Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-07-26 Water Board MinutesMEMBERS PRESENT: MINUTES DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY COUNTY OF HAWAII WATER BOARD MEETING July 26, 2005 ROYAL KONA RESORT, RESOLUTION ROOM Mr. Ivan Mochida, Chairman (10:13 a.m.) Mr. Loren Heck, Vice - Chairman Mr. Thomas Goya Mr. Bernard Konanui Ms. Sandra Scarr Mr. Riley Smith (10:15 a.m.) Mr. George Wilkins Mr. Milton D. Pavao, Manager (ex- officio member) ABSENT: Ms. Paula Helfrich, Water Board Member Ms. Millie Kim, Water Board Member Mr. Bruce McClure, Director, Department of Public Works (ex- officio member) Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director, Planning Department (ex- officio member) OTHERS PRESENT: Ms. Katherine Garson, Deputy Corporation Counsel Ms. Amy Self, Deputy Corporation Counsel Ms. Diane Robertson, R. W. Beck, Inc. Mr. Dave Jochim, R. W. Beck, Inc. Mr. Don Nitsche Mr. Gerald W. Holleman Mr. Bob Barry Mr. Jimmy Yocom Ms. Elinor Yocom Mr. Ronald Brown Department of Water Supply Staff: Mr. Quirino Antonio, Jr., Deputy Manager Mr. Glenn Ahuna, Engineering Division Head Mr. Daryl Ikeda, Acting Chief of Operations Mr. Richard Tsunoda, Waterworks Controller Mr. Richard Sumada, Assistant Waterworks Controller Mr. Calvin Uemura, Customer Service Section Mr. Lawrence Beck, Engineering Division Mr. Keith Okamoto, Water Quality Assurance and Control Branch Mr. Michael Watanabe, Water Quality Assurance and Control Branch Ms. Heather Asato, Administration Division, Summer Student Page 1 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc CALL TO ORDER - Chairman Mochida called the meeting to order at 10:14 a.m. and expressed his apologies but that he had encountered traffic on the way to the meeting. The Manager introduced Ms. Heather Asato, who is part of the Department's summer student program. She is helping out in the Administration Section. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC 1) Mr. Don Nitsche Mr. Nitsche asked if the Board would consider moving up an item on the Agenda as the topic is of interest to those present (Manager's Report, Item No. 2, USGS Drilling Program). Chairman Mochida asked that Mr. Nitsche make his statement first and then he could ask questions when the Agenda item comes up. Mr. Nitsche stated that they have been very frustrated with the progress on the test well. They were happy to get the test well, but it has not been going very well. He could go into more detail when the item comes up for discussion. He added that he would like to see one more person put on the staff (USGS). He also introduced Mr. Gerald Holleman, new President of Ocean View Community Development Corporation. He is very experienced and should be a good president. Mr. Nitsche is still Chairman of the Water Committee with OVDC. 2) Mr. Gerald W. Holleman Mr. Holleman thanked the Board for allowing him to be here. He conveyed that they would do everything possible to work with the Department on the Ocean View Well. He is sure the $6 million from the Legislature is on its way, and they represent all the major groups from Ocean View (Chamber of Commerce, and Ocean View Community Association) that would help work with DWS to expedite this project. He commented on the USGS not operating for almost one month. If that well is critical to getting them a well quickly, he asked that someone be found to operate the USGS drill rig on a temporary basis. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Mr. Wilkins moved for approval of the Minutes of the Public Hearing on the 2005/2006 Fiscal Year Budget (June 28, 2005), and the Minutes of the June 28, 2005, Water Board Meeting; seconded by Mr. Goya. Ms. Scarr had some questions about the USGS portion in the Minutes (she was not present last month); however, Ms. Self suggested that the questions be clarified later on during the Agenda item today, and not during this approval of the Minutes from last month's meeting. ACTION: A vote was taken on the Motion for approval of the Minutes of both meetings. Motion was carried unanimously by voice vote. Page 2 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc APPROVAL OF SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA ACTION: Mr. Goya moved to add the Supplemental report on Job No. 2003 -812, to the Agenda; seconded by Mr. Wilkins and carried unanimously by voice vote. ACTION TO MOVE AGENDA ITEM UP ACTION: Mr. Heck moved that the Board take up MISCELLANEOUS (H), MANAGER'S REPORT, Item No. 2, USGS Drilling Program; seconded by Mr. Wilkins and carried unanimously by voice vote. MISCELLANEOUS: H. MANAGER'S REPORT: 2) USGS Drilling Program The Manager reported that he met with Mr. Gordon Tribble of USGS last week. Mr. Tribble indicated the test well at Ocean View was at 960 feet; however, there has been nobody on the rig in three weeks due to personnel concerns. When asked about additional personnel, Mr. Tribble indicated that funding only provides for one driller and one helper. Additional personnel could only be added if extra funds become available. In response to Mr. Wilkins' understanding that the USGS rig would only be drilling to 1,000 feet on this well, the Manager stated that they are committed to drill to order, which is 2,000 feet. It will be the last time this rig drills beyond 1,000 feet. When asked by Ms. Scarr