north alpine service

This is a digital document from the collections of the Wyoming Water Resources Data System (WRDS) Library.

For additional information about this document and the document conversion process, please contact WRDS at [email protected] and include the phrase

“Digital Documents” in your subject heading.

To view other documents please visit the WRDS Library online at: http://library.wrds.uwyo.edu

Mailing Address: Water Resources Data System

University of Wyoming, Dept 3943 1000 E University Avenue

Laramie, WY 82071

Physical Address: Wyoming Hall, Room 249 University of Wyoming

Laramie, WY 82071

Phone: (307) 766-6651 Fax: (307) 766-3785

Funding for WRDS and the creation of this electronic document was provided by the Wyoming Water Development Commission

(http://wwdc.state.wy.us)

51.1248 North Alpine

FINAL REPORT

SUBMITTED TO

WYOMING WATER DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

FOR

LEVEL II NORTH ALPINE WATER SUPPLY STUDY

Hinckley Consulting P.O. Box 452

165 North Fifth Laramie, Wyoming 82070

307 -745-0066

RFP NO. 02 - 21

Subconsultants:

November 2002

Sunrise Engineering P.O. Box 678

47 East 4th Avenue Afton, Wyoming 83110

307 -885-8500

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

II. SERVICE AREA ................................................................................................... 5

III. DEMAND PROJECTIONS .................................................................................... 9

IV. HYDROGEOLOGY AND WELL TESTING ......................................................... 12

V. EVALUATION OF EXISTING SySTEM .............................................................. 25

VI. IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES AND ESTIMATED COSTS .......................... 27

VII. FINANCING OPTIONS AND USER FEE ANALYSIS ......................................... 43

VIII. PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................ 55

APPENDIX A - North Alpine Improvement and Service District Background Documents

APPENDIX B - Well Log Information

APPENDIX C - Public Meeting Information

APPENDIX D - Environmental Assessment

APPENDIX E - North Alpine Improvement and Service District Property Owners

North Alpine -WWDC Level II

TABLES

Table 1 Projected Maximum Day Use ....................................................... 11

Table 2 Projected Peak Hour Demands.~ .................................................. 11

Table 3 WSEO Statement of Completion Review ..................................... 13

Table 4 Groundwater Quality Analyses ..................................................... 16

Table 5 Construction and Permit Information for Clinger #1 and Clinger #2 Wells .......................................................................... 18

Table 6 - 9 Itemized Cost Estimates for Minimum, Mid Level, Maximum Level and Preferred Options ................................................ 37 - 40

Table 10 Capital Cost Comparison of Alternatives ...................................... 41

Table 11 Estimated Operation and Maintenance Costs .............................. 42

Table 12 Comparison of Water Supply Financing Programs ...................... 48

Table 13 - 16 Debt Service Analyses for Minimum, Mid Level, Maximum Level and Preferred Options ................................................ 49 - 52

Table 17 A - B Comparison of Funding Alternatives (Annual and Monthly

FIGURES

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Basis) .................................................................................... 53 - 54

General Location Map .................................................................... 2

Rees Subdivision Existing Water System Schematic ..................... 3

Regional Water System Schematic ................................................ 7

Proposed Piping and Well Locations Plan - USGS ...................... 14

Depths to Water - Clinger #1 and #2 Wells ................................. 20

Drawdown Data - Clinger #1 and #2 Wells .................................. 21

Well Area Site Plan ...................................................................... 28

Flow Meter I Chlorination Vault Schematic ................................... 30

Supply Well Power Panel Schematic ........................................... 31

General Improvements Plan - Orthophoto Quad ......................... 33

Possible Transmission Line and Tank Site Plan .......................... 35

ii North Alpine -WWDC Levell!

I. INTRODUCTION

The North Alpine Improvement and Service District is located in an unincorporated area of Lincoln County about one mile north of the Alpine City Limits. The district includes a total of about 65 acres as shown on the attached location map (See shaded area on Figure 1). Although the district includes two separate noncontiguous parcels, the main developed portion is made up of the 60 residential lots on about 48 acres, which comprise the Rees Subdivision (See Figure 2). The entire Rees Subdivision is located on a bench approximately 100 feet above the expansive alluvial terrace that makes up the majority of the Alpine Junction area.

