered as loan approval or as representation to the availability of funds. You may be required to refinance (graduate) the unpaid balance of the Agency loan, in whole or in part, if at any time the Agency determines your entity is able to obtain a loan for such purposes from responsible cooperative or private sources at reasonable rates and terms for loans for similar purposes and periods of time. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. d you vAsh to ilio a CNG Rights program complaint of disMin%hation, complete the USDA Program plxdmi Atton eomplabt Form, found online at httpy/www.not.usda.govJcomplalnt_tiling_c"50trN, or at any USDA oMica. or cog OW 632-M2 to r6Qu85t the form. You may also write a loner containing an of the inion0100013 oatluWW 1111 tfta form. send Vow completed complain bin or caner to us by no u U.S. Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 2 Please provide copies of this letter to your engineer, attorney, and accountant. All parties may access our web -site located at www.rurdev.usda.gov/UWEP HomepageNtril : a. Title 7 Code of Federal Regulation, Part 1780,(7 CFR 1780) b. Bulletin 1780-26, "Guidance for the Use of EJCDC Funding Agency Edition Documentation" The conditions referred to above are as follows: 1. Prosect Budget — Funding from all sources has been budgeted for the estimated expenditures as follows: Pro3ect Costs: Toted Bjdgeted Engineering Design (Fees) $ 285,000 Engineering -Pre -development (Feasibility Study) 185,300 Legal Services (Fees) 75,000 Other (improvement District Formation) 50,000 Development (Construction Costs) 5,650,000 Project Contingence 216.500 Total Costs: $ 6,461,800 2. Protect Funds — The project funding is planned in the form of a loan and grant from the following sources and amounts: Prefect Funding Source: Funding Amount Agency Loan $ 2,437,000 Agency Grant 4.024.800 Total Project Funding (All Sources): $ 6,461,800 Any changes in funding sources following obligation of Agency funds must be reported to the processing official. You must assure that all project funds are expended only for the eligible items included in the project budget of this letter of conditions. or as amended by the Agency in writing at a later date. 3. Disbursement of Funds — The Agency funds may be advanced as they are needed in the amounts necessary to cover the Agency's proportionate share of any disbursements required of your entity, over 30 -day periods. Funds would be disbursed by electronic transfer of funds. Interim financing should be used for the Agency loan portion of funding if the loan amount exceeds $500,000. You must provide the Agency with a copy of the interim financing instrument. Loan funds will be the first funds into the project, and then grant fiends. Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 3 4. Use of Remaining Funds — Applicant contributions and connection or tap fees will be the first funds expended in the project. Remaining funds may be considered in direct proportion to the amounts obtained from each source and handled as follows: a. Remaining funds may be used for eligible loan and grant purposes, provided the use will not result in major changes to the original scope of work and the purpose of the loan and grant remains the same. b. Agency loan funds that are not needed will be applied as an extra payment on the Agency indebtedness unless other disposition is required by the bond ordinance, resolution, or State statute. c. Grant funds not expended for authorized purposes will be cancelled within 60 days of project completion. Prior to actual cancellation, you and your attorney and engineer will be notified of the Agency's intent to cancel the remaining funds aitd given appropriate appeal rights. You must establish a separate account, to be known and hereafter referred to as the Construction Account, with a participating 31 CFR Part 202 collateral depository, federal agency, or Federal Reserve Bank acting as a fiscal agent in the United States. All project funds will be deposited into this account. The account shall be used solely for the purpose of paying authorized costs of the project as outlined in the project budget. Financial institutions or depositaries accepting deposits of public funds and providing other financial agency services to the Federal Government are required to pledge adequate, acceptable securities as collateral. General requirements for designating depositaries and regulations governing the pledging of collateral are identified in 31 CFR Part 202 ("Depositaries and FiAancial Agents of the Federal Government"). Treasury's current acceptability and valuation requirements are identified in 31 CFR Part 380 ("Collateral Acceptability and Valuation") and specific eligibility and valuation guidance is provided in Treasury's procedural instructions and on Treasury's Bureau of the Public Debt website at www.publicdebt.tmas.gov. All funds in the account will be secured by a collateral pledge equaling at least 1000 of the highest amount of funds expected to be deposited in the Construction Account at any one time. Any Agency grant funds not disbursed immediately upon receipt must be deposited in an interest bearing account except as follows: a. Federal grant awards (includes all federal funding sources) are less than $120,000 per year. b. The best available interest bearing account would not be expected to cam in excess of the following. Public Bodies: Interest earned on grant funds in excess of $100 per year will be submitted to the Agency at least quarterly as required in 7CFR3016. Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 4 c. The depository would require a minimum balance so high that it would not be feasible. 5. Security — The loan will be secured by a General Obligation (GO) bond with the United States of America, acting through the Department of Agriculture, Rural Utilities Service in first lien position in the amount of $2,437,000. The bond will be fully registered as to both principal and interest in the name of the "United States of America, acting through the Department of Agriculture". The bond and any ordinance or resolution relating thereto must not contain any provision in conflict with the RUS Loan Resolution, applicable regulations, and law' In particular, there must be no defeasance or refinancing clause in conflict with the graduation requirements of 7 USC 1983 (c). Additional security requirements are contained in RUS Bulletin 1780-12, `:`Water or Waste System Grant Agreement," Form RUS Bulletin 1780-28, "Loan Resolution Security Agreement," which also serves as an assignment of income, and Form RD 1942- 8, "Resolution of Members or Stockholders." A Form UCC -1, "Financing Statement," must be filed to perfect a security interest in collateral, including fixtures. We will provide you with this document at loan closing. 6. Loan Res ent — The loan will be scheduled for repayment over a period of 35 years. The payments due the first two years will consist of interest only. Payments for the remaining 33 years will be equal amortized annual installments. For planning purposes use a 2.1250% interest rate and an annual amortization factor of $42.47/$1000, which provides for an annual payment of $103,499.00. The interest rate will be the lower of the rate in effect at the time of loan approval or the time of loan closing, whichever is less, unless you choose otherwise. Should the interest rate be reduced, the payment will be recalculated to the lower amount. The payment due date will be established as the day that the loan closes. Interest only payments during the 24 -month deferral period will be made by your applicant funds on an annual basis. You will be required to complete Form RD -3550-28, "Authorization Agreement for Preauthorized Payments" for all new and existing indebtedness to the Agency: It will allow far your payment to be electronically debited from your account on the day your payment is due. 7. Reserves — Reserves must be properly budgeted to maintain the financial viability of any operation. Reserves are important to fund unanticipated emergency maintenance and repairs, and assist with debt service should the need arise. Reserves can also be established and Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 5 maintained for the anticipated and expected expenses including but not limited to operation and maintenance, customer deposits, and asset management for short-lived assets. The RUS loan would be secured by a General Obligation bond {"GO Bond") and not an Improvement District bond. Since a G.O. Bond is backed by the County of Hawaii to cover the debt service on the GO bond, and the County of Hawaii will get reimbursed through the Improvement District for the debt service it pays, a debt service reserve is not necessary 8. Users — This letter of conditions is based upon you providing evidence or a certification that there will be at least 248 "equivalent" users on the proposed system when construction has been completed. Before the Agency can agree to the project being advertised for construction bids, you must provide evidence or a certification that the total required number of users are currently using the system or signed up to use the system and that the monthly water usage projected for each by the engineer is reasonable. In the event any of the large volume users discontinue the offered service, you must obtain enough additional revenue (i.e., increase in user rates, sign up of an adequate number of other users, reduction in project scope to reduce debt service and O&M, etc.) to make up the projected income that would be lost by not having those users on the system. 9. Income Available — You must maintain a rate schedule that provides adequate income to meet the minimum requirements for operation and maintenance, debt service, and reserves. 10. Operation and Maintenance Expenses — O&M expenses must be properly budgeted to ensure the financial viability of any operation. For planning purposes, we have projected O&M expenses based on the information provided in the preliminary engineezing report which should be representative of a typical year. This information is utilized to determine loan repayment and should be reflected in your proposed operating budget. It is expected that O&M will change over each successive year and user rates will need to be adjusted appropriately. 11. Proposed Oyeratiing Budget and User Rate Analysis — You will be required to submit a copy of your proposed annual operating budget and rate analysis to the Agency which supports the proposed loan repayment prior to the Agency giving you written authorization to proceed with the bidding phase. The operating budget should be based on a typical year cash flow after completion of the construction phase. The rate analysis will be required to show the number of users, their average consumption based on a twelve month consecutive average, and rate structure to support the necessary revenue to make the operating budget cash flow. Form RD 442-7 "Operating Budget" attached or similar form may be utilized for this purpose. 12. Insurance and Bonding Requirements — Prior to loan closing or start of construction, whichever occurs first, you must acquire the types of insurance and bond coverage shown Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13,1013 Page 6 below. The use of deductibles may be allowed providing you have the financial resources to cover potential claims requiring payment of the deductible. The Agency strongly recommends that you have your engineer, attorney, and insurance providers review proposed types and amounts of coverage, including any exclusions and deductible provisions. It is your responsibility and not that of the Agency to assure that adequate insurance and fidelity or employee dishonesty bond coverage is maintained. a. General liability Insurance — Include vehicular coverage. b. Workers' Com2MWgon — In accordance with appropriate State laws. c. Position Fidelity Bonds — All positions occupied by persons entrusted with the receipt and/or disbursement of funds must be bonded. You should have each position bonded in an amount equal to the maximum amount of funds to be under the control of that position at any one time. The minimum coverage acceptable to the Agency will be for each position to be bonded for an amount at least equal to one annual installment on your loans. The coverage may be increased during construction of this project based on the anticipated monthly advances. The amount of coverage should be discussed and approved by the Agency. d. National Flood Insurance — If the project involves acquisition or construction in designated special flood or mudslide prone areas, you must purchase a flood insurance policy at the time of loan closing. e. li ALEMperty Insurance — Fire and extended coverage will normally be maintained on all structures except reservoirs, pipelines and other structures if such structures are not normally insured and subsurface lift stations except for the value of electrical and pumping equipment. Prior to the acceptance of the facility from the contractor(s), you must obtain real property insurance (fire and extended coverage) on all facilities identified above. 13. Accountine Services — You may be required to obtain the services of an independent licensed Certified Public Accountant (CPA). When permitted by state statutes or with the approval of the Agency, a state or Federal auditor may perform the audit in lieu of a CPA. A CPA will be considered independent if the CPA: a. Meets the standards for independence contained in the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Code of Professional Conduct in effect at the time the CPA's independence is under review: b. Does not have any direct financial interest or any material indirect financial interest in the borrower during the period covered by the audit; and c. Is not, during the period of the audit, connected with the borrower as a promoter, underwriter, trustee, director, officer or emplovee. Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 7 Audit Agreement: You must enter into a written audit agreement with the auditor and submit a copy to the Agency prior to advertisement of bids. The audit agreement may include terms and conditions that the borrower and auditor deem appropriate;. however, the agreement should include the following: d. A statement that the auditor will perform and document the audit work in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards, (GAGAS), as outlined in the attached booklet, "Government Auditing Standards (Revised 1994}", and the professional standards of the AICPA; e. A statement that the auditor will submit the completed audit and accompanying letters to your governing body 30 days prior to the date the audit is due to the Agency; L A statement that the auditor will make all audit -related documents, including work papers, available to the Agency or its representatives, upon request; and g. A statement that the auditor will immediately report, in writing, all irregularities and illegal acts to your governing body and the Agency. Prior to the advertisement for bids, your accountant must certify to you and the Agency that the accounts and records as required have been established and are operational. Qualily Review Requirement: As required by GAGAS, the auditor must belong to and participate in an external quality review program and provide you with acopy of the most recent quality review report. These reviews are performed every 3 years by an independent organization to determine if the auditor is following established audit procedures and applicable auditing standards. Audit Requirements: The following management data will be required from you on an annual basis and be submitted to the Agency as specified below: h. A borrower that expends $500,000 or more in federal financial assistance per fiscal year shall submit an audit performed in accordance with the requirements of OMB Circular A-133. As described above, the total federal funds expended from all sources shall be used to determine federal financial assistance expended. Projects financed with interim financing are considered federal expenditures. OMB Circular A-133 audits shall be submitted no later than 9 months after the end of the fiscal year. In addition to submitting two (2) copies of the audit report to the Agency, the borrower is also required to submit copies of OMB Circular A-133 audits, accompanying audit letters (the "reporting package'), and the Data Collection Form to the Federal clearinghouse designated by OMB to retain as an archival copy. The Federal clearinghouse address is: Federal Audit Clearinghouse, Bureau of the Census, 1201 E. 10th Street, Jeffersonville, Indiana 47132, RUS Bulletin 1780- Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 8 31,"Water Programs Compliance Supplement for OMB Circular A-133 Audits" outlines the requirements of OMB Circular A-133 audits. i. A borrower that expends less than $500,000 in Federal financial assistance per fiscal year and an outstanding Agency