what their time schedule is, the Manager replied that they would drill until the well is finished. If you consider the time spent already, that would be the only indicator of how much longer it will take. They are almost halfway and drilling started October of 2004. Ms. Scarr stated that she did not have confidence that the test well is ever going to get done with this rig and this arrangement. The Manager assured Ms. Scarr that the well would get done, but he could not say when. Mr. Heck mentioned that the longer they take, the more it costs the Department. The Manager understood the Board's concern and had expressed it to Mr. Tribble. The funding expires this October; and thereafter, additional funds would be needed to continue. Mr. Tribble assured the Manager that the driller would be back on the job after his personal crisis is taken care of. When asked by the Board if the Manager knew what the circumstances were, he replied that he did but that he could not divulge anything due to confidentiality. However, he could say that it is a legitimate reason. When the Board questioned if the Manager felt confident that the driller would be back on the job as expected, the Manager stated he was due back this week. Page 3 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc Mr. Heck asked if the Board should be asking for, or even expecting, drilling reports from USGS on when they are not on the job and the reasons why. He added that he has heard their excuses before and would expect that they have these instances on file (why the personnel are not on the job). There have been eight months of reasons, so there is a pattern there. He also mentioned contacting Mr. Tribble's boss in Sacramento. The Manager stated that the Tri- County Agreement with USGS is very generic. It does not address personnel issues - -only results. He did not think it would provide for that type of information to be given to the Board. When the Agreement was made, nobody could foresee these delays. He added that he would take a look at the Agreement; and if nothing is in there to support the Board's request, he still could ask for the information. Mr. Nitsche stated that he works closely with the crew and supplies water to them. He mentioned a letter he had written to the Manager and reviewed it for the Board. The letter is basically a plea that USGS add one more person to the crew, capable of drilling. The lack of manpower has kept this well from being completed in a timely manner; and with the $6 million in Legislative funds on its way, the findings of this well are critical. He added that earlier on, Mr. Tribble had promised extra manpower; however, he has reneged on that promise. If that extra person had been there from the beginning, this job would have been completed already. The Manager answered questions from the Board about the Department hiring another driller to complete the well after the funding for USGS expires this October. He explained that because this is a federally owned drill rig, they would not allow a private individual to operate it. Also, it is a federal policy that you cannot touch the hole. Mr. Nitsche stated that he understood the USGS wells could be used under certain emergencies as a production well and felt that this is an emergency. He added that the well is partially cast down to 700 feet because the upper part was "sloughing" on them. They also encountered a lava tube that was a bit of a problem; however, they got through that. He realized they had a lot of problems, but the lack of being on the job is another problem. This is the fourth week of personnel absent from the site. They did not show up the day before this meeting, and he was not sure if they were there today. It is a shame that one person is holding up the much - anticipated completion of this test well. Mr. Smith stated that the Department has an Agreement with USGS; and under that Agreement, there are certain things they have to provide. The only input the Board has is to comply with the contract. The way their employees work may or may not be to the Board's liking, but there is no way to control anything other than what is covered in the contract. Mr. Wilkins thought there may be some option, if the Board is completely dissatisfied, to stop payment to the USGS. The Manager stated that USGS could be told at anytime that the Department is not going to fund this any longer and they would have to stop; however, he was not sure if that was what the Board would want to do. Page 4 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc Mr. Heck stated that if there is a performance contract, then it should become part of the Board's /Department's responsibility. The Manager reiterated that he would have to take a look at the contract. Ms. Scarr felt that the Board ought to be in a problem - solving mode. She suggested that perhaps Mr. Tribble would be receptive to hiring an additional driller for the duration of this project. The Manager stated that he might be receptive if additional funds were provided to USGS. Ms. Scarr felt that it would not be too much money to spend, in the grand scope of things. The Manager informed the Board that the results from this well will only indicate water level and the salinity. It does not stop the exploratory well from being drilled with the $6 million appropriation. Way