The Rees Subdivision Plat, which was filed in 1955, also includes two additional tracts which encompass the Nordic Inn and several private residences owned- by the Clinger Family, all of which share use of the existing water system. All facilities in the area are served by individual on-site septic tanks and leachfields. The main Rees subdivision is bounded on the north and east by U.S. Forest Lands and on the west and south by lands owned by the Clinger family.

The North Alpine District applied to the Wyoming Water Development Commission in 2001 to provide funding assistance to make long overdue improvements to the existing antiquated and deficient water system which dates to the mid 1950's. In order to qualify for funding, the District was required to purchase the entire water system from the Clinger Family which had previously owned and operated the water system as a public utility. A formal order was issued by the Wyoming Public Service Commission authorizing the sale from the Clinger family to the North Alpine Improvement and Service District as of September 10, 2002.

There are currently approximately 32 homes on a total of existing 60 lots (including one lot that has been split). Additional development is anticipated to continue, as the area has become a popular location for workers from Jackson looking for more affordable housing. However full build-out is expected to take some time given that several residents own multiple lots which in some cases serve as open space buffers.

The District also includes a noncontiguous 17 plus acre parcel located northwest of the main subdivision owned by Mr. Jerry Woodland as shown on the location map, Figure 1. This portion of the District is presently not developed or subdivided. It was included in the original District formation as a possible alternative source of groundwater supply for the Rees Subdivision, which has seen mixed results with wells drilled within the subdivision boundaries. However, more detailed pump test information on the two wells that currently service the Rees Subdivision (located on Clinger Family lands at the base of the bench) indicate a potential to provide adequate water with the addition of one or two new wells adjacent to the existing wells.

The Wyoming Water Development Commission sponsored several past stUdies in this area including a 1995 Level 1 Study which focused on the non-incorporated areas of Alpine Junction which at the time were beginning to experience considerable growth pressures. This study provided an overview and projected future water use for the

1 North Alpine -VVWOC Level II

REES

46 I 47 I 48 I

SUBDIVISION 12,000 GAL. STEEL STORAGE TANK (ELEVATION ~ 5840) \

43 44 45 49

~ SPRUCE STREET 2W 2W

fJ"

30 29 28 27 26 25 24

17 18 20 21 22 19

PINE STREET 23 I

2W 2W

51 52 53 54 55

58 2W 2W

:7W~ 41 39 38 40 36(TWO ~ 56 LOTS)

32 33 34 35 ~ I~'W

4W ~

50

42 ~ 57

31 I

4 3 2 5

9 6 ~~~-----~--~~ __ ~ ____ L.----- N

7 8 16

z o ::l-

13 15 14

12 11 I 10 \ _-----I...-- J 1---~--~~L--1 _____ ~~-------------=======~ 7' 2W

-2W

- 4W

--- 2" WATERLINE - GALVANIZED 15-20 gpm WELL #1 ___ 4" WATERLINE - PVC (IN GARAGE BASEMENT)