loan balance of $1,000,000 or more, shall submit 1M audit -1mrformed in accordance with Water and Waste audit requirements i.e.. a GAGAS audio, These audits shall be submitted to the Agency no later than 150 days after the end of the fiscal year. Two (2) copies of the audit report are required by RD. An audit performed in accordance with Water and Waste audit requirements should not be submitted to the Federal clearinghouse. RUS Bulletin 1780-30, "Water Programs Audit Guide and Compliance Supplement" outlines the requirements for Water Programs Audits. j. A borrower that expends less than $500,000 in Federal financial assistance per fiscal year and has an outstanding Agency loan balance of less than $1,000,000 may submit a management report in lieu of an audit rem unless notified by the Agency otherwise. Management reports shall be submitted to the Agency no later than 60 days after the end of the fiscal year. A year-end management report shall consist of: Form RD 442-3, `Balance Sheet", and Form RD 442-2, "Statement of Budget, Income and Equity", or forms that provide the information in a similar format. Form RD 442-2 should have Schedule 1, all Columns completed on page 1, and page 2. Schedule 2 is not required for year-end reports. An annual audit report or similar financial statements may be submitted in lieu of Forms RD 442-2 and ,442-3. The financial report must be submitted no later than 150 days after the end of the borrower's fiscal year. Compensation for preparation of the A-133 audit or your annual audit is not included in project funds and should be paid from the operational revenues generated from your system operation. Annual Budget and Projected Cash Flow: Thirty days prior to the beginning of each fiscal year, you will be required to submit an annual budget and projected cash flow to this office. You should submit two copies of Form RD 442-2, Statement of Budget, Income and Equity, Schedule 1, page 1; and Schedule 2, Projected Cash Flow. The only data required at this time on Schedule 1, page 1, is Columns 2 & 3. All of Schedule 1, page 2 and Schedule 2, Projected Cash Flow will be required. You may submit annual budgets on other financial statements for cash flow projections rather than Form RD 442-2. With the submission of the annual budget, you will be required to provide a current rate schedule, a current listing of the Board or Counsel members and terms. Quarterly Reports — Borrowers receiving their first loan from RD, will be required to submit two copies of Form RD 442-2, Schedule 1, page 1, columns 2-6, as appropriate, and page 2. You may submit historical quarterly financial statements on a format other Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 9 than Form RD 442-2. This information should be received in the servicing office thirty days after the end of each of the first three quarters of the fiscal year. 14. I teal Services —The Agency will review the "Legal Services Agreement." This agreement will address the fees necessary for the services outlined in this agreement. At closing the owner's attorney will certify that the executed contract documents, including performance and payment bonds on contracts over $100,000 are adequate and that the persons executing these documents have been properly authorized to do so in accordance with RUS Instruction 1780.61(b). The Agreement should be submitted for Agency concurrence and approval. Project funding included for this purpose should be outlined in the Agreement. 15. Property Rights — Acquisitions of necessary land and rights must be accomplished in accordance with the Uniform Relocation and Real Property Acquisition Act. Prior to advertisement for construction bids, you must furnish satisfactory evidence that you have or can obtain adequate continuous and valid control over the lands and rights needed for the project. Such evidence of control over the lands and rights must be in the following form: a. A right-of-way map showing clearly the location of all lands and rights needed for the project. The map must designate public and private lands and rights and the appropriate legal ownership thereof. b. Preliminary Title Work — (Title Opinions). A copy of deeds, contracts or options for any lands needed other than rights-of-way, along with a preliminary title opinion covering such lands. A separate Form RD 1927.9, "Preliminary Title Opinion" may be used for each property currently owned or to be acquired. i.A certification and legal opinion relative to title to rights-of-way and easements. Foran RD 442-22, "Opinion of Counsel Relative to Rights -of -Way," may be used. This form may contain a few exceptions such as properties that must be condemned; however, prior to the start of construction or loan closing, whichever occurs first, a new Form RD 442-22, must be provided which does not provide for any exceptions. ii.A narrative opinion from your attorney concerning all permits, certificates, licenses and other items necessary to show that all legal requirements can be met and stating how they will be met. c. Preliminary Title Work — (Title Insurance) A title insurance binder will be required on all real estate now owned and property to be acquired in connection with this project. The binder will be in the amount of the proposed loan and name the United States of America, acting through the United States Department of Agriculture, as the proposed insured. Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 10 d. Final Title Work — On the day of loan closing, your attorney must furnish a separate final title opinion on all existing land(s) and those to be acquired on the day of loan closing. Form RD 192740, "Final Title Opinion" may be used. 16. Lnaineerine Serylces —The Agency must approve any agreements or modifications to agreements for professional design services. The agreement for engineering services should consist of the EJCDC documents as indicated in RUS Bulletin 1780-26, "Guidance for the Use of EJCDC Standard Documents on Water and Waste Projects with RUS Financial Assistance" or other approved form of agreement. 17. Resident Inspection — Full-time inspection is required unless waived or modified by RD in writing prior to advertisement for bids. This service is to be provided by the consulting engineer or other arrangements as approved by the Agency. Prior to the pre - construction conference, a resume of qualifications of the resident inspector(s) will be submitted to the owner and Agency for review and approval. The owner will provide a letter of acceptance for all proposed inspectors to the engineer and Agency. The resident inspector(s) must attend the pre -construction conference. 18. Restrictions on Lobbying — In order to comply with Section 319 of Public Law 101-121 which prohibits applicants and recipients of Federal contracts, grants and loans from using Federal appropriated funds for lobbying, the Federal Government in connection with the award of a specific contract, grant or loan, the Applicant, and all contractors and subcontractors must: 1. Execute the attached Certification for Contracts, Grants, and Loans. 2. Complete Standard Form LLL, "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities", if they have made, or agreed to make payment, using funds other than Federal appropriated funds, to influence or attempt to influence a decision in connection,with the contract. 3. The Certification and, if appropriate, the Disclosure must be provided to USDA, Rural Development. 19. Knvironmental Requirements — Miti ag tion - At the conclusion of the proposal's environmental review process, specific actions were determined necessary to avoid or minimize adverse environmental impacts. The following lists of actions are required for successful completion of the project and must be adhered to during project design and construction. MITIGATION 1: The Great Wall of Kuakini was constructed by Governor John Quincy to prevent cattle from destroying the agricultural plots in the Kona-Kailua region, Construction of the wall began in the early 1800s and was completed by the mid -1850s. The wall is Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 11 approximately five miles long and extends from Palani Road in Kailua-Kona to Kahalu`u Bay south of Kailua-Kona. Some historians suggest the wall was constructed to keep cattle away from the coastal homes and garden plots, while others suggest the garden walls, and perhaps the Kuakini Wall, prevented cattle from damaging the upland gardens in the region. On May 31, 2012, Glenn G. Escou, MA, Senior Archaeologist of Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. surveyed the lots that will be potentially impacted by the sewer line construction and the vacant lots proposed as the possible staging areas for construction activities. Mr. Escott noted the Kuakini Wail along the east boundary of TMK: (3) 7-5- 04:35 is the only archaeological site located within the project area. The remaining lots have been grubbed and graded; therefore no archaeological sites were located on the remaining lots. Mr. Escott has made a determination that the proposed sewer main installation will not impact the Kuakini Wall in any way. The vacant lots that border the Kuakini Wall shall not be used as construction staging areas. If the State Historic Preservation Division deems it necessary, a monitoring plan shall be prepared. MITIGATION 2: The Hawaiian Hoary Bat and Hawaiian Hawk are two protected species known to transit through the project area for foraging and breeding and they may be affected. • The Hawaiian Hoary Bat roosts in exotic and native woody vegetation. While foraging, the adults leave their young unattended in nursery trees and shrubs. If the trees or shrubs are cleared during roosting and breeding season, there is a risk the young bats could be harmed or killed. Woody plants greater than 15 feet tall should not be removed or trimmed from June 1 to September 15. • The Hawaiian Hawk is/are sensitive to loud, irregular, and unpredictable activities such as using heavy equipment or building a structure. The Hawaiian Hawk will have problems nesting. Harrassment of the nesting sites can alter feeding and breeding patterns, or nest and chick abandonment. Also nest disturbance can increase exposure of chicks and juveniles to inclement weather or predators. If a Hawaiian Hawk is observed transiting the proposed area during the breeding season of March through September, a nest search of the proposed construction site and surrounding area should be conducted by a qualified "Ornithologist" immediately prior to the start of work. If an active nest is detected during construction, construction activity shall be halted within 1,600 feet of the nest, and consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service shall be conducted. a. PPLQject Modifications — The project as proposed has been evaluated to be consistent with all applicable environmental requirements. If the project or any project element deviates Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 12 from or is modified from the original approved project, additional environmental review may be required. 20. Vulnerability Assessments fVA} and Ememency Respoun Plans (ERM — Congress enacted the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness Response Act of 2002, Public Law 107-188 (Bioterrorism Act). The Bioterrorism Act amended the Safe Drinking Water (SDWA) to require all medium and large sized community water systems (serving populations greater than 3,300) to assess vulnerability to terrorist attack and develop emergency plans for response to such an attack. Medium and large community water systems are being monitored by the U.S. EPA for completion of VA's and ERP's. The Agency requires all financed 3yater and wastewater syatgms to have a vulnerability assessment (VA) and an emergency response 21an (ERP) in place. New water or wastewater systems must provide a certification that an ERP is complete prior to the start of operations. A certification that a VA is complete must be submitted within one year of the start of operations. All other borrowers must provide a certification that a VA and ERP are completed prior to bid authorization. You will also be required to provide a certification that the VA and ERP are complete and are current every three years after the start of operations. The Agency dm not need or want a copy of the VA or ERP. The requested certification will be sufficient to meet our needs. Technical assistance providers are available to provide on site assistance if desired. 21. Permits — The owner, contractor or responsible party will be required to obtain all required permits for the project prior to advertisement for construction bids. A narrative opinion from your attorney concerning all permits, certificates, licenses and other items necessary to show that all legal requirements can be met and stating how they will be met. 22. Contract Documents. Final Plans and Specifications — a. The contract documents should consist of the EJCDC Construction Contract Documents as indicated in RUS Bulletin 1780-26 or other approved form of agreement. b. The contract documents, final plans, and specifications must comply with RUS Instruction 1780, Subpart C — Planning, Designing, Bidding, Contracting, Construction and Inspections and be submitted to the Agency for approval prior to advertisement for bids. Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 13 c. The use of any procurement method other than competitive bidding mpst be requested in writing and approved by the Agency. d. The Agency requires a pre -construction conference, pre -final, final, and warranty inspection. e. The Agency requires prior Agency concurrence of all Change Orders, Invoices, and Payment Estimates. f. The Agency will monitor construction through routine inspections and review of monthly payment estimates, change orders, and inspector's daily record to protect the interest of the Agency. g. Any construction in excess of $2,000 will include the Labor Standards Provisions stated in RD Instruction 1940-C, Exhibit A. 23. Graduation - By accepting this loan, you are also agreeing to refinance (graduate) the unpaid loan balance in whole, or in part, upon request of the Government.: If at any time the Agency determines your entity is able to obtain a loan for such purposes from responsible cooperative or private sources at reasonable rates and terms, you will be requested to refinance. 24. System for Award Management (SAN_ — You as the recipient must maintain an active and current registration at all times in the SAM system. See https://www.sarn.Wv/index. for further information. a. You as the recipient may not make a sub -award to an entity unless the entity has provided its Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number to you. Sub - recipients with sub -awards of $25,000 or more must also have and maintain a current SAM registration. b. Recipient Reporting. You as the recipient must report each first tier sub -awards of $25,000 or more in non -Recovery Act funds to httiz://www.fsrs.gov no later than the end of the month following the month the obligation was made. See the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) website (listed above) for additional recipient and sub -recipient reporting requirements. 25. Applicable State Statutes and Requirements — The applicant must provide copies of the following documents for review and approval to USDA Rural Development prior to bid authorization: County of Hawaii's Bond Documents, Ordinances, and applicable Legislative Documents. 25. ProcessingForms -- You must adopt and properly execute the following forms: Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 14 a. Form RD 400-1 "Equal Opportunity Agreement" b. Form RD 400-4 - "Assurance Agreement" a Form AD 1047 - "Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and other Responsibility Matters" d. Form AD 1049 - "Certification Regarding Drug -Free Workplace Requirements" e. Form RD 1910-11- "Applicant Certification, Federal Collection Policies" f. Form RD 1942-46, "Letter of Intent to Meet Conditions" g. RD Instruction 1940-0, Exhibit A-1, "Certification for Contracts, Grants and Loans" h. Standard Form LLL - "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities" (If Applicable) i. RUS Bulletin 1780-22, "Eligibility Certification" j. RUS Bulletin 1780-27 - "Loan Resolution (Public Bodies)" k. Form RD 1940-1- "Request for Obligation of Funds" Please complete and return the enclosed Form RD 1942-46, "Letter of Intent to Meet Conditions," if you desire further consideration be given your application and Form RD 1940-1 "Request for Obligation of Funds". The loan will be considered approved on the date a signed copy of Form RD 1940-1, "Request for Obligation of Funds," is mailed to you. Attached is a copy of RUS Bulletin 1780-12, "Water and Waste System Grant Agreement," for your review. You will be required to execute a completed form at the W1 time of closing. 