back, the intent was to drill a production well at the County's park site, which is at a higher elevation. If anything, it would be better than what you would have at the lower elevation. When asked by Ms. Scarr if the Manager was recommending that they go ahead and drill a test well at the County park site, he replied that he was not making any recommendations - -only suggesting not to "put all the eggs in one basket." Mr. Heck did not understand how you would proceed with a production well in some other location if there is any information that can be garnered from this USGS well. He was under the impression that the other well was on hold until the results from this one are known. The Manager stated that the test well would give an idea of where the water level is but not how much can be pumped because it will not be pump- tested. Mr. Nitsche explained that the geologists are pretty much in agreement that the water is pretty much the same all the way through Ocean View on that side of the fault that runs down to South Point. Where the test well is going in is an ideal location because it is close to the three -phase power on the highway and a good place for the trucks to load water. It is an ideal location for a production well. Originally, in 1998, they were going to put the well at the community center. There was an expense because of running the power lines up to the site. The Manager stated the reason that site was chosen was because the County owned the land. Mr. Nitsche stated that land costs were not a problem back then. In the meantime, their committees have gotten together; and they feel that if the test well proves good, it should be the place for the production well. If that does not work out, the next step is up at the park, which is County property just above the test well site. Choice number three would be to go back to the community center, which is the farthest away. He reiterated that this test well will have a lot of information on what direction to go in with the $6 million. Chairman Mochida asked the Board to focus on the issue here, and that is the contract with USGS. This Board does not have much control over USGS. Page 5 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc Ms. Scarr asked the Manager if he anticipates that the personnel will be able to return to work and stay at work on a continuous basis until the well is completed. The Manager stated that Mr. Tribble assured him this person will come back (anticipated to be by this week or next). Ms. Scarr asked if the Board should have a contingency plan in place in case he does not show up, where Mr. Tribble hires someone else. She wondered if it should be made into a formal Motion or to have the Manager convey to Mr. Tribble the Board's wishes for him to move on this quickly. The Manager stated that it did not have to be put into a Motion. He indicated that he would take care of it and relay to Mr. Tribble that the Board is not happy. If the person is not back on the job in two weeks, he will stress to them to hire someone else. Mr. Nitsche appreciated the Board's concern and input. The Manager also reported on the $6 million in funds. The Mayor has asked this Department to administer the funds. Their intent is not to transfer the funds to this Department, but to have DWS administer the funds. A public meeting will be held to gather input; and from there, the Department will hire a consultant. (Mr. Wilkins expressed an interest in attending the public meeting.) The Manager stated that it would be an open meeting. (Members of the public left at 10:51 a.m.) SOUTH HILO: A. JOB NO. 2003-812, CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOUTH HILO G.I. PIPELINE AND SERVICE LATERAL REPLACEMENT: Bids for this project were received and opened on July 21, 2005, at 2:00 p.m.; and the results were enumerated in the Supplemental Agenda. This project consists of furnishing and paying for all labor, materials, tools and equipment necessary for installing 3,900 feet of 6 -inch D.I. waterline, fire hydrants, the replacement of service laterals, and road resurfacing along Kehaulani, Nohea, Naniakea, Kawailani, Melani, Amaulu, and Nanea streets, Waihau and Waimalino lanes, and Mamalahoa Highway in South Hilo. Funding for this project will be from DWS C.I.P. Budget. The contractor will have 180 calendar days to complete this project. The Manager recommended that the Board award the contract for JOB NO. 2003 -812, CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOUTH HILO G.I. PIPELINE AND SERVICE LATERAL REPLACEMENT, to the lowest responsible bidder, Willocks Construction Corporation, for their bid amount of $1,410,868.00 plus $112,869.00 in construction contingency for a total contract amount of $1,523,737.00, and that either the Chairman or the Vice - Chairman be authorized to sign the contract, subject to review as to form and legality of the contract by Corporation Counsel. Page 6 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc ACTION: Mr. Goya moved for approval of the Manager's recommendation; seconded by Mr. Heck and carried unanimously by voice vote. MISCELLANEOUS: A. DEDICATION OF WATER SYSTEM: The Department received the following document for action by the Water Board. The water system has been constructed in accordance with the Department's standards and is