~ 40-50 gpm WELL #2 TO NORDIC "Q (PITLESS ADAPTER) INN, ETC.

~~~--~~~--------------------------------------------------++----------~

~ ~~I~ n-----cQ FIGURE 2 l\N~'l 2'0 ~ i)O~ Rs ousENG/NEERING,I'.c. REES SUBDIVISION f\\G~ (I'l - ~~--- PIaD .. IDWyo ..... ID.IdaIIo EXISTING WATER SYSTEM SCHEMATIC-- ~N

~~ .. ;; P.o. .... .r .... WYI38I1

~ ----" PII(307)' Ju(3I7) 73W3.14 SCALE: 11 " = 300' tv r""\-"'"T""\ ----.,. ~

various public and private water systems in the area including the Rees Subdivision which is the subject of this study. In addition, the WWDC in 1994 and 1995 sponsored Level III improvements to the Town of Alpine system including additional storage, a booster pump station, replacement of smaller diameter lines and additional valves, hydrants and related appurtenances. A more recent study, completed in 2001, looked at the feasibility of using the Town of Alpine springs (which previously were used for potable water until affected by a contamination episode) for a separate irrigation system.

This Level II Study, with the North Alpine Improvement and Service District as the sponsor, is being funded in its entirety from a 2002 "new development program" appropriation by the Wyoming Legislature in the amount of $60,000. This engineering study is specifically intended to "evaluate the supply source and existing system and make recommendations for improvements to pressure and storage". The typical Level II study consists of two principle objectives:

1) a determination of project feasibility; and,

2) if feasible, a refinement of the project to the status necessary for a Level III funding request.

4 North Alpine -WWDC Level II

II. SERVICE AREA

The primary service area for this study is the Rees Subdivision and the Nordic Inn, which includes residential properties owned by the Clinger Family. Additional surrounding properties that have difficulty obtaining adequate water may at some time wish to become a part of the District. However most private property owners in the area have to date been able to develop adequate (although often limited) private water supply wells and are reluctant to become part of a community water system. Some interest has been expressed relative to the provision of fire protection in the area, although the greater financial commitment associated with larger diameter distribution mains, fire hydrants and larger tanks frequently cause landowners to question the overall value and affordability.

At the present time, there are no specific development plans for the 17 acre plus Woodland property which is a part of the North Alpine Improvement and Service District. Recently, individual wells with adequate capacity for domestic use have been drilled on adjacent properties (See discussion on Coletti Well). With the prospect for 5 or 6 three (plus) acre lots, this property has options for on-site wells and leachfields as compared to the typical ~ acre lots in the Rees Subdivision. Since State funding agencies do not allow the developer of these lands to benefit from any grant or low interest loans, there would be less incentive for the landowner to take part in an improvements project unless water were unavailable or more expensive to develop onsite. With overall water system capital improvement costs anticipated in the range of $10,000 to over $15,000 per hookup (excluding all grant funds), private landowners often prefer to develop individual wells as their first option.

One of the key improvements to be recommended for the water system is the construction of a new storage tank on Forest Service lands at an elevation of about 5900 to 5950 (See Section VI on Improvement Alternatives for maps and discussions). A preliminary tank location and elevation has been chosen to the north east of the Rees Subdivision, primarily to insure adequate working pressure (45 psi minimum) to all lots within the service area (controlled by the upper lots in the Rees Subdivision) while minimizing the length of a transmission line that will access the tank. Lands in the subdivision range in elevation from about 5760 to as high as 5840. Forest Lands are the only alternative for this tank as there are no private lands in this area that provide adequate elevation.

As discussed in the 1995 Level 1 Study, a new water tank at this location and elevation does have the potential to serve areas outside of the primary service are"a previously described. The tank can potentially serve much of the area on the north side of the Snake River with gravity service as shown on Figure 1. It should be noted that pressure reducing valves would be needed for elevations less than 5700 where static pressures would exceed 100 psi. Consequently, this study will also look at a range of tank sizes and the possibility of installing additional tanks in the future to serve long term needs of the North Alpine area. This will also include a range of transmission line sizes to accommodate possible additional future uses.


A schematic of a possible future regional water system is shown in Figure 3. This diagram shows approximate elevations of existing and possible future well supplies and tanks along with the elevations of the principal areas of use. The diagram was prepared to suggest how the Town of Alpine' may at some future date connect to unincorporated areas to the north to create a regional system. Private lands north of the Snake River involve large acreages that could potentially triple the area of the current Alpine Town limits. However, as discussed in the 1995 Level I Study, most landowners on larger parcels are reluctant to join a large regional water system, as they believe they are adequately served by individual wells and smaller community systems.