27. Civil Rights & Eaual Opportunity - You should be aware of and will be required to comply with other federal statute requirements including but not limited to: Session 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 — Under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794), no handicapped individual in the United States shall, solely by reason of their handicap, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Agency financial assistance. Civil Riahts Act of 1964 — All borrowers are subject to, and facilities must be operated in accordance with, title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 20004 et seal and subpart E of part 1901 of this title, particularly as it relates to conducting and reporting of compliance reviews. Instruments of conveyance for loans and/or grants subject to the Act must contain the covenant required by paragraph 1901.202(e) of this title. The Americans with Disabilities Act ADA,, of 1990 — This Act (42 U.S.C. 12101 et prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in employment, State and local government services, public transportation, public accommodations, facilities, and telecommunications. Title II of the Act applies to facilities operated by State and local public entities which provides services, programs and activities. Title III of the Act Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 15 applies to facilities owned, leased, or operated by private entities which accommodate the public. Age Discrimination Act of 1975 —?his Act (42 U.S.C. 6101 et sca.l provides that no person in the United States shall on the basis of age, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Agency financial programs must be extended without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, age, or physical or mental handicap. 28. Bid Authorization - Once all the conditions outlined in this letter have been met, the Agency may authorize you to advertise the project for construction bids. Such advertisement must be in accordance with appropriate State statutes. No Notice of Award will be issued until the Agency concurs with the engineer's recommendations. Immediately after bid opening you must provide the Agency with (a) bid tabulation, and (b) your engineer's evaluation of bids and recommendations for contract awards. If the Agency agrees that the construction bids received are acceptable, adequate funds are available to cover the total project costs, and all the administrative conditions of loan approval have been satisfied, loan closing instructions will be issued to you setting forth any further requirements that must be met before the loan can be closed, then a Notice of Award may be issued. Obligated loan and grant funds not needed to complete the proposed project will be de -obligated prior to construction. Any reductions will be applied to grant funds first. When all parties agree that the closing requirements can be met, a mutually acceptable date for the loan closing will be scheduled. 29. Cost Overruns — Cost overruns must be due to high bids or unexpected construction problems that cannot be reduced by negotiations, redesign, use of bid alternatives, rebidding or other means prior to consideration by the Agency for subsequent funding. Such requests will be contingent on the availability of funds. Cost overruns exceeding 20% of the development cost at time of loan or grant approval or where the scope of the original purpose has changed will compete for funds with all other applications on hand as of that date. If the conditions set forth in this letter are not met within 12 months from the date of this letter, the Agency reserves the right to discontinue processing of the application. In the event the project has not advanced to the point of loan closing within 24 months and it is determined the applicant still wishes to proceed, it may be necessary to review the conditions outlined in this letter. If during that review, it is determined the conditions outlined are no longer adequate, the Agency reserves the right to require that the letter of conditions be revised or replaced. Ms. Robin Bauman, Business Manager County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management August 13, 2013 Page 16 We believe the information in this letter clearly sets forth the conditions with which you must comply; however, this letter does not relieve you from meeting the requirements of RUS Instruction 1780. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Samantha Shimizu, Community Programs Specialist at (808) 933-8307 or me at (808) 933-8313. *OTHY . O'CONNELL Acting Community Programs Director Enclosures cc: Area Director Position 3 Fonn RD 194246 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FORM APPROVED (Rev. 6-10) RURAL DEVELOPMENT OMB NO. 0575-0015 OMB NO. 0570-0021 OMB NO. 0570-0061 LETTER OF INTENT TO MEET CONDITIONS OMB NO. 0570-0062 Date TO: United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development (Name of USDA Agency) 154 waianuenue Ave. Suite 311 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 (USDA Agency Office Address) We have reviewed and understand the conditions set forth in your letter dated 08-13-2013 It is our intent to meet all of them not later than 08-01-2014 County of Hawaii, D t of Env Mgt 1R o» BY ip 61 Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd,. Director (Title) According to the Paperwork Reduction A a of] 095, an agency may trot conduct up, sponsor, and a persons is not re 'r to respond to a collection of mfortnation unless It displays a ralid 0 A1 control number. The valid oA18 caurn1 number for this inforatadon collection is 0375.0015. 0310.0021. 0570-0061 and 057160062. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to overa8e 1 hour per response, irulttding the line for reviewing instnrctions, searching existingi data sources, gathering and maintaining the data, needed. and completing and r•erinring the collection of informanom Form RD 1942-46 (Rev. 6-10) USDA Form RD 1940.1 REQUEST FOR OBLIGATION OF FUNDS (Rev.0640) FORM APPROVED OMS No. 0570.0062 INSTRUCTIONS -TYPE IN CAPITALIZED ELITE TYPE IN SPACES MARKED ( - ) Complete Items 1 through 29 and applicable Items 30 through 34. See FMI. I. CASE NUMBER LOAN NUMBER FISCAL YEAR ST CO BORROWER ID 61 -001 -*****0567 2. BORROWER NAME 3. NUMBER NAME FIELDS County of Hawaii I a. 1 ori%rewh. 4. AME Hawaii S. COUNTY NAME Hawaii GENERAL BORROWERILOAN INFORMATION G. RACE7iTHNIC 7. TYPE OF APPLICA�T 0. COLLATERAL CODE e. EMPLOYEE CLASSIFICATION 1- #-MDI 0 029tm -y I rATtt a. secupmI RELATI�NIP CODE - 4.NaFuwm n I.CAM0"Im L•NON11CM4 M110dED a* I-MAUUTe !•CHOPS MBIBIWFIIfiLY 2.11AClt S.AAI NNCOD s- r0 ASWMC A1r, I-man�g2 a.A llawTlle 4 7 oN!.WDILLlY 70. SEX CODE `: D otvltm 11. MARITAL STATUS iZ VETERAN CODE 13. CREDIT REPORT 6 t.tru e.OFlaw FeAwsotlt4iD I.1I4RI11E0 I !•YESi413 1 2•FBAYe f•rusucaotw 2-WAPAe0 401100riE00NORC601 7.040 2 210 14. DIRECT PAYMENT 16. TYPE OF PAYMENT 16, FEE INSPECTION (30FAM I•I010M1LLY 2-sexAm u*U1, rl 2-ANNNdIr 4.0{ymmy t -1'E6 2.040 2 1 1T COMMUNITY SIZE 1= OF FUNDS CODE I.M01001tt.M0 0'OH "AND i•tl,'lR 10,01! NF0014YI rE (�� COMPLETE FOR OBLIGATION OF FUNDS 1!. TYPE OF 20. PURPOSE CODE 21. SOURCE OF FUNDS 22. TYPE OF ACTION ASSISTANCE 069 �'°F""I 4 COLIGACIANCHEt otWnnDllaLLr �:DC0111 cnD CO alba 23. TYPE OF SUBMISSION 24. AMOUNT OF LOAN 25. AMOUNT OF GRANT t_. attw. 1$2.437,000.00 1$4,024,800.00 464360auo+r 1, 26. AMOUNT OF 27. DATE OF 28. INTEREST RAT@ REPAYMENT TERMS IMMEDIATE ADVANCE APPROVAL MO DAY YR 120. 2.1250 % 35 COMPLETE FOR COMMUNITY PROGRAM AND CERTAIN MULTIPLE•FAMLY HOUSING LOANS 30. PROFITTYPE 2.4oD1wt�anr - ,.Fti,{AFIIOIIf 2-NaNmm�r COMPLETE FOR EM LOANS ONLY COMPLETE FOR CREDIT 1SALE,ASSUMPTION 31. DISASTER DESIGNATION NUMBER 32. TYPE OF SALE M►nD4� 2-Alwl/w+oNtt.LY 1.AOWtIPTpNYHrN ,-CROTsa,�Y 21;t,aa1sO%Xv sUneoueNrlovl alelEareatA.a FINANCE OFFICE USE ONLY COMPLETE FOR FP LOANS ONLY 33. OBLIGATION DATE 34. BEGINNING FARMERIRANCHER MO DA YR (504 F40J q.rA,e,rw.wrrwAa..�wAhj...rn„Is1+lnw....A.Nr,.ro..rDrlwy2uD.4.wN.nr..nwi.,ctey,drwd.41..,.Mko... *4wwnwn.,ry.or.rn.nrr&wy.R.�.eq. Fr m..I. Ar*w w Am WWWArft p pam Position 2 ORIGINAL • Borrotwefs Case Folder COPY 1 -Finance Office COPY 2 - Applicant/Lender COPY 3 • State Office Amrft a*v,Ar nw*XAirrlt/..IR q/IWJ,a�awY,.w..r,wdaYw4w w.w/.pnr6 NO nl,rtadA�a{rd,b.rnlkr/Ir ofiy/.rwppr rrku nAkp4ps. mOdOAS rwnd.rM. n,'%W onA,w.I..k,,lY.,lt iyfrrneiAr e.O.rd.ibO!%O.Ol.1. TYrin.,l.bdwew74.r d.I ►lGw..w eofk,a" f,I.MIWA..1%, ,+rwAM2 A. AIvfw I V.$j *r2 hun,stio•% xwcM.tst.FO ewa.r.r. S.+h.r�j.wruf.reltri. Aen..r.wae. ,vr...�Mry.�.tp.1..A�gw.eM�Ma, dM�rrM. CERTIFICATION APPROVAL For All Farmtrs Programs EM, OL, FO, and SW Loans This loan is approved subject to the availability of funds. If this loan does not close for any reason within 90 days from the date of approval an this document, the approval official will request updated eligibility information. The undersigned loan applicant agrees that the approval official will lave 14 working days to review any updated information prior to submitting this document for obligation of funds. If there have been significant changes that may atTect eligibility, a decision as to eligibility and feasibility will be made within .10 days from the time the applicant provides the necessary information. If this is a loan approval for which a lien and/or title search is necessary, the undersigned applicant agrees that the 15-workiog-day loan closing requirement rosy be exceeded for the purposes of the applicant's legal representative completing title work and completing loan closing. 35. COMMENTS AND REQUIREMENTS OF CERTIFYING OFFICIAL Approval is subject to the availability of funds, legal requirements of USDA Rural Development's Regional Attorney, and the County of Hawaii's Department of Environmental Management's acceptance of the Letter of Conditions -dated August 13, 2013. 34. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that t am unable to obtain sufficient credit elsewhere to finance my actual needs at reasonable rates and tests, taking into consideration prevailing private and cooperative rates and terms in or near my community for loan, for similar purposes and periods of time. I agree to use the sutra specified herein, subject to and in accordance with regulations applicable to the type of assistance indicated above, and request payment of such sum. 11 agree to report to USDA any material adverse changes, financial or otherwise, that occur prior to ban closing. I certify that no part of the sum specified herein has been received. I have reviewed the lain approval requirements and comments associated with this loan request and agree to comply with these provisions. (For FP loans at eligible terms only) If this loan is approved. I elect the interest rata to be charged on my loan to be the lower of the interest rate in effect at the time of loan approval or loan clost. if I check'NO', the interest rate charged on my loan will be the rate specified in item 28 of this form YES NO WARNING: whoever, In any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsities, conceals or covers up by any trick scheme, or device a material fate, or makes any false, fktltlous or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the some to contain ane► false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined under this title or of more thapolve years, or both:' Date 2t) Date . 20 — (Signature of Applieoorl (9v-- ojCa-AppllcartU 37 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that all of the conunittee and administrative determinations and certifications required by regulations prerequisite to providing assistance of the type indicated above have been made and that evidence thereof is in the docket, and that all requirements of pertinent regulations have been complied with. I hereby approve the above-described assistance in the amount set forth above, and by this document, subject to the availability of binds. the Government agrees to advance such amount to the applicant for the purpose of and subject to the availability prescribed by regulations applicable to this type of assistance. Date Approved: Typed or Printed Name, CHRIS J. KANAZAWA Title: State Director (STgrrolerre of Approving offlcm11 38. TO THE APPLICANT: As of this date , this is notice that your application for financial assistance from the USDA has been approved, as indicated above, subject to the availability of funds and other conditions required by the USDA. 1f you have any questions contact the appropriate IISDA Servicing Office. USDA aal Development WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION The undersigned certifies that: 1. The organization is aware of and in compliance with other Federal statute requirements including, but not limited to: 2. The organization is unable to finance the proposed project from its own resources or through commercial credit at reasonable rates and terms. 3. The organization has no known relatives or close associates that are current USDA Rural Development employees. 4. Prior to USDA Rural Development approval, the organization will not take action (e.g., initiation of construction) or incur obligations which would limit the range of alternatives to be considered or which would have an adverse effect on the environment. County of Hawaii Department of Environmental Management Name of Organization a3 161� Sign ure ,#AutWorized Official Dam EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report Preliminary Engineering Report for Wastewater Facilities Name of Project: Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District Project Owner/Sponsor: County of Hawaii Department of Environmental Management Prepared By: Belt Collins Hawaii LLC With: PBR HAwAii & Associates, Inc. Goodwin Consulting Group Date PER Completed: June 13, 2012 (Updated August 1, 2012 for number of laterals and total project costs; Updated September 14, 2012 to revise annual budget) Date PER Submitted to USDA Rural Development: June 13, 2012 (Resubmitted August 2, 2012, September 14, 2012) Contents 1 General Information..............................................................................................................................1 1.1 Applicant/Borrower......................................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Financing...........................................................................................................................1 2 Project Area..........................................................................................................................................2 2.1 Location.........................................................................................................................................2 2.2 Land Use Designations..................................................................................................................2 2.3 Environmental Resources Present................................................................................................2 2.4 Growth Areas and Population Trends...........................................................................................5 2.4.1 Regional Population/Income Data........................................................................................ 5 2.4.2 Project Area Population and Wastewater Generation......................................................... 5 3 Existing Facilities...................................................................................................................................6 3.1 Region and Project Area Existing Wastewater Facilities...............................................................6 3.1.1 Kailua-Kona Sewer System..................................................................................................... 6 3.1.2 Project Area Existing Wastewater Facilities..........................................................................7 3.2 History .................................................................................................... ...................7 3.3 Condition of Facilities....................................................................................................................7 3.4 Financial Status of Any Existing Facilities......................................................................................7 4 Need for the Project..............................................................................................................................7 4.1 Health, Sanitation, and Security....................................................................................................7 4.2 System O&M................................................................................................................................. 8 4.3 Growth.......................................................................................................................................... 