in acceptable condition for dedication. GRANT OF EASEMENT HAWAII PRIDE OFF -SITE WATERLINE Grantor: W. H. Shipman, Ltd. E.W.O.: 2000 -032 TMK: (3) 1 -6- 003:022 & portion 066 Final Inspection Date: April 25, 2000 Water System Cost: $79,335.00 The water system was conveyed to the "Water Commission" in April of 2000 through a Bill of Sale - Document No. 2000 - 084518. The roadways owned by W. H. Shipman, Ltd., was never conveyed. The Manager recommended that the Water Board accept this documents subject to the approval of the Corporation Counsel and that either the Chairman or the Vice - Chairman be authorized to sign the document. ACTION: Mr. Heck moved for approval of the Manager's recommendation; seconded by Ms. Scarr and carried unanimously by voice vote. RECESS: 10:54 a.m. to 11:05 a.m. (Mr. Holleman was present.) B. PRESENTATION BY R. W. BECK, INC.: R. W. Beck, Inc., presented Board with an update of the Water Master Plan and Personnel Needs Assessment status. Ms. Robertson started with the Water Master Plan. With the C.I.P. program, they worked with staff to come up with criteria to be used to prioritize projects, as follows: • DWS Service Criteria and Standards - things like being able to get enough water to fight fires and enough for service to existing customers at the needed pressure. • State and Federal Requirements - things which impact health and safety, water quality, monitoring and reporting all would fall under that. • Operation and Maintenance Requirements - condition assessment means if there are facilities which are failing or are in poor condition. If DWS staff is having to go frequently to repair mains, they would fall under that. It becomes costly and uses a lot of staff time but would receive a higher ranking under operations and maintenance. Page 7 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc Coordination with Other Utilities and Other Water Projects - example, if there is a road project going on and there is a water project for the same area, it would make sense to do them at the same time. That would receive a higher ranking if applicable. Financing and Funding - if outside funding is available and there is a time requirement, that project would be bumped up on the list to take advantage of the funding. Strategic Initiatives and Directions from the Strategic and Business plans - things which the Board and staff have already identified as priorities are addressed in terms of the C.I.P. ranking. Mr. Wilkins asked how they make the decision on the factors that cause an initiative to move up or even off the listing. Ms. Robertson replied that they have a separate table, which has a ranking and has a description. For each of them, they looked at a high, medium, and low ranking. With that, they assigned certain points or description of what it means. There are some guidelines used to rank projects to have some consistency; however, it is still very subjective. Example of a highest priority would be impacts to health and safety versus another type of improvement that just increases redundancy in the system. She continued that what was shown were four sample projects showing their rankings in each of the columns one through six, based on the six bulleted explanations above. The scores of 1 to 10 mean 1 to 3 (low), 4 to 6 (medium), and 7 to 10 (highest). Mr. Smith commented that in using this methodology, what is happening is you are assuming that each one of the criteria carries the same weight. Ms. Robertson replied that is correct. In talking that over with staff, they came out with the last three columns ranking just with a yes or no. Therefore, they have less weight than the first three. A "no" is a zero. A "yes" is ranked as a five. The last three criteria could never be ranked as high as the first three. They talked about coming up with a more detailed weighting for the criteria, but they are also trying to keep it somewhat simple. If the process becomes too complicated, it tends to fall apart and not relied on. Mr. Wilkins commented that it looks as though the last two columns are in the process of being decided since they have the same weight up and down the list. The danger to avoid is that if the scores become zero, the whole category disappears. Mr. Goya asked if they could use a simple yes or no rather than a number value. Ms. Robertson replied that the yes or no is on a separate table, which contains more detail. For this example, they wanted to come up with an actual score so they needed to apply some sort of number value to it. Ms. Scarr did not understand why, under Strategic Initiative and Direction column, they all have equal scores. She would think the Strategic Plan would direct the Department toward some projects in preference to others. Aside from health and safety concerns, certain projects like the Waiaha corridor should carry more weight than a five because of the need to supply more water in West Hawaii. Page 8 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc Ms. Robertson replied that she would not pay too much attention to the number values assigned to these projects. It is just for the purpose of illustrating the process they are going to go through rather than the actual ranking that is assigned to these specific projects. Mr. Wilkins commented that for the time being, the last two columns shown