It should be noted that from a hydraulic perspective,' there is limited benefit to the North Alpine District in connecting to the Town of Alpine water system. The Town operates off of a 500,000 gallon tank located on Forest Lands at an elevation of about 5855, which would provide static pressures in the range of 20 to 25 psi for the highest lots in the Rees Subdivision based upon gravity flow conditions. During high demand periods and fire flow conditions, pipe friction losses to transmit the water over 7000 feet from Alpine to properties to the north could result in very low or even negative pressures within the Rees Subdivision depending upon demand and pipeline size. (Based upon a general rule of thumb friction loss gradient for large transmission lines of about 3 to 4 psi per 1000 feet, fire flow demands·during peak use periods can potentially reduce residual pressures an estimated 20 to 30 psi over a distance of 7000 feet). Also the second higher elevation 250,000 gallon Town of Alpine Tank located at about 5950 (again located on Forest Service lands) would similarly be of no benefit to a regional system since it operates within an isolated pressure zone within the Town system serviced by a booster pump station.

Consequently, a new tank north of the Snake River would be essential for a regional gravity flow water system that is capable of delivering fire flows through out the service area. A tank designed to serve the specific needs of North Alpine Improvement and Service District, which with the Rees subdivision is at a higher elevation than most areas, could also ultimately serve additional private lands in the area with the use of pressure reducing stations. Given this potential, the tank site should also be designed to allow the possibility of a second future tank to serve long term needs.

Additional higher density development is in the planning stages for the North Alpine area including a low cost housing development designed for workers in Jackson and the surrounding areas. The Meridian Group of Jackson owns over one hundred acres west of Alpine Junction on the North Side of the Snake River and has plans to construct several hundred residential units and related commercial facilities. The Meridian Group property ranges in elevation from about 5640 to 5660 EL, about 100 feet lower than the Rees Subdivision site. A storage tank serving the Rees Subdivision can potentially serve this area. However, the specific schedule as to when this project will actually take place is at the present uncertain.

For purposes of this study, the primary system components will be sized to allow for the addition of 25 single family residences. Some components may be upsized or designed with flexibility to be enlarged to allow for future demands and growth. This

6 North Alpine -\NWDC Level II

250,000 GAL. STORAGE TANK EL: 5950

FIGURE 3 REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM SCHEMATIC

500,000 GAL. STORAGE TANK EL: 5780

ALPINE WELLS

NO SCALE

FUTURE CONNECTION

POSSIBLE TRANSMISSION LINE ACROSS SNAKE RIVER BRIDGE

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

PRV I I

REES SUBDIVISION

PROPOSED STORAGE TANK THIS STUDY EL: 5950

EL: 5800±

I PRV CLINGER NO. 2AND NEW NORTH ALPINE WELL NO.3 I

I (FUTURE I DEVELOPMENT) I

SNAKE RIVER I NORDIC liNN

I

LEGEND PRV = PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE

assumes that some of the adjacent lands will be subject to development or subdivision in the near future. The additional. undeveloped lands added to the water system would be required to pay tap fees and user fees in accordance with established schedules. The schedules would be based upon the full" cost of the system and not benefit from any of the state or federal grant or loan that may be provided for the system. However, since the residents of the service district will be responsible for the improvements and areas of future use remain uncertain, limited expansion options are proposed to keep overall costs affordable.

The costs for the overall improvements will include the installation of a single residential service to the Woodland property. A portion of the cost will be made up with tap fees in accordance with standard schedules to be applied to all new properties.

8 North Alpine -WWDC Levell!

III. DEMAND PROJECTIONS

Demand projections for the primary service area will be based upon buildout of the Rees Subdivision plus the additional residential and commercial uses associated with the Clinger properties presently connected to the water system. Demand figures will be based upon typical demand rates observed in other residential subdivisions for the size and type of lots comparable to those in the Rees Subdivision. Historic water use in the Rees Subdivision has been severely restricted by both physical and forced limitations on the existing system. For example users within the subdivision we're specifically restricted from using any water for any outside use including irrigation or car washing. Also, as the system is anticipated to operate off of an elevated storage tank, which will supply water for peak use periods, the' maximum day demand represents the key figure for sizing components. Several sections of transmission line will however be designed for fire flow or peak hour demands, whichever is larger.