8 5 Alternatives Considered........................................................................................................................8 5.1 Alternative 1: No Action / Maintain Status quo..........................................................................8 5.1.1 Description............................................................................................................................ 8 5.1.2 Design Criteria.......................................................................................................................8 5.1.3 Map.......................................................................................................................................8 5.1.4 Environmental Impacts.........................................................................................................8 5.1.5 Land Requirements...............................................................................................................8 5.1.6 Construction Problems..........................................................................................................8 5.1.7 Cost Estimates.......................................................................................................................8 5.1.8 Advantages/Disadvantages...................................................................................................9 5.2 Alternative 2: Gravity Sewer System............................................................................................9 5.2.1 Description............................................................................................................................ 9 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 5.2.2 Design Criteria.......................................................................................................................9 5.2.3 Map.......................................................................................................................................9 5.2.4 Environmental Impacts.........................................................................................................9 5.2.5 Land Requirements...............................................................................................................9 5.2.6 Construction Problems..........................................................................................................9 5.2.7 Cost Estimates.....................................................................................................................10 5.3 Alternative 3: No Easements......................................................................................................10 5.3.1 Description..........................................................................................................................10 5.3.2 Design Criteria.....................................................................................................................10 5.3.3 Map.....................................................................................................................................10 5.3.4 Environmental Impacts.......................................................................................................10 5.3.5 Land Requirements.............................................................................................................10 5.3.6 Construction Problems........................................................................................................10 5.3.7 Cost Estimates.....................................................................................................................11 5.3.8 Advantages/Disadvantages.................................................................................................11 5.4 Alternative 4: No Private Sewage Pumps..................................................................................11 5.4.1 Description.......................................................................................................................... 11 5.4.2 Design Criteria.....................................................................................................................11 5.4.3 Map.....................................................................................................................................11 5.4.4 Environmental Impacts.......................................................................................................11 5.4.5 Land Requirements.............................................................................................................11 5.4.6 Construction Problems........................................................................................................11 5.4.7 Cost Estimates.....................................................................................................................12 5.4.8 Advantages/Disadvantages.................................................................................................12 6 Selection of an Alternative..................................................................................................................12 7 Proposed Project (Recommended Alternative)..................................................................................12 7.1 Project Design.............................................................................................................................12 7.1.1 Collection System Layout....................................................................................................12 7.1.2 Pumping Stations................................................................................................................13 7.1.3 Treatment...........................................................................................................................13 7.2 Total Project Cost Estimate.........................................................................................................13 7.3 Annual Operating Budget...........................................................................................................16 7.3.1 Income................................................................................................................................16 7.3.2 Operation and Maintenance Costs.....................................................................................17 7.3.3 Debt Service........................................................................................................................18 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 7.3.4 Net Income (or Deficit).......................................................................................................19 Conclusionsand Recommendations...................................................................................................19 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report I General Information This preliminary engineering report (PER) is in support of a proposal to construct wastewater system improvements within the Lono Kona Subdivision funded through the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Rural Development (RD), Rural Utilities Water and Waste Disposal Loan and Grant Program. Several landowners within Lono Kona have received violation notices from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for their continued use of large -capacity cesspools. Cesspool leachate has the potential to contaminate the groundwater and Kailua Bay. The project offers a cost-effective solution to replace cesspools with a sanitary sewer system. This PER describes the present situation, analyzes alternatives, and proposes a specific course of action from an engineering perspective following the format specified by the USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service, October 2003). This document has been prepared concurrently with an Environmental Report (PBR Hawaii & Associates, Inc., 2012) in order to consider environmental issues as part of the engineering analysis. Pertinent findings from that environmental review have been incorporated or referenced in this document. 1.1 Applicant/ Borrower The Applicant/Borrower is a public body, the County of Hawaii, Department of Environmental Management: Address: 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, HI 96720 County. Hawaii Contact Person: Dora Beck Contact Person's Title: Acting Director Contact Telephone Number. 808-961-8028 Contact Fax Number: 808-961-8644 Contact E-mail Address: dbeck@co.hawaii.hi.us 1.2 Project Financing The property owners connecting to the proposed sewer system will be responsible to pay for the Project development costs. To assist with the financing, the County has applied to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development, Rural Utilities Water and Waste Disposal loan and grant program. The program offers below-market interest rates, amortization periods longer than conventional loans, and the possibility of grants to partially subsidize the costs. The County has initiated the process to establish an Improvement District whereby the assessments collected would be used to repay the loan. The lien powers under an Improvement District provide an enforceable means to address delinquencies. The County will guarantee loan repayment to USDA by way of a reimbursable General Obligation bond authorized through the Improvement District process. Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engneenng Report Z Project Area 2.1 Location The Lono Kona Subdivision is located in Kailua-Kona, ahupuaa of Keopu 2"d, Keopu 3rd, and Honuau la, North Kona District, island and County of Hawaii ("Project Area") (see Figure 1). This subdivision was created in 1962 (Subdivision No. 692-A), prior to the construction of the Kailua-Kona Sewer System. The Project Area includes various Tax Max Key parcels within Zone 7, Section 5. The Project Area includes parcels that were studied for potential sewer connection. The alternative sewer plans described herein would serve 110 parcels within the Project Area. The Latitude/Longitude of the Project Area is approximately bounded by: 19 deg 38 min 35 sec; 155 deg 59 min 16 sec 19 deg 38 min 29 sec; 155 deg 59 min 05 sec 19 deg 38 min 22 sec; 155 deg 59 min 13 sec 19 deg 38 min 15 sec; 155 deg 59 min 25 sec 19 deg 38 min 28 sec; 155 deg 59 min 30 sec 2.2 Land Use Designations The Project Area is located in the vicinity of the Kailua-Kona Village core. The State and County land use designations for the Project Area reflect the higher -density urban character. A church and Salvation Army community center border the higher -density residential area on land designated as Agricultural. The Project Area land use designations are as follows: State Land Use Districts: Urban with a small portion in the Agricultural District County General Plan (LUPAG Map): Medium Density Urban County Zoning: Double -Family Residential (RD -3.75), Multi -Family Residential (RM -1), Single - Family Residential (RS -7.5), and Agricultural (A -5a) Special Management Area (SMA): outside the SMA. The Environmental Report (PBR Hawaii & Associates, Inc., 2012) has maps of the land use designations. 2.3 Environmental Resources Present The Environmental Report found no endangered or threatened species within the Project Area. If the Hawaiian hawk is observed in the vicinity during construction, the Environmental Report includes mitigation measures to minimize impacting that species. There are no archaeological or cultural resources within the areas directly impacted by construction—i.e., the rights-of-way and easements where the sewer lines would be constructed and the vacant lots that are potential construction staging areas (see Figure 2 for a map of the Area of Potential Effect). There are no wetlands, streams, or other sensitive resources within the Project Area. A 100 -year flood zone traverses through the Project Area, but since the Project consists entirely of subsurface improvements, there would be no effect on overland flood patterns. The Environmental Report verified these findings through consultations with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, State Historic Preservation Office, and the Army Corps of Engineers. Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Prepminary Engineering Repot M r"", 74 Figure I. Lo"tion MaP !„EG NP Wastewater Treatment Plant North Kona Sewerage System Project Area ton* Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 INUNIM AO" - Figure 2. Area of Potential Effi;--t I-Vtl(J f%V11d OUWUU 11111JUVWMWIL UlIbLURA ft 41 S F--L-J--L-J--------IF.d 0 VO 340 680 Cwtstruction staging expected to 000v on one, or rnore vacant 10 parcels, at the, contractor's discretion Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 Legend © Exhifiric Sewer Manhole — ExiMing Sewer Main 0 New Sewer manhols New s~ Easement, lo-twide New Sewer Win Vaunt 10 Parcels - R*A-#ct94 Staging Area Nveh;;WO, Nrow's A*ded Rights or Yvay EXHIBIT D. Preliminary Engineering Repart 4 2.4 Growth Areas and Population Trends 2A,1 Regional Population/Income Data The Project Area is located within census tract 216.01 and Kailua Census Designated Place (CDP). The 20DO population for the Kailua CDP is 9,870. Relative to the entire County, the Kailua CDP has a comparable median age of 36.5, less seniors over age 65, slightly larger household size, and diverse ethnicity. The median household income for the State nonmetropolitan areas, County, census tract, and CDP are as follows: 91.4,21 Project Area Population and Wastelwater Generation The population within the Project Area was estimated using the wastewater generation assumptions as follows: Single-family dwelling: 4 capita/unit Duplex: 4 capita/unit Apartment: 2.8capita/unit Based on these assumptions, the Project Area's existing population is approximately 1,100. The projected population if built out to the entitled zoning is 2,470 persons. The projected average wastewater generation for this maximum population is 138,110 gpd (see Appendix A for wastewater generation calculations). Lon* Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 3 Existing Facilities .1 Region and Project Area Existing Wastewater Facilities 8.1.1 Kailua-Kona Sewer System The planning area for the County's Kailua-Kona Sewer System includes a northern zone, extending approximately 8 miles from Keahole Point to Kaiiva Bay, and a southern zone extending approximately 4 miles from Kaiiva Bay to Kahaluu Bay (R.M. Towill Corporation, April 1981). The existing collection system services a portion of this northern and southern zone planning area, extending from Kealakehe to Laaloa (see Figure 3). The County completed the first sewer system serving Kailua-Kona in 1985 with a treatment plant capacity of 0.3 mgd. A 19+68 wastewater master plan recommended separate wastewater systems for the northern and southern zone, and the treatment plant was expanded to 1.0 mgd based on the plan. A 1981 supplement to the areawide plan recommended that the most cost-effective system is one central treatment plant serving bath zones. The plan also recommended relocating the existing treatment plant from an industrial area that received complaints from neighbors to the current location of the treatment plant on State land near Honokohau Harbor, referred to as the Kealakehe' Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Figure S. Kali a- rsna Sewer System The Kealakehe WWTP was built as a 5.3 mgd secondary treatment lagoon system with the intent that the primary means of effluent disposal would be reuse as irrigation water. Due to economic and legal complications, the Kealakehe Golf Course which was the major user of the reclaimed water, was never built. R-2 quality effluent has been available for reuse since the WWTP started operations in 1993, but has been disposed in a temporary sump where it seeps into the ground (Brown & Caldwell, February 1999). Loner Kana Sewer Improvement District PER 6 September 14, 2012 The County has plans to upgrade the treatment facilities to meet R-1 reclaimed water standards and to expand the distribution system for this higher quality reclaimed water to a potentially greater number of users. 3.1.2 Project Area Existing Wastewater Facilities Within the Project Area, the existing method of wastewater disposal is by onsite methods—i.e., cesspools or septic systems. 3.2 History The Lono Kona subdivision was created in 1962, prior to the first section of the Kailua-Kona Sewer System installed by the County in 1965. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations required all large capacity cesspools to be replaced by an alternative wastewater system by April 5, 2005. EPA started issuing violation notices to property owners within the Project Area in 2010. 3.3 Condition of Facilities The condition of the sewer lines to which the Project will connect are in good condition. The Kealakehe Treatment Plant has adequate capacity to handle the sewage from the Project Area. Some septic tanks in the Project Area are known to have odor problems. There are no known performance problems associated with the existing cesspools in the Project Area, notwithstanding their potential contamination of the groundwater and nearshore waters. 