are temporarily neutral. Mr. Jochim reviewed the results of the Personnel Needs Assessment. There were three goals: 1) Review staff adequacy for existing operations; 2) Evaluate staffing needs to implement 20 -year Water Master Plan; and 3) Recommend additional staff as appropriate. When they visited the Department in June, they interviewed management and staff in various divisions, as well as the district offices. Each person was asked a series of standard questions as well as some open -ended ones to invite individual concerns. In reviewing the results, communication came up a lot. The question is how to relate this information to the Strategic and Business plans as well as certain things going on within the Department and comparing what some of the other utilities on the island are doing. In response to Mr. Smith's question if it were appropriate to ask customers for their feedback on the level of service from the Department, Mr. Jochim replied that for purposes of this Assessment, it targeted staff only. In response to Mr. Heck's question if the interviews were held in a way to entice openness and honesty, Mr. Jochim replied in the affirmative. Those interviewed were assured that the information would not be used against them. He added that staff seems positive about working for this Department. He continued that their findings were drafted, and they will be meeting with management. In all, about 19 positions have been identified, several of which have been budgeted for next year. There are a couple additional ones - -some electrical engineering positions that came out as pretty high priority. There were some Department -wide issues or opportunities and some ideas on techniques for improving communication between divisions and around the island. The computer billing system came up quite a bit in terms of people not being able to work efficiently because they are working around it. There were ideas on the computer network -- getting it to work more efficiently to access information. There was also a lot of input on one of the tactics identified as part of the Strategic Plan - -to get job task descriptions (work processes) well identified and documented so that when new people come on board, a document would be available to them to help them learn their job faster. A good example is the meter reader classification, which has a high turnover because people enter the Department through that entry -level position and move up. There is no systematic process for teaching them their job other than having them tag along with somebody. Ms. Scarr asked if some of the additional staff identified are those unfilled positions the Department has been having difficulty in filling. Mr. Jochim replied that some are, but other needed positions address future anticipated growth on the island. Page 9 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc The Manager commented on the electrical engineering series that the Department presently does not have. This would be a totally new series, but Mr. Ahuna and his staff feel it is very important in the plan review process. Mr. Jochim continued that staff identified areas where efficiency could be improved. One idea was having a dedicated staff person at the engineering counter to handle comments and questions so they do not have to pull an engineer up all the time to answer the questions. In response to Ms. Scarr's question if this Department is considering hiring chemical engineers in the future, as some are doing nationwide, Mr. Jochim replied that it did not come up. He thought everybody was pretty comfortable with the water quality. The Manager added that they have looked at establishing a chemical lab, and there have been discussions for about a year with the personnel from the Microlab. Probably the reason why it has not progressed is because this water does not have the same kinds of problems as other jurisdictions on the mainland. Mr. Goya asked about fiscal responsibilities and the IT area as the Department transitions more towards a technical base support system. Mr. Jochim replied that a lot of the financial comments related to the Harris system and having to work around it. On the IT side, there was a lot of interest in setting up a Department -wide intranet where you could access information on a secure platform across the island. A lot of utilities have gone to the intranet IT system. A lot of specific comments from staff indicated that if they had access to a maintenance reporting software, it would make their jobs more efficient. Mr. Goya asked if there were any questions on water rate impacts or affordability. Mr. Jochim replied that nobody got into specifics. It was more of a wish list. A schedule of upcoming presentations to the Board by R. W. Beck, Inc., is as follows: • October 26, 2005 - Preliminary C.I.P. results and cost estimates (Ms. Robertson stated that by that time, they would be very close to the end of the water master plan and could move forward with the rate study) • January 24, 2006 - new financial plan and rate impacts • March 21, 2006 - review rates • May 23, 2006 - adopt new rates (if necessary) Mr. Goya stated that it would be very interesting to see how the 19 positions are integrated into the whole plan, noting that some of them are already current vacancies. Ms. Robertson stated that