Observations during July of 2002 when tests were being performed on water supply wells indicated total use rates (not including the Clinger properties) were less than 18 gpm or 26,000 gallons per day. Based upon 32 existing homes, this equates to about 810 gallons per home. At an assumed average of 3 persons per home, this would represent about 270 gallons per person per day. Minimum DEQ standards require 340 gallons per person per day. Also, many subdivisions which allow irrigation see usage rates in the range of 500 to 1000 gallons per person per day. The Rees Subdivision is anticipated to be at the lower side of the range for use given that the lots are relatively small (average of about one half acre) and most of the area is heavily wooded which limits the space available for lawn.

Observations in July of 2002 project water use on the Clinger properties, where extensive irrigation use was taking place, at 50 gpm or about 72,000 gallons per day during peak occupancy times. This rate of use is anticipated to continue given the extensive lawn and landscaped areas associated with these residential and commercial properties. Also, as a part of the recent sale of the water system to the North Alpine Water District, the Clingers have maintained the right to use water at historic rates.

Water demand projections for the Rees Subdivision and related service area are summarized in Table 1. These projections, which include allowances for irrigation, estimate that the service area will eventually need in the range of 160 gpm of supply or three wells producing 50 to 55 gpm each to meet as a minimum, maximum day demands. This rate of production does not provide the maximum day flow with one well out of service but does fit better within the limitation of the aquifer as discussed in the following sections.

Data for projecting peak hour flows in small systems is very limited. Consequently, most projections are based upon a multiplier in the range of 1.5 to 2.5 times the maximum day demand. For systems such as this, the peak hour demand is most definitely driven by irrigation, which can also occur outside of the typical peak flow times (morning hours and evening hours) with the more widespread use of automatic


sprinkler systems on timers. In addition, sprinkler systems vary in terms of rate of water used and the length of the water cycles, which also complicates peak demand predictions. As peak hour demand on this system will have some i.mplications in the sizing of the distribution and transmission lines, it is recommended that a factor of 2.0 times the maximum day demand be used as presented in Table 2.

Wyoming DEQ standards often refer to the annual average day flow for use in sizing certain water system components such as the water storage tank. However, with systems in recreational areas such as Alpine where wintertime occupancy is often a fraction of the summer occupancy, annual average flows are often much lower and therefore have less meaning for design purposes. Consequently the maximum day demand serve as the primary water use factor for sizing most components with the exception of certain distribution and transmission piping which will be sized for fire flow or peak hour demands.


TABLE 1. PROJECTED MAXIMUM DAY USE REES SUBDIVISION AND SURROUNDING SERVICE AREA

NUMBER PERSONS ESTIMATED GALLONS

TOTAL TOTAL

DESCRIPTION OF LOTS PER LOT POPULATION

PER USE,GPD

USE, PERSON GPM

Residential Lots within 60 3 180 600 108,000 75

Rees Subdivision

Clinger Family Note: use based upon historic pattern as per agreement, 72,000 50

Properties, All Uses estimated at 50 gpm.

SUBTOTAL 180,000 125

Adjacent properties with potential to connect to 25 3 75 600 45,000 31 system in the future

TOTAL 225,000 156

TABLE 2. PROJECTED PEAK HOUR DEMANDS REES SUBDIVISION AND SURROUNDING SERVICE AREA

MAXIMUM DAY PEAK HOUR

DESCRIPTION DEMAND, FROM DEMAND, GPM, FACTOR = 2.0 x

TABLE 1, GPM MAX DAY

Residential Lots within Rees 75 150

Subdivision

Clinger Family Properties, All Uses 50 100

SUBTOTAL 125 250

Adjacent properties with potential to 31 63

connect to system in the future

TOTAL 156 313

11 North Alpine - WWDC Level II

IV. HYDROGEOLOGY AND WELL TESTING

This section describes efforts undertaken as a part of this study to evaluate groundwater sources with specific emphasis on the two wells which currently serve the water system. This groundwater evaluation represented a first step in the process that would determine the ultimate direction of this Level II Study would take and whether there was a need to develop additional water supply in new locations.

Introduction and Hydrogeologic Setting

This section describes the results of hydrogeologic investigations and pump testing for the North Alpine Water Supply Study. It begins with an assessment of the general availability of groundwater in the larger area, then, based on the results of that assessment, focuses on the production characteristics of the two existing subdivision supply wells.