3.4 Financial Status of Any Existing Facilities The County collects sewer service charges to fund operation and maintenance expenses, fixed costs (e.g., debt service, construction costs), and equipment replacement. The sewer charge revenues and expenditures are accounted for in a separate sewer fund established pursuant to Hawaii County Code section 21-34. Past audits have not raised any concerns with the sewer fund. The audited financial statement for fiscal year ending June 30, 2011 is in Appendix B. 4 Need for the Project 4.1 Health, Sanitation, and Security The untreated cesspool leachates have a high potential to contaminate groundwater, especially in the highly permeable lava rock substrate of the area. Since the Project Area is within the Critical Wastewater Disposal Zone established by the Department of Health for areas near the shoreline, there is a high probability for the contaminated groundwater to seep into the nearshore coastal waters. To stem further water quality degradation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banned large capacity cesspools pursuant to the Underground Injection Control provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act.l Several property owners within the Project Area have received violation notices from EPA. The purpose of the Project is to prevent further water quality degradation from cesspools in the most cost-effective means and comply with EPA requirements. 1 EPA defines a cesspool to be a `large -capacity cesspool" as follows: Residential multiple -dwelling, community, or regional systems (e.g., townhouse complexes or apartment buildings) that dispose of sanitary waste, or Non- residential cesspools that have the capacity to serve 20 or more persons per day (e.g., rest areas or churches) if the cesspools receive solely sanitary waste. Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September l4, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 4.2 System O&M The Project is not intended to rectify any operation or maintenance problems of the Kailua-Kona Sewer System. 4.3 Growth The Project is intended to address existing wastewater disposal deficiencies. The driving need for the Project is public health and not to enable future growth. The Project Area is 86% built out (based on the number of lots) with 16 vacant parcels. Future development of these vacant parcels could proceed even without the Project using onsite septic or treatment plant systems. 5 Alternatives Considered 5.1 Alternative 1: No Action J Maintain Status Quo 5.1.1 Description No action consists of no sewer improvements and continued reliance on onsite wastewater disposal methods consisting of an Individual Wastewater System (IWS) or package plant wastewater treatment. State law stipulates each IWS system is limited to 1,000 gallons per day, and requires 10,000 square feet of usable land. The majority of the properties are less than 10,000 square feet, and would therefore, not be able to replace their nonconforming cesspool with an onsite septic system. 5.1.2 Design Criteria None (no new system to design). 5.1.3 Map None. 5.1.4 Environmental Impacts Without the Project, those who received EPA violation notices would immediately have to install an approved wastewater system— i.e., either a septic system or private wastewater treatment plant. The cost for a septic system or a private treatment plant is greater than the Project costs to the property owner. EPA would impose a time limit for compliance, and penalties for noncompliance. For property owners with cesspools that do not meet the definition of a "large capacity cesspool', the cesspools can legally remain. However, the potential to contaminate the groundwater and nearshore waters would persist. 5.1.5 Land Requirements None. 5.1.6 Construction Problems None (no construction). 5.1.7 Cost Estimates Those landowners with large -capacity cesspools would need to expend approximately $40,000 to construct an IWS for disposal of 1,000 gallons per day of sewage. Multiple IWS may be installed provided adequate usable land is available. Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Prelinkary Engineering Report 5.1.8 Advantages/Disadvantages Advantages of Alternative 1: The landowners would not have to pay Improvement District assessments or monthly sewer charges. There would be no construction impacts that would have been caused by the construction of the sewer system. Disadvantages of Alternative 1: Landowners who received EPA large -capacity cesspool violation notices would have to immediately comply and/or face penalties. Cesspools for single-family residences would continue to potentially contaminate the groundwater and near shore coastal waters. 5.2 Alternative 2: Gravity Sewer System 5.2.1 Description Construct a gravity sewer collection system within the existing road rights of way and easements through private properties. The sewer system consists of 8 -inch and 10 -inch sewer mains with sewer manholes and sewer laterals extending up to each individual property identified in the improvement district. The collection system ultimately connects to the County's trunk sewer in Hualalai Road. The sewer is located at sufficient depth to allow the majority of individual properties to conned entirely by gravity. Five properties are significantly lower in elevation than the fronting roadways and will be required to install, operate, and maintain their own sewage pump to connect to the gravity system. 5.2.2 Design Criteria Design of the sewer system will follow the "Design Standards of the Department of Wastewater Management," City and County of Honolulu, July 1993. 5.2.3 Map See Alternative 2 preliminary design in Appendix C. 5.2.4 Environmental Impacts No long term significant impacts are anticipated. There will be mitigable short-term impacts in terms of noise and dust during construction. 5.2.5 Land Requirements The majority of the system is located in existing public rights of ways. Easements through 5 private properties are required. These parcels are located at the downstream end of the sewer collection system and must be crossed to gain access to the County sewer in Hualalai Road. 5.2.6 Construction Problems Construction is anticipated to be routine for the Kona area. Typical construction challenges faced include trench excavation through hard basalt and the potential of uncovering lava tubes/underground cavities. Excavation in hard basalt is commonly accomplished using heavy equipment and hoe ram; production rates are slow and costly. The risk of uncovering a lava tube increases with the depth of excavation. Once uncovered, the standard practice is to collapse the unstable sections of the lava tube, and backfill with engineered material to fill the void. Lava tubes vary in size from inches in diameter, to tens of feet, and can extend laterally for hundreds of feet. Construction projects within 5 miles of the improvement district have uncovered lava tubes large enough to drive a school bus through. Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 5.2.7 Cost Estimates The opinion of probable construction cost for Alternate 2 is $5,500,000, excluding the cost of easement acquisition. An allowance is included for stabilizing and backfilling lava tubes. See Appendix C for a detailed breakdown.Advantages/Disadvantages Advantages of Alternative 2: Alternative 2 provides an all gravity public sewer serving the majority of properties in the improvement district. The sewer line depths are at or near the minimum required, thereby minimizing the risk exposure to uncovering lava tubes. Disadvantages of Alternative 2: The gravity sewer is unable to serve all properties in the improvement district without the need for sewage pumps. Approximately five properties are lower than the sewer main and will require installation of a sewage pump to connect to the County sewer system. Alternative 2 also impacts private landowners with the creation of sewer easements through vacant parcels. 5.3 Alternative 3: No Easements 5.3.1 Description To eliminate the easements required for the all gravity system in Alternative 2, two sewage pumping stations (SPS) are required within the improvement district. These SPSs are boated on lower ends of Lamaokeola Street and Alahou Street. The gravity collection system within the public right of way remains largely similar to the Alternative 2 layout. Two sewer force mains will connect each SPS to the gravity main in Kalani Street. An additional reach of gravity sewer along Kalani Street between Kuakini Highway and Alahou Street is required. The system will connect to the County trunk sewer at the intersection of Kalani Street and Kuakini Highway. 5.3.2 Design Criteria Design of the sewer system will follow the "Design Standards of the Department of Wastewater Management," City and County of Honolulu, July 1993. 5.3.3 Map See Alternative 3 schematic layout in Appendix D. 5.3.4 Environmental Impacts The electrical requirements to operate the pump stations result in a larger ecological footprint for the alternative compared to the all -gravity alternative. The air and ambient noise quality for the adjacent residential units will be impacted by the day to day operation of the pumping station. Sewage pumps and electric generators are sources of noise. Odors may be noticed as the SPS does not operate continuously. Sewage will collect and sit in the SPS wet well until pumped to the Kalani Street sewer. 5.3.5 Land Requirements Land acquisition would be necessary for 2 treatment plants totaling approximately 0.4 acres. 2012 tax assessment values for these properties total $310,100. 5.3.6 Construction Problems The anticipated construction problems are similar to those stated in section 5.2.6. Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER 10 September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 5.3.7 Cast Estimates The opinion of probable construction cost for Alternate 3 is $8,S ODO, excluding the co of ac410isi On of private properties. An allowance is included for stabilizing and backfilling lava tubes. See Appendix D for a detailed breakdown. 5.3.8 Advantages/Disadvantages Advantages of Alternative 3: Alterative 3 will not require creation of easements across p property. An advantage from the standpoint of the commercial landowners, the elimination of the gravity sus In ea10►Onts wow relieve the adjacent commercial properties from connecting to the County system, and instead allow those parcels to continue to rely upon their legal septic system. Disadvantages of Alternative 3. The construction and operational costs would be the highest of all alternatives. This alternative also has the largest ecological footprint due to the energy requirements to operate the pump stations. The SPS will become an ongoing operation and maintenance expense to the County. This option requires the acquisition of 2 private properties, Though currently vacate, the maximum potential of these properties will not be fully realized. Because the adjacent commercial owners do not have to conned a disadvantage from the standpoint of the improvement district participants is the number of riles potentially serviced by the sewer improvement is reduced thereby increasing the shame of the rei maining patrticiparr ,4 Alternative 4. No Private Sewage Pumps 5.4.2 Description This ally system would have the same layout as Alternative 2, but the hwe t for portions of the system would be lowered so that the lowest properties would not have to install sewagepumps. 5.4.2 Design Criteria Design of the sewer system will follow the "Design Standards of the Department of Wastewater Management," City and County of Honolulu, July 1993. 5.4.3 Map The schematic layout would be identical to Alternative 2 but with a different profile. 5.4.4 Environmental Impacts Deeper trenches would be required resulting in greater expenditure of anergy and increased potential to breach lava tubes. There would likely be increased duration of construction none. 5.4.5 Lance Requirements The land requirements are similar to those stated in section 5.2.5. 5.4.6 Construction Problems The anticipated construction problems are similar to those stated in section 5.2.6. The increased depth of trench excavation magnifies the i isk'of uncovering a lava tube. Lona Kona sewer Improvement District PER 11 September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Prdkmmy EnOWWV Remi 5.4.7 Cost Estimates The opinion of probable construction cost for Alternate 4 is $6,000,000, excluding the cost of easement acquisition. An increased allowance is included for stabilizing and backfilling lava tubes, traffic control, and trench excavation. See Appendix E for a detailed breakdown, 5.4.8 Advantages/ Disadvantages Advantages of Alternative 4: The 5 landowners who would have had to install sewage pumps in Alternative 2 would be relieved from that financial and operational burden. Disadvantages of Alternative 4: The total costs increase for all users. Impacts during construction increase due to deeper trenching. 6 Selection of an Alternative If the landowners reject the Improvement District, the no -action (Alternative 1) will be the only alternative by default. Of the three sewer alternatives, Alternative 2 has the lowest present worth cost and, hence, the recommended alternative. The present worth factors the initial capital costs, operation and maintenance costs, replacement costs, and salvage value (if any) over the life cycle of the sewer system (see Appendix F for detailed present worth calculation). Life Cycle (Years) Sewer Lines, Manholes, Laterals, Etc. 50 so So Sewer Pump Stations, Generators, Etc. Initial Capital Cost $5,500,000 S85W,000 Replacement Cost, Every 15 Years $2,400,000 Salvage Value so so $0 Annual Operation & Maintenance Costs Sewer Lines, Manholes, Laterals, Etc. $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 Sewer Pump Stations, Generators, Etc. $6,150 Annual Cost Escalation (Constant $ Analysis) 0.00% 0.000/0 0.000/0 "Real" Discount Rate for Present Worth 2.00% 2.00% 2.0011/6 Present Worth $5,947,000 $13,090,000 S6,437,PTJ 7 Proposed Project (Recommended Alternative) 7.1 Project Design /.1.1 Collection System Layout The Recommended Alternative ("Project") consists of approximately 5,640 linear feet of 8 -inch sewer pipe, 360 linear feet of 10 -inch sewer pipe, 34 sewer manholes, sewer laterals to 110 parcels, and restoration of roadway pavements. Eight -inch sewer lines would be installed on Alahou Street, Lamaokeola Street, Alakai Street, Alanoe Place, Kalani Street Ala Onaona Street, and in some private properties. The 10 -inch portion Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER 12 September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engirw3ering Report low, would be installed in Hualalai Road and connect to an existing 30 -inch line in Kuakini Highway (see Alternative 2 layout in Appendix C). M The Project requires acquisition of land for sewer line easements. These easements are 10' wide located in the zoning setback portions of the affected properties where structures would not be allowed. The total land area required for the easements is approximately 0.26 acres. The estimated land cost based on tax assessed values is $200,000, conservatively assuming fee simple values. 7.12 PumpingStations The Project does not require pump stations. 7.1.3 Treatment The Project will not have any treatment components but will be part of the County's Kailua-Kona Sewer System that conveys the sewage to the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant. 7.2 Total Project Cost Estimate The total project cost—including design, construction, financing, and land costs—is $6,4 million, detailed as follows: This total project cost translates to the user as an Improvement District assessment. The assessment is calculated by dividing the total project costs by the total single family equivalent (SFE) to determine the cost per SFE. The number of SFEs per parcel is based on land use and is proportional to the estimated Lono Kona Sewer improvement District PER 13 September 14, 2012 wastewater generation. At a total cost of $6.4 million divided by the total SFEs at 248, the cost per SFE is $25,828. The Improvement District assessment enables the user to spread the payment over 35 years. At an assumed interest rate of $3,75% per annum, the monthly cost per SFE would be $121. In addition to the monthly assessment cost, the user would also have to pay a monthly sewer charge. For residential uses, the monthly sewer charge is currently $27 per month. Therefore, for a single family dwelling, the total monthly cost would be $148 ($121 + $27). The total monthly cost for the range of land uses in the Project Area is as follows: Single Family Unit $1,458 $121 $27 $148 Duplex Unit $1,021 $85 $27 $112 Apartment Unit $1,021 $85 $27 $112 Commercial TMKs 7-5-004:036 & 7-5-004:047 $4,703 $392 $39 $431 TMK 7-5-004:048 $6,573 $548 $39 $587 TMK 7-5-004:949 $7,140 $595 $39 $634 Other TMK 7-5-003:022 $20,434 $1,703 $2,140 $3,843 TMK 7-5-003:025 $9,066 $756 $281 $1,037 1 Existing monthly sewer charges for Commercial and Other uses are based on average daily water consumption of 17,700 gallons for TMK 7-5-003:022, 2,400 gallons for TMK 7-5-003:025, and 400 gallons per commercial parcel for TMK 7.5-003.036 and 7-5-003:47 through 7-5-003-.649, Source: Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. The total project cost allocated by land use would be as follows (see Figure 4 for a land use map): Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 14 9 Source. Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. Fi;w* 4. Existing Und We The assessment covers the user's capital cost for the sewer system. Other capital costs that the user would have to pay on their own include the cost to connect to the lateral and close their existing onsite system. luno Kona Sewer Improvement District PER 15 September 14, 2012 I aa; 11 -ms SR&T,-7, 7.3 Annual Operating Budget This section analyzes the income and expenses related to the operation of the recommended system. 7.3.1 Income The sources of income include an improvement district assessment and sewer charges. The improvement district assessment will pay the debt service to finance the design, construction, and improvement district establishment and administration. The Improvement District assessment will be set by ordinance pursuant to Hawaii County Code chapter 12. The sewer charges flow directly Into a special Sewer Fund to finance the operation and maintenance of the County sewer system (see Appendix 6 for the Sewer Fund budget). Hawaii County Code chapter 21 sets forth the legal basis for the sewer charges and Sewer Fund. The sewer charges pursuant to section 21-36.1 are as follows: WASTEWATER SERVICE CHARGE RATE USER CATEGORY Eflecttve lftte* 7/011971 1/01198 7/01/00 7/01102 A. Single Unit Residential: S 25.00 $ 26.00 S 27.00 1. Monthly charge per unit B. Multi -Unit Residential: 1. Monthly base rate charge per unit 25.00 26.00 27.00 C, Nonivsidential: 1. Monthly base rate charge per unit 20.00 20.00 21.00 22.00 2. Mouthlyusage char per 1,000 gallons (after the first 8,000 83110115) per unit 3.55 3.55 3.80 4.05 D. Private Haulers Discharge f t -C 1. Discharge fee per 500 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 gallons or acfioa thereof 2. Mininuun charge per load 30,00 30-00 30-00 30-001 E. Gang Cesspools - I . Monthly chap per unit 15.00 1 11.5.00 07/01/03 07101/05 07/01107 F. Recycled Water: 1. Distribution charge per 1,000 1.00 1.20 1.20 gallons or fraction thereof I I Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14,2012 EXHBrr D: Ptab4sary Erowmerkv Report 16 The total monthly and annual income from the combined sources is summed in the table below. Improvement District Assessment Sewer Charges Monthly Rate EEDUs Income Notes 121.50 248.0 30,132-00 Residential 27.00 215.5 5,818-50 Nonflesidential Commercial 12.6 117.00 Assumes 400 gpd for four commercial parcels I Assumes 17,700 gpd for one parcel and 2.400 gpd Other 20.2 21421.00 for the other TOTAL MONTHLY 1 38,488.50 TOTAL ANNUAL 1 461,862-00 7.3.2 Operation and Maintenance Costs Since the recommended system is a gravity system, there are no short-lived assets. The O&M costs attributable to the Lono Kona gravity sewer system are distinguished from the system costs allocated to Lono Kona for conveyance, treatment, and disposal in the following table: Itern tono %of* Cos't 5y!"C414ta TOTAL - Labor (including fringes) 13,412 29,883 43,295 Electricity 19,610 19,610 Other Utilities 549 549 Chemicals 544 544 Maintenance & Repair 1,498 1,729 3,227 Vehicles - Oper, Maint, & Repair 381 774 1,155 General & Administrative 2,709 9,407 12,116 TOTAL ANNUAL 18,000 62,496 80,496 TOTAL MONTHLY 1,500 5,208 6,708 EDUS 248 248 248 Cost/EDU/month 6 21 27 Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2612 17 7.3.3 Debt Service The RD loan would be secured by a General Obligation bond ("G.O. Bond") and not an Improvement District bond. Since a G.O. Bond is backed by the County to cover the debt service on the GO bond, and the County will simply get reimbursed through the Improvement District for the debt service it pays, a debt service reserve is not necessary, For previous similar RD Loans for water improvement districts in this County, no debt service reserve was required. =171711-1 11 Mobilization $846,000 Demolition $1,500 Sewer System $1,920,800 Paving Restoration $1,440,000 Backfill of Lava Tubes $250,000 Hualalai Road Tie-in $50,000 Easement Costs $200,000 Subtotal $4,708,300 Contingency (20%) $941,700 Total Construction Cost Other Costs $5,650,000 Feasibility Study $185,300 Design $285,000 Reserve Fund (Mot Required) $0 Legal Fees $75,000 ID Formation $50,000 Misc (3% of Construction Cast) $169,500 Total Other Costs $764,800 Total development Costs $6,414,900 Loan Required $6,414,900 Interest 3,75% Amortization Term 35 Annual Debt Service 332,100 Annual Administration $30,000 Total Annual Cost $362,100 EDUs 248 Cost/EDU $ 1,460.08 Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 18 7.3.4 Net Income (or Deficit) Based on the preceding Income and Costs presented, the Project would have a positive cashflow. Income Monthly Amount Improvement District Assessment 30,132.00 Sewer Charges 8,356.50 Subtotal -Income 38.488.50 Costs O&M 6,708.00 Debt Service 27,675.00 Admin/Reserve 2,500.00 Subtotal -Costs 36,883.00 Net Income (Deficit) 1,605.50 8 Conclusions and Recommendations The Project Area currently disposes wastewater primarily by onsite cesspools with a few septic systems. Since the Project Area is within the Critical Wastewater Disposal Zone established by the Department of Health for areas near the shoreline, there is a high probability that the untreated cesspool leachates seep into the groundwater and nearshore coastal waters. Several property owners within the Project Area have received large -capacity cesspool violation notices from EPA. Without the Project, the landowners would have to replace the large -capacity cesspools with septic systems or private treatment plants. Because of the higher density zoning of the Project Area, many of the lots do not have the size to accommodate the required onsite system. For the parcels that can accommodate an onsite system, the cost for the onsite systems coupled with the need to pay lump sum or find private financing makes this onsite alternative not as cost-effective as the Project. Upon reviewing alternative sewer designs, the Project is the recommended alternative since it has the lowest capital and operational costs. The Project is an all -gravity system. This alternative will require acquisition of easements, and five lots lower than the road will have to install private sewage pumps. While lowering the line (Alternative 4) eliminates the need for private sewage pumping, it comes at a 9% premium over the recommended alternative to the benefit of only 5 properties (2 of which are vacant). The capital cost for the Project would be financed through an Improvement District that enables the users to pay for the Project cost amortized over 35 years. The Project Area is one of the few pockets of affordable housing within the vicinity of the Kailua Village core. Funding provided by the USDA loan and grant program could further reduce the monthly cost to keep this area affordable. Lono Kone Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 19 bl%rks Cited Brown & Caldwell. (February 1999). Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant: Effluent Reuse Master Plan. Prepared for the County of Hawaii Department of Public Works. PBR Hawaii & Associates, Inc. (2012). Environmental Report: Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District. Prepared for the County of Hawaii Department of Environmental Management. R.M. Towill Corporation. (April 1981). Kailua-Kona Sewerage System, Phase IV (Northern Zone). Prepared for the County of Hawaii Department of Public Works. U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service. (October 2003). Bulletin 1780-3: Preliminary Engineering Report- Wastewater Facilities. Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District PER September 14, 2012 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 20 Appendix A: Wastewater Generation Calculation EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report (This page intentionally left blank) EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report PROJECT: Lono Kona Sewer PER JOB NO: 201233,0300 CLIENT- PBR / DEM DATE 20 -Mar -12 SUBJECT: Wastewater Generation - Design Basis BY: is FILE MALono KoAIU0 12330100 KP,\Design\Calcuhkdonsl(Wastewater GenerationxlsjByTMK 375003022 B A-58 T06 307359 n1a n/al' 491 4403 375003025 B A -5a 231 117917 n1a Wa° 158 19W 375003026 A RS -7,5 1.11 48395 6 4 24 1920 375004035 D RWI 180 165441 165 2-8 462 36960 375004036 E CV -7.5 0.19 8385 Wa n/6' 106 53[1 375004047 E CV -7,5 0-28 12180 rda ftla{ 48 240 375004048 E CV -7.5 0,34 14928 n(a nlfa{ 33 465 375W4049 E CV -7.5 0.50 21750 Na 40 19 1520 375004050 E CV -7,5 0,20 8869 Na 40 8 640 375004051 E CV -75 0-29 12728 Na 40 11 880 375022053 F RM -1 0.52 22499 22 18 62 4960 375022056 F RM -1 019 8372 8 2.8 23 1840 3750221159 F RMA 0,19 8311 8 2.8 23 1840 375022060 F RM -1 0.37 16061 16 2-8 45 3600 375022062 F RMA 0A7 7501 7 2.8 20 1600 375022063 F RM -1 0A7 7501 7 2-8 20 16W 375022064 F RM -1 017 7501 7 2.8 20 1600 375022071 D RM -1 0.17 7501 7 2.8 20 1600 375022076 c RM -1 0.39 16919 16 2-8 45 3600 375022078 c RD -3.75 0,18 7680 2 4 8 640 375022079 c RD -375 0.20 8834 2 4 8 640 375022080 c RD -3,75 0.21 9104 2 4 8 640 375022081 c RD -3.75 0,18 7658 2 4 8 640 375022082 c RD -175 0-20 8599 2 4 8 640 375022083 c RD -3-75 0,18 7758 2 4 8 640 375022084 c RD -375 0,22 9540 2 4 8 640 375022085 c RD -3-75 0A7 7610 2 4 8 640 375022086 c RD -175 0.18 7950 2 4 8 640 375022087 c RD -3,75 0A8 7701 2 4 8 M 375022088 c RD -3.75 0-18 7701 2 4 a 640 375022099 c RD -3-75 0-18 7967 2 4 8 640 375022090 c RD -3-75 0,19 8072 2 4 8 640 375022091 D RD -335 017 7527 2 4 8 640 375022092 D RD -3.75 0-17 7553 2 4 8 640 375022093 D RD -3.75 0,18 7893 2 4 8 640 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report PROJECT- Lono Kona Sewer PER JOB NO: 2012-33.0300 CLIENT_ PBR / DEM DATE-- 20 -Mar -12 SUBJECT: Wastewater Generation - Design Basis By. jc FILE: MALono Kona12012330300 PEP,\Design\Calculations\[Wastewater Generation.)ds]ByTMK 375022094 D RD -175 0.18 7810 2 4 8 640 375022095 D RD -3-75 0A8 7941 2 4 a 640 375022096 D RD -3.75 0,19 8150 2 4 8 640 375022097 D RD -3,75 0-18 7989 2 4 8 640 375022098 D RD -3-75 0.19 8320 2 4 8 640 375022099 D RD -3-75 0,19 8455 2 4 8 640 375022100 D RD -335 0.19 8438 2 4 8 640 375022101 D RD -175 019 8481 2 4 8 640 3750?_2102 D RD -3.75 0.19 8381 2 4 a 640 375022103 B RD -3-75 CiAg 8337 2 4 8 640 375022104 B RD -3-75 0-19 8364 2 4 8 640 375022105 c RD -3.75 0.20 8668 2 4 8 640 375022106 c RD -3-75 0.23 9940 2 4 8 640 375022107 c RD -3-75 0,20 8577 2 4 a 640 375022108 c RD -3-75 0.18 7680 2 4 8 640 375022109 c RD -3-75 0,18 7680 2 4 8 640 375022110 c RD -3.75 0.18 7680 2 4 8 640 375022111 c RD -375 0.18 7680 2 4 8 640 375022112 c RD -3-75 0,18 7680 2 4 8 640 375022113 c RD -175 0.18 7680 2 4 a 640 375022114 c RM -1 0.20 8634 a 2.8 23 1840 375022115 B RM -1 0.18 7950 7 2.8 20 1600 375022116 B RD -3-75 0.18 7680 2 4 8 640 375022117 B RD -3-75 0.18 7680 2 4 a 640 375022118 B RD -3-75 018 7680 2 4 8 640 375022119 B RD -335 0.18 7680 2 4 8 640 375022120 B RD -375 018 7680 2 4 a 640 375022121 B RD -3.75 0A8 7630 2 4 a 640 375022122 B RD -3,75 0A8 7680 2 4 8 640 375022123 B RD -175 0.18 7680 2 4 8 640 375022124 0 RD -3.75 0.19 8329 2 4 8 640 375022125 B RD -3.75 0,20 8573 2 4 8 640 375022126 B RD -335 0.18 7884 2 4 8 640 375022127 B RD -3,75 0,23 10001 2 4 8 640 375022129 A RD -375 0.17 7566 2 4 8 640 EXHIBIT 0: Preliminary Engineering Report PROJECT: Lona Kona Sewer PER JOB NO: 2012.33.0300 CLIENT. PBR / DEM DATE 20 -Mar -12 SUBJECT: Wastewater Generation - Design Basis BY. JC FILE M.ALono Kona\2012330300 PER\Design\Calculationsl[Wastewater Generadon-xh]ByTMK 375022130 A RD -175 018 7653 2 4 8 640 375022131 A RD -3,75 0A8 7919 2 4 8 640 375022132 B RD -175 0.19 8115 2 4 8 640 375022133 B R[) 3,75 0A8 7854 2 4 8 640 375022134 B RD -3 75 0-18 7789 2 4 8 640 375022135 B RD -3,75 0A8 7823 2 4 8 640 375022136 B RD -3.75 0.18 7854 2 4 8 640 375022137 B RD -3,75 0.18 7758 2 4 8 640 375022138 6 RD -3.75 0,18 7767 2 4 8 640 375022139 B RD -3.75 0.18 7775 2 4 8 640 375022140 B RD -3,75 0-18 7775 2 4 8 640 375022141 B RD -3.75 OAA 8137 2 4 8 640 375022142 a RM -1 0-20 8830 8 2,8 23 1840 375022143 A RM -1 0.22 9644 9 2,8 26 2080 375022144 A RD -3-75 0-21 9209 2 4 8 640 375022145 A RD -3.75 0.18 7775 2 4 8 640 375022146 A RD -335 0A8 7775 2 4 8 640 375022147 A RD -3.75 0A8 7767 2 4 8 640 375022148 A RD -335 0-18 7758 2 4 8 640 375022149 A R7-175 0A8 7854 2 4 a 640 375022150 A RD -3.75 0,18 7823 2 4 8 640 375022151 A RD -3,75 0.18 7789 2 4 8 640 375022152 A RD -3,75 0A8 7854 2 4 8 640 375022153 A RD -3,75 0,18 79-28 2 4 8 640 375022154 A RD -3-75 0-22 9405 2 4 8 640 375022155 A 140-175 0,17 75,01 2 4 8 640 375022156 A RD -315 0A7 7501 2 4 8 640 375022157 A RD -3,75 017 7501 2 4 8 640 375022158 A RD -3,75 0,17 7501 2 4 a 640 375022159 A RD -3,75 0,17 7501 2 4 a 640 375022160 A RD -375 0,17 7501 2 4 8 640 375022161 A RD -3.75 0.17 7501 2 4 8 640 375022162 A RD -375 0.17 7501 2 4 8 640 375022163 A RD -175 0.17 7501 2 4 8 640 375022164 A RD -3,75 0,17 7501 2 4 8 640 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report i PROJECT: Lono Kona Sewer PER JOB NO: 201133.0300 CLIENT: PBR / DEM DATF-, 20 -Mar -12 SUBJECT: Wastewater Generation - Design Basis BY. JC FILE MALono Kona12012330300 PEP,%Design\Caltulations%[Wastewater Generadonxls]ByTMK 375022165 A RD -175 0.17 7501 2 4 8 640 375022166 A RD -3.75 0.17 7501 2 4 8 640 375022167 A RD -3.75 0A7 7501 2 4 6 640 375022168 A RD -3.75 017 7501 2 4 8 640 375022169 A RD -3-75 0.17 7501 2 4 8 640 375022170 A RM -1 018 7841 7 2-8 20 1600 375022111 F PAVI 0-18 7889 7 2,8 20 1600 138110 112 4 Parcels 2472 — # Capita Design Parameters 1 Sewers laid above the ground water table Dry VI 5 gped Wet IfI 1250 gad 2 Average per capita design flow = 80 gpd 3 Equivalent Populations by zoning A -5a Agricultural, 5 actunit, assume 25 capita I ac R'-147.5 Single Family Residential, 7,500 sf/uNt, 4 capita/ unit RD -3.75 Double Family Residential, 3,750 sffunit, 4 capita I unit RM -1 Multiple Family Residential, 1,000 sf/und, 2.8 capita / unit (rounded Lip) CV 7.5 Village Coma nercial, 7,500 sf/bIdg = Neigfibabood Business, 40 capita I ac EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report H u ts CL K CLD LU oal Z IU LU U L ti K U Ln kn 'n In Ag m -I RM &M m a Ai 06 m v 0 00 m Ad O 11 t4 ix 41 40 Lb CQ 41Q tic to m m m M CLLIQ iii L^j "0 4" 40 to m Ln kn 'n In Ag m -I RM &M m a Ai 06 m v 0 00 m Ad O 11 41 4" 40 0 m CL Ln ar ......,.,,,.....m.............»,., ,�..„...,. �.�:-za sr•m .. zz.W: ,.., nzs , .� ,:,, ..waa1. z.ma»ynka� ''tea, ., w&,, .. (This page intentionally left blank) EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Enging Repaf Appendix Department Ma Financial s nagementtement EXH1Brr ti_ ` wy EngtwefiM RePad (This page intentionally left blank) EXHIBIT D: Prelimiwy Engineering Report Position 3 FORM APPROVED OMS No, 0$75.0015 `.. E RD 442.3 N f t Ctltv3t}i' QC FtaWA11 (Sever ��) (Rov. 3-97) 2S Aum! Strset, Room 2143 L� SHEET BALANCE Aii+{1 m silo, iiT 96720 Preliut Close 12-31-2412 46.30-2011= ASSE79 Mcmtti 6Y Yearr Czy Year c r, ,r rte,. htartkw gag=� 1. !C,aslt et9t l andid Ranks . . «. .«._» , o.. �.,« . 5, 294rtf%i , Oit Wer to 2, Tune deposits and A011-men 01,514 6504 4. Lary; Alloxmce for doubtful $931,331, 4d Invenwics 7. -- _ 9, Total Qm=t Asses {Add 1 lhroug* 8) A4R ss• 777: 342'00 $0.00 EiXF-D 18. Land` .............. «..._.« 11. Buildings ........ .__....« , « « _ . _.,_.«..,,._.. .« ... 12. pumitum aurid oquipamt d . 13. --------- 14. Less: Aommoulated ftw*ctstion m m., 13. Net Ttttai Flied Assets (Add 10 thrstraag t ° 16. 17. 18. TOW Assets (Add 9,15, 16 aid 17) ...._ ..« ... «.... _ «, ss, 773.182.40 $0.00 LIABYLM S AND EQUITIES 19. Amts payable � _. �,.« ,...« «.«,«_« .«. « ,_ ..._.__......._..__... - 21. Not" pay" 21- CUnIMt JXXO Of 1JSV t AM 22. Cummer deposits .«. .......... 23. Taxes payable 24. Intettst payable..e...._ ..«.._._._......__.. �._.._... , ..... 25, 0%10 to Gahet Emda $sss.osl.0a 26. z»rarrad ReT0=0 27.'TotalC:uinutLiabilities (Add 19through 26)..-__._...._.--.._.. _� �. LIABILLIMS $765,645.000,04 LQNr CY1 2$. Notes payablts USDA .......... 29, 30. 31. Total Loo$-"Terms Liabilities (Add Z8 through 32. Total Liabilities (Add 27 and 31) 7 0 0 L ITY 33.�i�otsusod�aersn+ga ,«_. ..... «. ,...._........_.. ...... $1.205,703.40 ««ncmbrances 3d. b#aa+bctslt' Fund ;«Ba attcea $0t 44 $sr0as7,t►p. snot 35. Total Equity (Add tines 33 and34 _.... 