the report has fiscal impacts for those different positions. The idea is that there are some that are already in the budget for next year (there were about three or four positions), so they were the highest priority. In terms of the next priorities, they have yet to be reviewed with the Manager. Page 10 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc C. AGRICULTURAL RATE RENEWAL: The Manager addressed the concerns by agricultural (ag) rate users at the Board's meeting on May 24, 2005. Concerns were over the yearly paperwork needed to maintain the ag rate. The Manager stated that it should take no more than a half an hour for them to complete the paperwork. His concern was with the burden it places on staff. He called upon Mr. Calvin Uemura from the Customer Service Section who is directly doing the work to give the Board an idea of what is involved. Mr. Uemura reported that they mailed out requests on April 4, 2005, and had a June 1 deadline. This is fairly new to the customers in respect to the request for tax forms. The forms the Department requires were included with the Agenda as a sample. The original form only had five listings. Two more were added. The form itself and the requirement on the last two pages of the handout are the G45 and G49 State Excise Tax Returns. The Department has received 600 out of the roughly 900 mail -outs. Out of that, he had to mail out at least 400 letters explaining the G45 was. With their backflow preventer in place, signing and returning the top form and a photocopy of the back form would complete their annual renewal process. Some of the things they encountered that slowed down the process by the Department were the additions of #2 and #7; however, all of the items 1 through 7 are part of the Department's Rules and Regulations. It is a matter of restating what is in the Rules and Regulations. The Manager stated that one question he posed to Customer Service was if they were comfortable doing this on a yearly basis, and their answer was yes. They estimated eight hours a week spent on this work, so it is really not that bad. When asked by the Board how many are in compliance, Mr. Uemura replied that 410 are, as of today. For whatever reasons, some customers did not respond; but in fairness, because this is a new process all non - responders were sent reminders that if they do not respond by the deadline (June 1), they will lose their ag rate. Chairman Mochida asked what recourse the Department has if they do not comply. Mr. Uemura replied that for the August billing customers, he is just about done with converting them back to the general rates. By the end of the next cycle (September), the remaining balance would be done. For a customer who gets his bill by the second week in the August billing cycle, if they have not renewed, they will see the increase in their rates. Ms. Scarr commented that the Department's Rules and Regulations say the Department "may" require this form to be submitted- -not "shall." She assumed the Department was the one to decide to actually collect this information. The Manager stated this was a result from a Board Meeting where the Board wanted the Department to do the renewals. Mr. Goya pointed out in the Water Rates brochure from the Department that it says "shall." Page 11 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc Mr. Wilkins stated that there are two factors that might affect the agricultural farmer's willingness to respond - -one would be if they gained an advantage on rates, and the second would be if they gained an advantage in the amount of water they are allowed to use. He asked what the differences are in these two points between the farmer and the homeowner. The Manager indicated that the rates are included on the Department's brochure on water rates. If the ag rate user does not use beyond a certain amount, it is really a detriment to them. That may be why some people did not respond to the request. When asked how the Department is doing with the subdivisions on master meters, Mr. Uemura replied that subdivisions are more unique because he has to deal with the Association as opposed to the individual GE holders. The time lag is much larger. They also run into different parameters where the water account and the GE are not in the same name. The water account may be under the farmer's personal name because there may be a dwelling on the property; however, the GE is under a company or farm name. In response to Ms. Scarr's question of how many there are, Mr. Uemura replied there are three or four with ag rates on a master meter. The Manager reiterated that he does not feel the paperwork is a burden on the customer, and the Department will maintain the renewal on a yearly basis as long as staff can manage it. In response to Mr. Heck's question of what it would cost the Department if it were to do it once every three years, Mr. Uemura replied that a small majority change plans or retire from the business. The Rules and Regulations stated that they must notify the Department when they stop agricultural activity; but in reality, it does not happen. Chairman Mochida had concerns about those who are not responding (with respect to backflow). This should be an important issue for the farmer because they use poison. It may be that they are not renewing their rate because they are