Domestic and commercial water supplies for the Alpine Junction area are all based on groundwater. There are 123 Wyoming State Engineer's Office groundwater permits in good standing in this area (north side of the Snake River; T37N, R118W, Secs. 17 -30; data search as of May 2002). These wells reflect a steady growth in individual residential properties and small subdivisions spread across the river terrace along and north of the Snake River, with small-scale commercial development (motels, Wyoming Port-of-Entry) along US Highway 26.

The great majority of the existing water-supply wells are between 50 and 150 feet deep, with reported depths to water between 20 and 70 feet. There are 17 wells in this area that are over 200 feet deep. The deepest is 520 feet, located on the higher bench occupied by the Rees Subdivision (in Lot 2). Permit-listed yields are nearly all in the 10-25 gpm range, although few wells consistently draw groundwater at these rates and it is unclear that the aquifer can sustain these levels of production at most wells. The highest capacity wells in the area are the 250-ft wells developed by the Town of Alpine south of the Snake River with tested yields of 300 - 400 gpm.

Our 1995 study of groundwater resources in the North Alpine area (Sunrise, 1995) concluded the primary aquifer for wells in this area is the Pliocene-age Salt Lake Formation. Although unconsolidated alluvial material covers the terrace, these deposits are relatively thin and are not thought to contribute to sustainable groundwater supplies except in localized areas.

The Salt Lake formation consists of complexly interbedded siltstone, sandstone, conglomerate, volcanic ash, and claystone deposits. Groundwater production is generally modest from this formation, although adequate for the diffuse residential use typical of the area. Notable exceptions occur in select areas of locally enhanced permeability, assumed to be associated with lenses of material relatively free of silt


and clay and, perhaps, with fractured occurrences of the underlying, much-older bedrock formations (Paleozoic-age carbonates and sandstones).

In the immediate area of the Rees Subdivision, existing groundwater development consists of 2 wells within the subdivision, the two wells supplying the existing subdivision water system from just outside the subdivision, and a new well immediately west of the subdivision (See Figure 4 for locations). Table 1 presents a summary of these wells .. There are also scattered wells on the lower terrace south and west of the subdivision (see Sunrise, 1995), but none of these suggest groundwater development possibilities as close to the points of use within the subdivision as the wells of Table 3.

Table 3 - WSEO Statement of Completion Review Rees Subdivision Vicinity, Alpine, Wyoming

Permit Applicant Priority Depth Depth to Permit Notes I Facility Date (ft) Water Yield

(ft) (gpm)

98553 Moe 1995 520 300 10 Rees Subdivision - Lot 2 (now owned by Hansen); driller's log: "2-5 gpm" from "fractured shale"; pump set at 492 ft.

99439 McNeal 1995 400 143 25 Rees Subdivision - Lot 15; pump test reported 220 ft drawdown at 15 gpm

122727 Coletti 2000 700 176 5 -12 immediately west of Rees Subdivision; owner reports a 9/27102 3-hr. pump test at 14 gpm that produced 170 ft. of drawdown

102467 Clinger #1 1988 109 60 40 main supply for Rees Subdivision

102468 Clinger #2 1988 120 53 50 main supply for Nordic Inn; back-up supply for Rees Subdivision.

Neither of the two wells within the subdivision (Moe and McNeal) appears to be particularly productive. The pump test reported with the McNeal well indicates a very poor specific capacity (0.07 gpm per ft of drawdown as compared to 6.7 at Clinger #2). Although we were unable to complete a test of the Moe well, the driller's description of "fractured shale" and the drilling of the well 220 feet beyond the water table are both strong indications of relatively poor production. Similarly, the newest well in the area, Coletti, penetrates 500 feet of aquifer below the water table to produce a reported 5 -12 gpm and demonstrated large drawdown during a recent pump test.

13 North Alpine -W'NDC Level II

28 27 26 25 24

19 20

14 13 12

42 41

31 32 33 34

8 7 6

EL: 5670.1 WELL #1 (IN GARAGE)

WELL #2 ,--r ....... ~.---------""""'-'-~--r------........ ~~ ...... ___ .... --t _______ -__ (WE LL CAS I NG ) 1!!!1!111.-~~~!!!!!!!!!IfII~----.....J

~ ....... NEW WELL #3

(FUTURE)

.. -- w ---- PROPOSED WATERLINE

EXISTING WELLS PROPOSED WELL

North Alpine - WVVDC Level II p.14

The groundwater level elevations (surveyed surface elevation minus measured depthto-water) calculated for the study area show groundwater in the two Clinger wells to have been within approximately 1 foot of the' same elevation, approximately 5577 MSL, immediately prior to testing (July 2002). Stabilized static water levels could not be obtained due to well use; the groundwater gradient between the two wells was toward whichever well was in use at the time of measurement. The static water level reported upon completion of the Moe well indicates an elevation of only 5490 MSL suggesting this poorly-permeable well had not fully recovered from drilling when the "static" water level was reported.