36. Total Liabilities and n' Add lies 32 and 33 ,«. « « $54773,352.00, C�:Ri IT'1 Ci31tJ tECT hats O �i .., ��IAtt4Mo�rr�rek�'ea�JFVIi,Naare+�rlwr,Arr�,rapn�d'#a®I�twb�alC�Alew�lsati�i�f'Jf�tvaidL3dtlrswNrotitr„�rs �++AtV YffRY@7111IM1=%'YG bidnOlNfIM iIMJ�`�=�'JMM'aARM: ��1MX�4�R ra#ie�ti��#1.7�w d�nit +'RRfitI%it Cnwpirir i�W ,,r lRMA'diMi�/7tirW Rb�F{ilfW='�{:Od�:�A4t#7k'�' :. RD 442.3 (ltev. 3.07) EXHIBIT D: Pts**WY Ett ttOWIn9 RePott COUNTY OF HAWAII Nonmajor Governmental Funds Combining Balance Sheet June 30, 2011 Assets Cash and cash equivalents Investments imprest fluid Receivables: Due from other goverrunents Due from other governmental f ids Due from oar nongovernmental fluids Trade, not of allowance for doubtful accounts Other TOW assets Liabltities and Fund Balances Liabilities: Accounts payable Due to other governmental fiords Defined revenue Other Total. liabilities Fund balances: Restricted for: Debt service Highways, streets and abandoned vehicles Committed to: Sanitation Highways, streets and abandoned vehicles Rental assistance and subsidy Cemetery Golf course Lower Puna area Parks and recreational facilities Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances $13,248,630 S 5,548,541 $ 8,363,666 S84,659 $173,679 400 250 - 80,278 4,254 618,798 - - Special Revenue Funds 8,993 Solid Pig Highway Sewer Wako Gly Meter Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund $13,248,630 S 5,548,541 $ 8,363,666 S84,659 $173,679 400 250 - 80,278 4,254 618,798 - - 971,155 8,993 11,346 - - - 1,350 - - - - 1,056,941 1,499,534 - - 81 - 494,347 1,051,514 1,071,538 2,67.4,025 - - $14,30,144 S 6,t�20,479 $10.9972!1 S 8,4,659 S 725,251 $ 289,786 S 2,176,942 $ - $ - 277,547 10,883 30,046 - - - 1,056,941 1,51032 - - - 69.529 1 229 - - 1,002,798 1,427,139 3,718,749 - - 13,297,346 - - - 5,193,340 7,269,192 - - - - 173,679 84,659 13,297,346_5;,193,340 7,269,192 94,659 17_ 3,679 $14,3001_44 $.6,,t Oj479 $10 87 941 $ 84_ $1'lr 3,679 EXHIBIT D.- Preliminary Engi� Rpt Opinion of #•.! (This page intentionally left blank) EXHIBIT d: Preliminary Ea£3 N Report X AM a r PLAN - SEWER LINE A PROFILE - SEWER LINE A MAMOEMEW HLO, IMYJml PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE A STA 9+00 TO STA 15+50 APPROVED C-2. a, Y A. _ WEn��,.g eq R�1ALAlAI Rp A � ` 1.M ibAML1i � PLAN - SEWER LINE A m m ro m N W W •-._ - CpnMObU1MAT 40 40 30 JO Wv.i S t2 DEFT OF AtMlM WT! w6 NAWOEME��EMfAL Cd1NTILO, M1WArll ww�are�Mnonwcr 20 20 • L PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE A e STA 15+50 TO STA 19159 �R PROFIL - SEWER LINJ A '�" APPROVED tCYf:lwi fra YqT: r 014+00 r R% �3 O 15-M 16±2L 7 1 s r '�)� a` � Hi)a�qu.la " M)b�Np M)eazew : •$•n ,N r ,, �.. pAcrs/auM M)3(PtAyr - lA�1Ali - A MN41MI24 TIA,402ta r ` i.ls M)dlpy� ' Miba2cq 8@Lp j V BNf 61*I `M �� GS .� 18Q2219e S � - TM PLAN - SEWER LINE B Ino — ---- --- 1e0 110 ------ 110 130 '- 170 NWrta' _ _.J ¢¢• N W 120 170 = = R - V 110 110 ���� �NI�OM tt NB WAIN DM OF ENVPONMENTAL CWN)Y OFMM" NtO,iNWiVI I 8 _��_ Fg h-�Al{ 100 MAMKiEMENf M akiw�wa 100 eom� E PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE B 90 STA 2+00 TO STA 8+00 x¢axwrw NWM PROFILE - S ER LINE B i APPROVED .ry (E rr 1 TKxsmSm TRidOLm � ! Te(?3=m`[ iNM t00pps1 PLAN - SEWER LINE B wee r.. N z ww,oEu�xr Hao, MW Z PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE 8 a STA 8+00 TO STA 14+74 wmmimr Mnw+ APPROVED 30 1�00 176 _ _ 1 fi TYt7d�m1 1 TKxsmSm TRidOLm � ! Te(?3=m`[ iNM t00pps1 PLAN - SEWER LINE B wee r.. N z ww,oEu�xr Hao, MW Z PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE 8 a STA 8+00 TO STA 14+74 wmmimr Mnw+ APPROVED 30 1�00 176 `� a - 1Mcr6wuR e � ` -IX TYAi6Es1 TMV60QyY- y) OIXT44nE M74 1p .. TMcr6ma,ie Mc)aonar 'Mlr6oaal T1a).4mtar ( fs`r TMc)10QDi1 • I TNNidf@I11 TMlr60E111 TW 160E111 4' I -. TNN 160E16 T 16QEIM Tw,) aIW E bR Yd yl11tM�14 1 K M ."n: M M()6N11t M16912M1 p $ i TII PLAN - SEWER LINE C nM 140 100 100 130 w W rnnMaNwaouo�) ��.. 120 90 MFI1mw - B0 110 ro�i $ iSR INalrtv�`ik - 70 ,00 so EO �� .ara u1e w wav `4 ` NVYIONMEMAL COUNTY OF MW KILO, IMWMI MI !b 50 lorgkpMalMMaar1 �� � . ta�elneNularinom¢) PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE C eo {oII STA 0+00 TO STA 7.02 PROFILE - SEW ER LINE C ""N"O"N APPROVED erw. awr („8 - r 1{ i 8 hi ) M76� .: / 1M M784Lpff . b - 9e - M74012db \ \� 41 I tl •' MldOlttlp - 4 P . IDflz ' MiLaQ2,0 M74O2 M74.mtw ,007 a Mlse72a7• �pp11 t / � - M]4aaOp .MAKµ ST lWY 6' . .•`� Y�'a,'3 rY R R ¢ ;' m S I �, Ml4-03111 M7yp>2117 M/i402H7 S' . /M7d0}2107 _ S 'P. 3D YX t gM/40'a1u P 1 Mr44206 m76Y2W ns Mf4012p0 M18@110 'i Ml4tl2f01 7j $ i.. . a iH PLAN - SEWER LINE C I 140 100 100 130 - 90 - 90 ` 120 80 so '° - ----- '° ALTERNATIVE 4 i33 `- 90 190 aoi FP DM. 6MU M ML COUWrYOFKW" 3 �;y AMN107MlKf KILO,MWMI 90 i w s0 PLAN AND PROFILE - T SEWER LINE e040 40 STA 0-00 TO STA 7+02 Ilolmmw\wFrw+ PROFILE - S ER LINE C APPROVED 70� ns 30 5.m C -6A 14 S/ of 7Yr )j Mf)dey__ Cr AL '+b. air '� - �, - • �'>s a e �') tOdd iryv PLAN - SEWER LINE G1 rH 100 100 90 90 i-4 i � L F,onQ i � yrY ; Y 70 70 8 c e 60 60 y Y r1YA AB YWF DER. OF EMVMOMMEMAI COLT OFN l MAMWEME)R NRO, MWM 4 50 50oFr�er —( wort�ewu ow FILE a' 40 40 SPLAEVER L NECl STA 0+15 TO STA 3+05 R "R PRO ILE - SEWER 6NE G1 _ APPROVED 301 Y.Y[,ral2 r•«I 130 1 _ G7 «u Ir iX` all r'� 8 d/ C / .. k F MWI x >aar),, 7y)�� alal/. �rrr 4 / me h 921* PLAN - SEWER LINE C-1 100 100 90 .. __ __-..-... 90 so so70 a 70 M.w.. ALTERNATIVE 4 3eE g� 60 E c' a �$ 60 q ! uxnaA an wNr waw OE" OF ENVOOM1EMfAL COUNTY Of MVOM MAMOEMENf NILO, MWAri 6 so 50 a oAo PLAN AND PROFILE a S 40 SEWER LINE Cl 3+05 �p STA 0+15 TO STA Axp11M PRO ILE - SEWER NEC -1 Ioa1N IMWNf i �yA._pAp.np Y, APPROVED S 30fN. _ 30 n"' « C -7A -«u MId@t(f � Mi4�a�5Pi �p�,ipr iYf �ry� ryjlar�ti Miy�1b MroO>r111 M76�tlt / M /8102 M)40D:1q 1 MMR2� Mldtl=19 M144MI21 Twy Qm M7d0II:120 Mlb�itl _ .. M1+021, M182 111 W . - •�" M - SI rte'...� ! ,SEWHtum F` -S t 5... w t� g 4 R _' �, i r,` r•.. M` -'A MT+4)212/ MM3 M M44MN - M1d@21S M1+M2f7l iM(rdm1:t11 11N 14122 M7407tt9 - M/40221 Mid@21q �t/f lydy7ly lYK1+01212/ . PLAN - SEWER LINE D TH 160 160 ISO 150 �IosnooewoKr 140 rn 140 W 130 170 W 120mm K S V 120 KM`W M Nu0 WRKY DE OF ENVUMM MA COIIM OFNA~ W"IMEM MROI, WNI 110 110 t _ �" � sosrwcr t°�`t` • oNo PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE D 100 - 100 STA 7+00 TO STA 14+00 PRO ILE - SEWER L NE D .-•.. z -L L APPROVED 90 so 6+00 7+00 a+OO 9 11+00 124430 13+00 14+fM 15+00 16 ew.r� aM O.g - u 14 TYI16472111 nciemsl� M)4dp11f rtltF6xG.f11 M76/D:f3 � M78GPA1/ � 3 s .� _. irm5uREO _ = Iwas KAIANI6T w4 MTamvr M1i43/tl 111I7107iH1. , Mla/alll �� m td 75@21x1 i �1 8 �II I 1 Ij1 PLAN - SEWER LINE D c4u:.v NO t10 110 100 100 �uao ona»n•i _ - yy---I��—��� 90. - 90 W � so so r z j 70 U 70 I 'I •rnaw wn Imv DEFT OF ENVRONYEMAL CORMOF1~1 1 60 ,N 60 ulam MANbFMEMf Mlo, N l wxolaxlum•rosr �auR11aa1tlFlo1lwcr j '-- PLAN AND PROFILE "--- SEWER LINED 60 i __ 60 STA 14+00 TO STA 16+26 PROFILE - S ER LINE D - x M APPROVED r,• �� 40) .. �• G9 _;.g 14 PLAN - SEWER LINE E F no 150 ec]>i:ry H mawe.w W uo w z J - _ wewadENr Nno, N+wui 110S rnaaau aupNaat wwae�n:Ns]we. MO PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE E Ito STA 0+80 TO STA 8+00 wrmww�wwwn ,,, APPROVED 10 9 �u ,e g 4 a yy QO A«)yQatb 1Yi]4�15P ]IIt ];�Isr .. iM!)J4tY110 •^ JE tIR ]4IIN] >S _ - ..F. `,q ;p ' Mi;wry . tyf /dORNS lYf]d�:iN .v _ ?t.r "AIA ORAOFLAST "p T 4 3 "s NI i 74*aN1 T*44MM a �S. W tYf/ 1Y(]3tlf.]l] TY(744319 ]dQIIib - TATE )3ATl:N]TwmdvztN]' i 711th{�iR 1MIf]'8772W . hK]d0II PLAN - SEWER LINE E F no 150 ec]>i:ry H mawe.w W uo w z J - _ wewadENr Nno, N+wui 110S rnaaau aupNaat wwae�n:Ns]we. MO PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE E Ito STA 0+80 TO STA 8+00 wrmww�wwwn ,,, APPROVED 10 9 �u MM02L1T1 MTd4g1i{ MTbOV.,a M)80>TNo M)i0ti.,. I1 , n{T) T1a T447L,a 3K744mia M,44", .- jI _. TW?4en= -- -' fl, y ALq MAONA ST' J . Mf34121A $ M?.=,a nft-"dw iMt)4Y>Z,y, 1Y()saEy1 •` x PLAN - SEWER LINE E m man YAN4AFMENf NAO,INWNI IOMNON1aa0M`d aYlq II/�ON11611t GaTGT PLAN AND PROFILE SEWER LINE E STA 8+00 TO STA 11 r24 APPROVED w 14 9 110 Each, sewer lateral connection, in place complete. Each $ 5,000 $ 550,000 10 Lump Sum, Hualalai Road Tie-in, in place Each $ 50,000 $ 50,000 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report PROJECT: Lono Kona Sewer PER JOB 12012.33.0300 CLIENT: PSR / DEM DAT 30•/,412 SUBJECT: Opinion of Probable Cost - Ahernadve 2 BY: JC FILE: M U -ono Kona12012330300 PER%DeWV%Cost Esdmates\Iopc.per xlsjKR-preferred Item Estimated _ No. Quantity Description Unit Price Total CONSTRUCTION MOBILIZATION 1 Lump Sum, Project survey Lump Sum S. 33,000 $ 33,000 2 Lump Sum, Mobilization / Demobi ization Lump Sum $ 293,000 S 293,000 3 Lump Sum, Erosion Control Lump Sum $ 250,000 $ 250,000 4 Lump Sum, Traffic Control Lump Sum $ 270,000 $ 270,000 TOTAL FOR MOBILZATION $ 846,000 DEMOLITION 1 0.50 Acres, Clearing and grubbing, within the limits Per Acres $ 3,000 $ 1,500 TOTAL FOR DEMOLITION $ 1,500 SEWER SYSTEM 2 5,640 Lin_ Ft_, 84nch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and fittings, in place complete. Per Lin. Ft. $ 30 $ 169,200 3 360 Lin. Ft., 10 -inch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and Per Lin. Ft. S 35 $ 12,600 4 3,700 Cu. Yds., trench excavation and backfill. Per Cu. Yd. $ 200 $ 740,000 5 1 Each, Conned to existing sewer stub, in place complete. Each $ 2,000 $ 2,000 6 29 Each, sewer manholes 5.0' to 9.5' deep, in place complete. Each $ 12,000 $ 348,000 7 4 Each, fined shallow drop sewer manholes 10.0' to 14.99' deep, in place complete. Each $ 16,000 $ 64,000 8 1 Each, lined drop sewer manholes 15.00' to 20.00' deep, in place complete. Each $_ 35,000 $ 35,000 9 110 Each, sewer lateral connection, in place complete. Each $ 5,000 $ 550,000 10 Lump Sum, Hualalai Road Tie-in, in place Each $ 50,000 $ 50,000 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report PROJECT: Lono Kona Sewer PER JOB 1201233.0300 CLIENT: PBR I DEM DAT 304u1.12 SUBJECT: Opinion of Probable Cost - Alternadve 2 BY: JC FILE M:1Lono Kona12012330MO PERWesiVACwt EsdmaM%[opc-Per xk)ER jrvf@rred Item Estimated No. Quantity Description Unit Price Total TOTAL FOR SEWER SYSTEM $ 1,970,800 MISCELLANEOUS 1 12,000 Sq_ Yd. Asphalt concrete pavement and base course, Mix 3, in place complete. Per Sq_ Yd. $ 120 $ 1,440,000 2 Lump Sum. Allowance for backfill of lava tubes Lump Sum $ 250,000 $ 250,000 TOTAL FOR MISCELLANEOUS $ 1,690,000 Subtotal $ 4,508,300 20% Contingency $ 901,660 Total $ 5,409,960 Total Construction Cost Say S 6,600,000 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report Appendix D: Alternative 3 (No Easements) Schematic Layout and Opinion of Probable Cost EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Repot (This page intentionally left blank) EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report <. • P912042.310M r OOEM • ,e r. Elf i 0PdW ae �t f` t•t EXHIBIT D. Prefirnhuy Ergs 1 Lump Sum, Project surrey Lump Sum $ 53,004 S 53,000 2 Lump Sum, MobkzWm 1 DanxWembon Lump Stun $ 470,000 S 470,000 3 Lurks Sum, Eirosion Control Lump Sum $ 250,000 $ 2546,,{100 4 Lump, Sum, Tralk Control Luras Sum S 405,000 S 405,W TOTAL FOR MOBILZATICNd S 1,178,000 DEMOLITN 1 0.40 Aures, Clearing and tom, within Ilea lin** of, � aw Of vegetation and stumps and roots. Per Acres $ 5.000 S 2000. TOTAL FOR DEMOLITION S Z000 SEWER SYSTEM 1 4,440 Lin.. Ft_, 84 nch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and 1#*Vs, in pie complele. Per Lin. FL $ 30 S 133,200 2 580 Linn. Ftt.,104nch PVC SOR-26 sewer pipe and fr *W, in pace compWW Per Ln. Ft. $ 35 S 213,300 3 1,450 Ln. Ft., 6 -inch force main, in place complete. Per Ln_ Ft. S 100 S 145,000 3 1 Lump Sum, Appurtenances for force rein, in Place completes Lump Sum $ 50,000 $ 50,000 4 4,200 Cu. Yds., trench excavation and tsaddfill. Per Cu. Yd. $200 S 840 004 5 24 EaO, sewer manholes 5.5110 9.5' deep, in place complele- Each S 12,tt 288,E 6 4 Each, WW shallow des sewer manholes 100' to 14.W deep; in place complete. Each S 16,000S 64,000 EXHIBIT D. Prefirnhuy Ergs Subtotal S 7,045,500 20% Contingency S 1,409,100 Total S 8,454,600 Total Construction Cost Say $ 8,600,000 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report PROJECT: Lono Kona Sewer PER JOB 1201233.0300 CLIENT: PER! DEM DAT 304u1-12 SUBJECT: Opinion of Probable Cost -Alternative 3 BY: JC J;F •' a FILE M:1Lono Kona12012330300 PERIDesiign%Cost Estimamk[opc-perxls]PER-SPS Option Item Estimated No Quantity Description Unit Price Total 7 1 Each, lined sewer manholes 15.00'to 20.00' deep, in place complete. Each $ 35,000 $ 35,000 8 110 Each, sewer lateral connection, in place complete. Each S 5,000 $ 550,000 9 Lump Sum, HualaW Road Tie-in, in place complete. Lump Sum S 50,000 $ 50,000 10 Lump Sum, Sewer pump stations, in place complete at 2 locations. Lump Sum $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 11 Lump Sum, Sewer pump station ancillary equipment including generator and monitoring equipment, in place complete at 2 locations. Lump Sum $ 500,000 $ 500,000 TOTAL FOR SEWER SYSTEM $ 4,175,500 MISCELLANEOUS 1 12,000 Sq. Yd. Asphalt concrete pavement and base course, Mix 3, in place complete. Per Sq. Yd_ S 120 S 1,440,000 2 Lump Sum Allowance for backfill of lava tubes Lump Sum $ 250,000 $ 250,000 TOTAL FOR MISCELLANEOUS S 1,690,000 Subtotal S 7,045,500 20% Contingency S 1,409,100 Total S 8,454,600 Total Construction Cost Say $ 8,600,000 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report (This page intentionally left blank) EXHIBIT D. Preliminary Engineering Report Appendix E: Alternative 4 (No Private Sewage Pumps)—Opinion of Probable Cost EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report Alternative 4 preliminary plans are included in Appendix C PROJECT: Lono Kona Sewer PER JOB 1201233.0300 CLIENT: PBR / DEM DAT 30 -Jul -12 SUBJECT: Opinion of Probable Cost - Ahernadve 4 BY: )C FILE: M:LLono Kona12012330300 PERM3wI jnlCost Estimaft$%[opaper.xls]PER-n*pumpak Item Estimated No Quantity Description Unit Price Total 9 3 Each, lined shallow drop sewer manholes 10.0' to 14.99' deep, in place complete. EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report MOBILIZATION 1 Lump Sum, Pro)ect survey Lump Sum $ 37,000 $ 37,000 2 Lump Sum, Mobilization / Demobilization Lump Sum $ 322,000 $ 322,000 3 Lump Sum, Erosion Control Lump Sum $ 250,000 $ 250,000 4 Lump Sum, Traffic Control Lump Sum $ 315,000 $ 315,000 TOTAL FOR MOBILZATION S. 924,000 DEMOLITION 1 0.50 Acres, Clearing and grubbing, within the limits of grading, including removal and disposal of vegetation and tree stumps and roots. Per Acres $ 3,000 $ 1,500 TOTAL FOR DEMOLITION $ 1.500 SEWER SYSTEM 2 5,640 Lin. Ft., 8 -inch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and fittings, in place complete. Per Lm. Ft. $ 30 $ 169,200 3 360 Lin. Ft., 10 -inch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and fillings, in place complete. Per Lin. Ft. 4 35 $ 12,600 4 4,000 Cu. Yds., trench excavation and backfill. Per Cu. Yd. $ 225 $ 900,000 5 1 Each, Conned to existing sewer stub, in place complete. Each $ 2,000 $ 2,000 6 24 Each, sewer manholes 4.0' to 9.49' deep, in place complete. Each $ 12,000 $ 288,000 7 1 Each, sewer manholes 9.5' to 14.99' deep, in place complete. Each $ 15,000 $ ------------ 15,000 8 2 Each, sewer manholes 15.0' to 20.0' deep, in place complete. Each $ 20,000 $ 40,000 9 3 Each, lined shallow drop sewer manholes 10.0' to 14.99' deep, in place complete. EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report Subtotal $ 4,940,300 20% Contingency $ 988,060 Total S 5,928,360 Total Construction Cost Say E 6,000,000 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report PROJECT: Lono Kona Sewer PER JOB 12012.33.0300 CLIENT: PSR / DEM DAT 30+01-12 SUBJECT: Opinion of Probable Cost -Alternadve 4 BY: JC BELT FILE: M:U.ono Kona12012330300 PER1Des1V\Cost Esdmasesl[ope-perxlsjM-nopumpaIt Item Estimated No_ Quantity Description Unit Price Total Each S 16,000 $ 48,000 10 4 Each, lined sewer manholes 15.00' to 25.00' deep, in place complete. Each $ 35,000 $ 140,000 11 110 Each, sewer lateral connection, in place complete. Each $ 5,000 $ 550,000 12 6 Each, sewer nser connection, in place complete. Each $ 10,000 $ 60,000 13 Lump Sum, Huaialai Road Tie-in, in place complete. Each S 50,000 $ 50,000 TOTAL FOR SEWER SYSTEM S 2,274,800 MISCELLANEOUS 1 12,000 Sq. Yd. Asphalt concrete pavement and base course, Mix 3, in place complete. Per Sq. Yd. S 120 $ 1,440,000 2 Lump Sum. Allowance for backfill of lava tubes Lump Sum $ 300,000 $ 300,000 TOTAL FOR MISCELLANEOUS $ 1,740,000 Subtotal $ 4,940,300 20% Contingency $ 988,060 Total S 5,928,360 Total Construction Cost Say E 6,000,000 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report Appendix F: Present Worth Analysis EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report (This page intentionally left blank) EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report E � o 0® 2 8 B S @ @ E ON % k 2 0 0 d w 'CM° / 8 E2 2 ACo \ \ a.