not putting the backflow prevention assembly in. He suggested that staff call a meeting to address this. The Manager asked Mr. Michael Watanabe to address the concerns. Mr. Watanabe is with the backflow prevention program in the Water Quality Assurance and Control Branch, and they have been doing an excellent job in policing the island as far as backflow prevention devices. Mr. Watanabe stated that they decided to address the backflow requirement with the ag rate. With customers applying for ag rates, they are saying they are involved in agriculture; therefore, they must have a backflow prevention assembly. For those who do not respond, staff plans to check with the Real Property Tax office. There are ag properties that are dedicated to have a preferred tax rate. They will be addressed at that point to see who is conducting ag activity but do not have an ag rate. They have been keeping an inventory of the Department's customers through those two methods. Ms. Scarr recalled previous Board discussions on offering ag rates, and one of the aspects was to get the farmers to apply for the rate, at which time they would be told they need a backflow preventer. She agreed with Chairman Mochida that you do not want them to drop off the ag rate. Maybe this is defeating the purpose in getting them to acknowledge they are involved in agriculture. Page 12 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc The Manager stated that it is not a lot of time to spend to send in the forms. Ms. Scarr stated that the Manager is assuming they are filing these forms. Why assume that all of them are actually paying GE taxes. They should be, but they may not be. She knew of some cases where they are not and they did not respond. The Manager stated that Mr. Watanabe is addressing that by checking with the tax office. Mr. Heck asked what authority the Department has if it finds people that do not have a backflow preventer. The Manager replied that if it can be determined that they are dedicated to agriculture and they are doing that work but do not have a backflow preventer, the Department has the right to shut off their service. It is not only this Department's authority but also the Department of Health. In response to Mr. Wilkins' question if policy required a backflow on residential outside faucets, Mr. Watanabe replied that the Department's jurisdiction ends after the meter. It comes under the plumbing code. Mr. Heck quoted No. 9 on 3 -29 Agricultural Use Rates - "Consumer shall notify the Department immediately if agricultural activities cease for more than 120 days." He asked why the Department wants to know if there is a lack of agricultural activities for three months and also if people are responding to this. The Manager replied that if their activities cease, then they should not be getting the ag rate. Mr. Heck clarified that in agriculture, many times it ceases because of weather or the crop. Manager replied it does not mean seasonal. The word "cease" means if they are going to give up farming. Mr. Heck commented that it the terminology may be a little unclear. Ms. Scarr felt that there are a lot of farms that are not dedicated because they have houses on them and they pay the homeowner's rate rather than an agricultural rate for taxes. That way, a lot of farms would be missed if they do not send in that ag rate application. The backflow prevention is the major issue in protecting the water supply. Maybe more creative thought is needed to get them to come in and say they are farming. D. WATER COMMITMENTS: Ms. Scarr stated that at the last meeting, staff handed out a chart of water commitments and maximum daily pumpage for District 7. Water commitments for 2005 total 4,817,000. However, the data that came from the Department back in January shows 6,046,800. She asked what happened to the $1.2 million. Page 13 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc The Manager commented that the relationship almost seems like the difference between average day and max day (a factor of 1.5). Ms. Scarr stated that the concern is that the possible demand is going to exceed the possible supply at some point in the foreseeable future. The Manager reiterated what he said at a previous meeting and that is that the Department is not going to let that happen. Ms. Scarr mentioned that there are quality issues as well as quantity issues. If the Department keeps pumping from the Kahaluu Shaft at the current rate, the salinity in it is not at a very desirable level. The Manager indicated that the pumping was curtailed to increase the quality of the water. In response to Ms. Scarr's question if the Department is making additional commitments in the North Kona system, the Manager replied yes, but on a very limited basis. For example, a developer might ask for 200 units but only get 50. Mr. Ahuna added that although they have commitments, they are going to phase their projects. Mr. Smith thanked the Department for providing this information. As a Board, what he would look at and be concerned with on all these charts is when the blue line exceeds the yellow line. Blue is commitments plus max day, and yellow is capacity. The Manager stressed that these commitments were made back when the Department needed money to develop a system. At that time, it was the right thing to do because the