■Cd �f0 © 60 - o ■ _ cm a � �k\OLJQ a t 2 A � _$§ � o 0® 2 8 B S @ @ E ON % k 2 0 0 d w CL a©§ 2 vp �z� & k�&L S © k � 42 3 � CO) � k�&L S © o ■ _ cm a � �k\OLJQ o� ■ � t k k � k�&L S ` 2 /k t S A � � o ■ ■ )§� w c k � k�&L ` UJ � Ul tea$ � � 72 ■ ■ )§� a c §) _�( cc ■ a o ■ ■� § { o r s � o § § Z fo CL CL $ E 2 ■ c , �§aCL § 2§2 0�B 0 � o @ C e & & 212 I k Table 2 County of Hawn# Lon* Kona Proposed Sewer Project Preliminary Engineering Report Present Worth Analysis Cash Flow and Present Worth Source: Goodwin Consulting Group, Mc. EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 05262012 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Gravity Sewer System No Easements No Private Sewage Pumps (Recommended) (Pump Stations) (Lower Invert) Capital, Annual Capital, Annual Capital, Annual Replant, O&M Cash Replcmt, O&M Cash ReplCFK O&M Cash Year & Salvage Costs Flow & Sahrage Costs Flow a Salvage Costs Flow 0 $5,500,000 $5,500,000 $8,500.000 $8,500,000 $6.000,000 56,000.000 1 $18,000 S18,OOD $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 2 $16,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 418,000 $18,000 3 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 4 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,15D $18,OOD $18,000 5 $18,000 S18,ODO $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 6 $18,0011 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 7 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,ODD $18,000 8 S18,0DO $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 9 518,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,OOD $18,000 10 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 11 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 518,000 518,000 12 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 13 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 14 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 518,000 15 $18,000 $18,000 52,400,000 $24,150 $2,424,150 $18,000 $18,000 16 $18,000 518,000 $24,150 $24,150 518,000 $18,000 17 $18,000 S18,OD0 $24,150 524,150 $18,000 $18,000 18 $18,000 518,000 S24,15D $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 19 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 20 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 578,000 21 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 22 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 23 $18,D00 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 S18,00D $18,000 24 $18,000 518,000 524,150 $24,150 $18,000 518,000 25 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 S18,OOD 518,000 26 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 27 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 28 $18,000 S1 8,0M $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 29 $18,000 $18,ODO $24,150 S24,150 $18,000 $18,000 30 $18,DDO S18,0DO $2,400,000 $24,150 $2,424,150 $18,000 $18,000 31 518,000 S18,0D0 524,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 32 $18,D00 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 33 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 518,000 34 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $78,000 35 $18,000 $18,ODD $24,150 S24,150 $18,000 $18,000 36 $18,000 $18,000 S24,150 $24,150 518,000 $18,000 37 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 38 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 39 $18,000 $18,ODO $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 s18,000 40 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 41 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 S18,D00 $18,000 42 $16,000 S18,000 $24,150 $24,150 518,000 $18,000 43 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 44 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 45 578,000 $18,000 $2,400,000 $24,150 52,424,150 $18,000 518,000 46 $18,000 $18,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 47 518,000 518,000 $24,150 $24,150 $18,000 $18,000 48 $18,000 S18,000 $24,150 $24,150 518,000 f18,000 49 $18,000 $18,0DO $24,150 $24,150 518,000 $18,000 50 $0 $18,000 $18,000 $0 $24,150 $24,150 so $18,000 $18,000 S5,500,000 $900,000 $6,400,000 $15,700,000 $1-707,500 $16,907,500 S6,OOD,000 $900,000 $6,900,000 Total Present Worth $6,947,000 $13,090,000 $6,437,000 Source: Goodwin Consulting Group, Mc. EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 05262012 Appendix G: Annual Operating Budget EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report (This page intentionally left blank) EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engheering Report 05/03/12 Estimated Fund 030 Sewer Fund COUNTY OF HAWAI'l Year 2012-13 Page 31 Revenues FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 Base.El Account Description Actual Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate 3300 Intergovernmental Revenue 3301 Federal Grants +++ Federal Grants 0.00 0 0 0 0 3303 federal Grants +++ Federal Grants 0.00 0 0 0 0 3305 State Grants 3305.73 2006 Earthquake Asst 959.09 0 0 0 0 +++ State Grants 959.09 0 0 0 0 3308 Federal Grants 3308.75 FEMA 2011 Tsunami Disaster 4,254.48 0 0 0 0 +++ Federal Grants 4,254.48 0 0 0 0 -** Intergovernmental Revenue 5,213.57 0 0 0 0 3400 Charges for Services 3401 General Government 3401.72 Wastewtr Div Svc Fees 71,032.14 105,600 152,000 100,000 100,000 +++ General Government 71,032.14 105,600 152,000 100,000 100,000 3406 Sewers 3406.01 Hilo Sewer Charges 2,930,393.88 2,914,600 2,894,953 2,894,953 2,894,953 3406.02 Papaikou Sewer Charges 146,043.59 148,380 147,346 147,346 147,346 3406.03 Kulaimano Sewer Charges 199,500.06 207,225 205,066 205,066 205,066 3406.04 Kapshu Sewer Charges 8,974.06 9,072 10,470 10,470 10,470 3406.05 Honokaa Sewer Charges 0.00 290,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 3406.06 Kona Sewer Charges 2,978,664.89 2,943,900 3,078,722 3,078,722 3,078,722 3406.07 Naalehu Sewer Charges 23,212.56 27,000 28,469 28,469 28,469 3406.08 Pahala Sewer Charges 15,987.83 18,180 19,193 19,193 19,193 3406.21 Hilo Sewer Discharge Fee 103,344.50 130,000 115,000 115,000 115,000 3406.26 Kona Sewer Discharge Fee 93,825.50 127,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 +++ Sewers 6,499,946.87 6,815,357 6,814,219 6,814,219 6,814,219 **** Charges for Services 6,570,979.01 6,920,957 6,966,219 6,914,219 6,914,219 3600 Miscellaneous Revenue 3604 Disp Of Fixed Assets +++ Disp Of fixed Assets 0.00 0 0 0 0 3609 Reimbursemts & Transfers 3609.10 Fund Bal From Prev Year 0.00 545,263 530,874 0 0 3609.11 Transfer From Gen Fund 0.00 0 0 2,954,482 3,734,601 3609.12 Fd Bal Res For Repl Fund 0.00 1,619,198 1,824,056 0 0 +++ Relmbursemts & Transfers 0.00 2,164,461 2,354,930 2,954,482 3,734,601 3611 Sundry & Misc +++ Sundry & Mise 0.00 0 0 0 0 **** Miscellaneous Revenue 0.00 2,164,461 2,354,930 2,954,482 3,734,601 Sewer Fund 6,576,192.58 9,085,418 9,321,149 9.868,701 10,648,820 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report 05103/12 Estimated Fund 030 Sewer Fund COUNTY OF HAWAII Year 2012-13 Page 32 Expenditures FY 2010-11 FY 2011-12 FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 Base,El Account Description Actual Budget Estimate Estimate Estimate 5631 Wastewater 5631.01 Wastewater S&W 2,567,858.54 2.933,646 2,900,523 2,906,962 2,906,962 5631.02 Wastewater OCE 3,317,636.24 3,668,289 4,133,641 4,133.641 4.133,641 5631.21 Wastewater Eqpt 43,139.21 10,000 551500 172,000 223,000 5631.31 Operator Tmg Facility 11,550.00 15,000 17,575 17,575 17,575 Total Wastewater 5,940,183.99 6,626,935 7,107,239 7,230,178 7,281,178 5912 Miscellaneous Total Miscellaneous 0.00 0 0 0 0 +++ Dept 631 Wastewater 5,940,183.99 6,626,935 7,107,239 7,230,178 7,281,178 5801 Trans To Other Funds Total Trans To Other Funds 0.00 0 0 0 0 5802 Fringe Reimb Total Fringe Reimb 0.00 0 0 0 0 +++ Dept 801 Interdepartment 0.00 0 0 0 0 5902 Employee Benefits & FICA 5902.16 Health Benefits 256,907.40 315,537 340,610 340,610 340,610 5902.17 Retirement Benefits 379,548.17 442,837 4491581 465,114 479,649 5902.20 FICA Employer Share 182,957.46 225,847 221,890 222,383 222,383 Total Employee Benefits & FICA 819,413.03 984,221 1,012,061 1,028,107 1.042,642 +++ Dept 901 Pensions & Contribs 819,413.03 984,221 1,012,081 1.028,107 1,042,642 5911 Miscellaneous $911.49 Prov -Compensation AdjS 0.00 (52,709) 0 O 0 5911.86 Workers Comp 22.734.63 33,000 35,000 35,000 35.000 Total Miscellaneous 22,734.63 (17,709) 35,000 35,000 35,000 5912 Miscellaneous 5912.93 Replacement Reserve Acct 390,497.81 1,800,000 1,166,829 1,575,416 2,290,000 Total Miscellaneous 390,497.81 1,600,000 1,166,629 1,575,416 2,290,000 5913 Miscellaneous 5913.03 Prov for Payroll Lag Adj 0.00 (108,029) 0 O 0 Total Miscellaneous 0.00 (108,029) 0 0 0 +++ Dept 911 Miscellaneous 413,232.44 1,474,262 1,201,829 1,610,416 2,325,000 Sewer Fund 7,172,829.46 9,085,418 9,321,149 9,868,701 10,648,820 EXHIBIT D: Preliminary Engineering Report CON EXHIBIT E: Engineer's Opinion Of Probable Cost PROJECT: Lono Kona Sever PER JOB 12012.33.0300 CLIENT: PBR / DEM DAT 3gtfi-12 SUBJECT: Opinion of Probable Cost - Alternative 2 BY: JC FILE: M.U.ono Kom=12330300 PER%Des1V%C= Esdmamk[opc-Perxls]PER-prsferred Item Estimated No. Quantitv Description Unit Price Total MOBILIZATION 1 Lump Sum, Project survey Lump Sum $ 33,000 S 33,000 2 Lump Sum, Mobilization / Demobilization Lump Sum S 293,000 $ 293,000 3 Lump Sum, Erosion Control Lump Sum S 250,000 $ 250,000 4 Lump Sum, Traffic Control Lump Sum $ 270,000 $ 270,000 TOTAL FOR MOBILZATION $ 846,000 DEMOLITION 1 0.50 Acres, Clearing and grubbing, within the limits Per Acres $ 3,000 $ 1,500 TOTAL FOR DEMOLITION S 1,500 SEWER SYSTEM 2 5,640 Lir. Ft., 8 -inch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and fft Ings, in place complete. Per Lin. Ft $ 30 $ 169,200 3 360 Lin- Ft., 10 -inch PVC SDR -26 sewer pipe and Per Lin_ Ft S 35 $ 12,600 4 3,700 Cu. Yds., trench excavation and backfill. Per Cu. Yd. $ 200 $ 740,000 5 1 Each, Conned to existing sewer stub, in place complete - Each S 2,000 S 2,000 6 29 Each, sewer manholes 5.0' to 9.5' deep, in place complete. Each $ 12,000 S 348,000 7 4 Each, lined shallow drop sewer manholes 10.0' to 14.99' deep, in place complete_ Each $ 16,000 $ 64,000 8 1 Each, lined drop sewer manholes 15.00' to 20.00' deep, in place complete. Each $ 35,000 $ 35,000 9 110 Each, sewer lateral connection, in place complete. Each $ 5,000 $ 550,000 10 Lump Sum, Huatelai Road Tie-in, in place Each $ 50,000 $ 50,000 PROJECT: Lono Kona Sewer PER JOB 12012.33.0300 CLIENT: PBR / DEM DAT 30 -Jud -12 SUBJECT: Opinion of Probable Cast - Alrernadve 2 BY: JC FILE: KALoeo Kona120I2330300 PERU)eWptCou Esdmamgopc-perxls)*ER-proferred Item Estimated No_ Quantity Description Unit Price Total TOTAL FOR SEWER SYSTEM $ 1,970,800 MISCELLANEOUS 1 12,000 Sq. Yd_ Asphalt concrete pavement and base course, Mix 3, in place complete. Per Sq. Yd. $ 120 S 1,440,000 2 Lump Sum_ Allowance for backfill of lava tubes Lump Sum S 250,000 $ 250,000 TOTAL FOR MISCELLANEOUS $ 1,690,000 Subtotal $ 4,508,300 20% Contingency $ 901,660 Total $ 5,409,960 Total Construction Cost Say S 5,500,000 Eshihit F Lon. Kon. P,.p..4 Sewer improvement District Lon. Kona Sewer improvement District P -1—d Assessment R.ii ENb..hd Eised A-INi 73-022-053X!016 75-5708 ALAR ST AAHOU CLEAN 6 SOBER 7S5M ALAHM ST KARUA-KONA, X1967.0 0.7 $6yWA2 $31838 uwHDu itc 7s-5737 KAuwwsr:w KAa.un_s.Na, Hi ea7m 16-IWALAMM KNIPPERS, IDHM 750210761%ilt 113MALAYAIST KNIPPERS, CAROLYN 64AQE311TH5TSOUTH wx", 0K 7A00R 0.7 $6,Yi17A7 Exhibit F Lona Kana Proposed Sewer Improvement District Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District Proposed Assessment Roil 750720880000 YS 192. ALAKM ST SM.pSON, Mf.LSSAFOTI' 75-192 AL"M IST KAAUA KONA, XI%7401837lA $13,81445 $756.78 ��� �'� t� ,.•� x •moi � a ��,i;'iaff"� �- ��a��.� ��3�>:. MANN040,ffAOME O YOSHIMLCVELYNTRST 1767 RWESTONE LN MON WV PARA CA 91755-5621 7-502209600CD 75-574514 KWIAST FUIOKA.ROY/NANCTTHST 2529HLVWORTHDR DAMS, CA 95616-7671 1A $13,814.85 $756.78 WCi1EN,8O8{RT T 7-5022-106.IXgD 75397..—ST TTEE U15SWESTTEMPLE SALTLAY.EC".UT 841154412 114 $13,81425 575678 RUPLEY. WIlSDN,MICIIACt A TRST Estimated A3HN30N, KTSRftfNf, SW tOO CNM 7-"22-1170000 fixed Annual IARf/CPR s". ad94Rs Propenyo—t Contarl A&h— NE. RMaaxment !.sersmera` NEPkvN6Aalf'AM'>i� , R�P6fl74tA' �.'� �S 'K $ �. °'• > `, , .. .��.. --W-119OGLY7 MFAiAb,WA11AMP KA" STTy MWA1196720 24 $27,629.69 $1,51156 7 50720/8H om PS 5142 MAN(1F Pl. HAA110, HARRIET U :All] HCKJIEHUA Sr Pt461 CIY in 96M2,1731 14 $13,814 69 $756 TP IIALIESTEKOS, D M 7,-022421O000 TAKUSHLSAMMT 15494 KAlAM ST KANA),FKOFU. "I %7401678 2.0 $9,667,75 $54056 75-D22-0&NK1W TS -5746 MANOF M. TAKUSKJASONY 909ALANANMASTAPT401 HONOLULU,M 96a162916 :,4 $13,61444 $75676 7-5-022-06 QOW 75-5750MANOEM 61G ISLAND RESWCNT6LL INC 1221 KAPICKAM 8LW STE$45 floNolutU.m "M L4 $13,814.84 '$�5$ 5t.n HARIt6,K1E F TRST HARKS, MARGAKEl'A IRVST 7-5-021-0 -ww 755747 ALANOE PL HARRIS, GRANTD 1717"WAIMT 81706 Hastat LU, NI 96$15 14 59,867.74 5.,-% 750720880000 YS 192. ALAKM ST SM.pSON, Mf.LSSAFOTI' 75-192 AL"M IST KAAUA KONA, XI%7401837lA $13,81445 $756.78 ��� �'� t� ,.•� x •moi � a ��,i;'iaff"� �- ��a��.� ��3�>:. MANN040,ffAOME O YOSHIMLCVELYNTRST 1767 RWESTONE LN MON WV PARA CA 91755-5621 7-502209600CD 75-574514 KWIAST FUIOKA.ROY/NANCTTHST 2529HLVWORTHDR DAMS, CA 95616-7671 1A $13,814.85 $756.78 WCi1EN,8O8{RT T 7-5022-106.IXgD 75397..—ST TTEE U15SWESTTEMPLE SALTLAY.EC".UT 841154412 114 $13,81425 575678 RUPLEY. 75022-3324KK70 75571RSAMAOKEOLAST TRANSMURACION, MARIA 7;-57181AMAOKEOLA "ItUAYDNA, HI 9670 1.6 $%7'.75 WIlSDN,MICIIACt A TRST A3HN30N, KTSRftfNf, SW tOO CNM 7-"22-1170000 75182 KALANI ST TRST 8262751 UHONUA RD OAPTAW COOK,It%704 IA $13,81445 $756.76 oKANO,Dav� wsAin TR --W-119OGLY7 75-18G�KM.`�A.jyNI,ST OK11N13, r'A .F mMll T8 KA" STTy MWA1196720 24 $27,629.69 $1,51156 x`83 ;y{� SARADPON,EMlM M CALMA, &IDRO A IIALIESTEKOS, D M 7,-022421O000 7490KMAM5r 61RLESTERO%MRLAM 15494 KAlAM ST KANA),FKOFU. "I %7401678 2.0 $9,667,75 $54056 IAt/JAARIA ESiPA POLYANNA 5 75022-3324KK70 75571RSAMAOKEOLAST TRANSMURACION, MARIA 7;-57181AMAOKEOLA "ItUAYDNA, HI 9670 1.6 $%7'.75 Exhibit !_ Luno Kona Proposed Sewer Improvement Ulstlict Lon* Kona Sewer tmprovement District Proposed Assessment Roll 7-5022-145,OOW 75-182 ALA ONAONA Sf 3MITIi RHINE WAMA-KOtM,IN MM $9,etii1S 36 TYLER, JOSEPH c IR PEe$ Min 7-"22-164.OM 75-191MAONAONAST SAKEER, THELMA5 75-333 ALOHA Wbi$% M KWUA-KONA, Hl 96740-1570 1.4 $13A1435 $756.78 i, a 14ARRGlK]R, ALVNt t4AMSU041, LORRAINE 7-5 22.16600tt1 75-185AtAONAONAST HARAGUOILAtNtNM p0812x SIlN —1.—A, %MN! 116 AKERS, f RAID TR 15322-168-0000 75181 AIAONAONAST A M1 KAREN TR P080K 4:152 KArt1M kON0. Hi %145 JS52 lA $13,834.85 __ $75&.78_ Yotd 9ti 247.0 $2,431,000.00 $133,49900 Msessnrenf urdts 145.0 r bwlWo wwwldehl xrvte µr7,aneU arM Cuunly wimbrix6ation rruh. r Tluassesvnn4s tAat were ENnMnetl taro UMa Mayen morcel ere Nbca Mto each alsf wR (<nada+r�m:�,m vmpeety Re*mei Naea oa «.a.se. Snnaer CamN o(Mmra'i: 0rk 4bi4rtC Gaadw:n CwurAt4r4 Grwo, Ine. Estim4 ed flxed Annual 1MKIcpA $4. Add— Muperty Owner C*nt tA"— SfE, M_n,.nt Aest— rx' SAGUN, £R4N0 B SAGUN, NON A 75 OZ113]4MKV. '7$-1$9 wmi ST 'N, ERANOAM^ 75-199 mma ST UNn-8 KAILt1A-K17HA. NI%7411399 0.7 A907AZ $37838 y� •.�. ., ANM.ttRONO, R08£xrH •�•• •. 7-5022-145,OOW 75-182 ALA ONAONA Sf 3MITIi RHINE WAMA-KOtM,IN MM $9,etii1S 36 TYLER, JOSEPH c IR PEe$ Min 7-"22-164.OM 75-191MAONAONAST SAKEER, THELMA5 75-333 ALOHA Wbi$% M KWUA-KONA, Hl 96740-1570 1.4 $13A1435 $756.78 i, a 14ARRGlK]R, ALVNt t4AMSU041, LORRAINE 7-5 22.16600tt1 75-185AtAONAONAST HARAGUOILAtNtNM p0812x SIlN —1.—A, %MN! 116 AKERS, f RAID TR 15322-168-0000 75181 AIAONAONAST A M1 KAREN TR P080K 4:152 KArt1M kON0. Hi %145 JS52 lA $13,834.85 __ $75&.78_ Yotd 9ti 247.0 $2,431,000.00 $133,49900 Msessnrenf urdts 145.0 r bwlWo wwwldehl xrvte µr7,aneU arM Cuunly wimbrix6ation rruh. r Tluassesvnn4s tAat were ENnMnetl taro UMa Mayen morcel ere Nbca Mto each alsf wR (<nada+r�m:�,m vmpeety Re*mei Naea oa «.a.se. Snnaer CamN o(Mmra'i: 0rk 4bi4rtC Gaadw:n CwurAt4r4 Grwo, Ine. Exhibit G: Lono Kona Sewer ID Easements Map New Sewer Manhole vacant parcels New Sewer Easement I Ci -ft wide Single -Family New Sewer Line Duplex 0 250 500 1,000 ID Boundary Apartment I 1 1►1 Feet commercial other William P. Kenoi Mayor Walter K. M. Lau Managing Director October 24, 2013 EXHIBIT B GiuUN of Pa�javi DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Aupuni Center 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 7 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4224 (808) 961-8321 • Fax (808) 961-8630 www.co.hawaii.hi.us Bobby -Jean Leithead-Todd, Director Department of Environmental Management 345 Kekuanao`a Street, Suite B Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Ms. Leithead-Todd: Subject: Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District Project Warren H. W. Lee Director Brandon A. K. Gonzalez Deputy Director After review of the relevant documents and materials, involvement of the Department of Public Works (DPW) is not required for the Lono Kona Sewer Improvement District Project (Project). The Project is strictly a sewer system and the County roads affected by the project would be restored to their existing pavement width in accordance with DPW standards. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, 6randon onzalez Deputy D rector County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.