Department got a lot of improvements out of it. He added that Mr. Ahuna and his staff have a good handle on the situation and will not do anything to jeopardize the existing consumers. That is really the bottom line. E. MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT: When asked by the Board if there were any projects that need mention, the Manager stated that the one still outstanding project is Pohakea. F. REVIEW OF MONTHLY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: Mr. Goya asked about budgeted and unfilled positions. He asked that somewhere in the report, unfilled positions should be listed so the Board would be aware of any discrepancies in the budget. Mr. Sumada asked for clarification if that meant unfilled and budgeted. Mr. Goya replied in the affirmative. It will help when the Department comes to the Board for consideration of a new position that is not on the budget. Page 14 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc The Manager stated that most of them are career series, and within the series, there are a lot of vacancies, but they are not budgeted. G. MANAGER'S REPORT: 1) Kona Coastview/Wonderview status - project is going well. There have been very good comments from the community with regard to the contractor, Isemoto Contracting Co., Inc. 2) USGS Drilling Program - discussed earlier. 3) Kona Water Quality - consultant is looking at not only treatment but also possibly revising the way water is pumped at the shaft. Awaiting their recommendations. 4) New Chief of Operations - Mr. Daryl Ikeda has been selected as Chief of Operations, effective August 1, 2005. 5) Waiaha Corridor - settled on cost to this Department. Will send surveyors out to and then get an appraisal; buy the land; develop the agreement; have it reviewed by Corporation Counsel; and, hopefully, the project will start in about eight or nine months. It should be finished in 11 /z years. That will provide a corridor to bring water from Waiaha at least down to Heinaloli Street. Staff will also be meeting with Kamehameha Investment Corp. They have three wells, and the Department would like to participate and receive a portion of that water. In response to Mr. Smith's question if the Manager is optimistic about that, he replied that he feels an agreement can be reached. 6) Mr. Smith mentioned that he is on the Board of Directors of the Kona - Kohala Chamber of Commerce; and for the last couple of years, they have put together a Ulumau Hawaii Island Leadership Series. They just graduated the second class, and he acknowledged Mr. Keith Okamoto for participating in the weekend sessions and taking time out of his personal schedule to improve himself and become an asset to the Department of Water Supply. Mr. Okamoto mentioned that the Department sponsored him. Mr. Smith mentioned that the next group of participants includes Mr. Kurt Inaba from the Department of Water Supply. 7) Automatic Meter Reading - the Department plans to try implementing 2,000 radio read meters and start off with the very dangerous areas such as Palani Road, Kaumana Drive, and Keaau -Pahoa Highway. In addition, the Department will get two mobile units - -one Hilo and one in Kona so the meter readers can drive at the speed limit and pick up the readings. Looking at spending less than $1 million for this work. Will come back to the Board next month for approval. It will be sole source determination. 8) Mr. Goya asked about the Information Systems Branch, which was approved by the Board at its June 28, 2005, meeting. He asked if approval has been received yet from the Hawaii Government Employees Union. The Deputy Manager indicated that it just went out- - awaiting their review. H. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: 1) Follow -up to Ms. Scarr's survey - it was decided to proceed with a small sample survey of 1,000 out of approximately 6,688 customers in South Kona. It should give a pretty good reading. The Manager was asked to check on the cost of printing in -house to save cost. He asked that Ms. Scarr keep in touch with the Department in the next month to get final costs, to be reported on at the August meeting. Page 15 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc 2) Chairman Mochida mentioned some concerns he heard of from attending the AWWA National Conference in San Francisco and also from Honolulu about wire wrap tanks. The reports do not seem to be very good. He asked that an Agenda item be scheduled for the August meeting to discuss the construction of tanks. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Meeting: The next meeting of the Water Board will be held on August 23, 2005, 10:00 a.m., in the Hilo Operations Center Conference Room, 889 Leilani Street, Hilo, Hawaii. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC None. ADJOURNMENT ACTION: Mr. Heck moved for adjournment of the Meeting; seconded by Mr. Goya and carried unanimously by voice vote. (Meeting adjourned at 12:16 p.m.) Secretary The Department of Water Supply is an Equal Opportunity provider and employer. To file a complaint of discrimination, write: USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326 -W, Whitten Building, 14"' and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington DC 20250 -9410. Or call (202) 720 -5964 (voice and TDD) Page 16 of 16 7 -26 -05 Minutes.doc