A fully stabilized depth-to-water for the Coletti well (measured as part of the present study) indicates a groundwater elevation of 5621 MSL, comparable to that calculated for the nearby McNeal well in our 1995 study, and suggesting a substantial gradient "off the hill" toward the west and south. The contemporary water level elevation in Palisades Reservoir (July 2002) averaged 5554 MSL, indicating the expected groundwater gradient toward discharge into the reservoir.

Based on aquifer test data included on Statements-of-Completion filed with the Wyoming State Engineer's Office and cursory additional testing in association with our earlier investigations (Sunrise, 1995; 18 wells examined), we conclude that the . existing wells serving the Rees Subdivision are among the most productive wells in the area. This is attributed to a potential eastward increase in the conglomeratic component of the Salt Lake Formation and local enhancement of permeability associated with the north-south trending Grand Valley Fault.

Table 4 presents the groundwater quality analyses assembled for our 1995 report, augmented with two additional analyses acquired under the present investigation. Table footnotes describe the location of the sampled wells. Clinger #2 is one of the two wells currently supplying the Rees Subdivision. With the exception of the Coletti analysis (which is so anomalous it suggests an error), these data indicate generally high-quality groundwater. All samples (except the anomalous Coletti analysis) are classified as "hard" to "very hard". Conductivity measurements from 12 wells in addition to those listed on Table 4 indicate the general representativeness of the listed data (Sunrise, 1995; Table A-4).

Conductivity values measured during July 2002 pump testing of the Clinger wells averaged 618 umhos/cm, in contrast to a value of 470 measured in July 1995. Combined with the substantially lower groundwater level encountered in 2002, this suggests water quality may be better during periods of more abundant recharge and a higher groundwater table. In either case, groundwater appears to meet drinking water standards.

15 North Alpine -VVWDC Level II

Table 4 - Groundwater Quality Analyses (mg/l) Rees Subdivision Vici~ity, Alpine, Wyoming

EPA Drinking

A B C D *E F . Water Standard

Date 7/20/95 7/20/95 7/20/95 7/20/95 7/1100 ~/16/02

Total Solids 500 s 286 233 220 347 770 310

hardness 279 202 228 282 230 312

calcium 80 43· 56 69 49.7 67

magnesium 22 23 20 27 26.9 35

sodium 250 s 2.7 7.4 1.1 17 23 4.0

potassium 1.4 2.2 .74 2.1 5.3 1.0

bicarbonate 340 260 283 332 242 330

sulfate 250 s 6 16 <5 24 54 33

chloride 250 s 10 <2 9 25 4.9 5.3

nitrate 10 p .34 .65 .13 2.3 <2.0 0.9

arsenic .05 p <0.005 .001

copper 1.3 g <.05 0.12

fluoride 1.4 p 0.19 0.19 <0.1 0.49 1.0 0.3

iron 0.3 s .11 .02 .61 .02 .041

manganese .05 s <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.001

zinc .061 - .145

radioactivity 15 p 1.8 (pCi/l)

Notes: A - Town of Alpine (Well No. 17). Additional analytes: barium (.15), cadmium «.001), chromium «.007), mercury «.0002), nickel «.01), selenium «.002), silver «.002); all are well within drinking water standards. B - Alpine Water Users (Well No.9) C - Woodworth (Well No. 12) D - Reinhart (Well No.4) *E - Coletti (a second nitrate analysis reported <0.5). These data are taken from two groundwater analyses provided by the well owner. The two analyses are quite different (the more reasonable values are listed here), however, so the listed results should be considered with caution. F - Clinger No.2


Conclusion. The hydrogeologic .review presented above led to the conclusion that if the adequacy of the quantity and quality of the existing wells serving the Rees Subdivision could be confirmed, there was little reason to attempt to develop a new groundwater supply at an alternate location. In addition to the indications that the presently-developed site has a higher-than-average productivity:

1) It can be further developed with minimal disruption;

2) It has better year-round access than a site within the Rees Subdivision (access has been secured for subdivision use through purchase of rights-ofway); and,

3) It provides an overall pumping lift not substantially greater than indicated for wells within the subdivision. The reported groundwater level elevation in the Moe well, uphill and northeast of the existing supply wells actually is lower than that at the Clinger wells.

Relative to potential well sites on the terrace further south or west of the subdivision, the presently-developed site:

4) Is less subject to potential contamination from surrounding users;

5) Is less likely to cause groundwater level interference than a well in the more densely developed areas;

6) Is closer (less expensive) to the points of use; and

7) Involves far fewer pipeline I powerline right-of-way complications.

Thus, the focus of the investigation became the testing of the Clinger wells, as described below.

Well Testing

Table 5 provides construction and permit information for the Clinger #1 and Clinger #2 wells as extracted from the Statements of Completion (prepared 40 and 6 years, respectively, after well completion) by the owner for the Wyoming State Engineer's Office, augmented by the present investigations.


Table 5 - Construction and Permit Information for John Clinger #1 and John Clinger #2

Well No.1 Well No.2

Permit No. P102467W P102468W

Total Depth (ft) 109 120a

Static Depth to Water 90c 53c

(ft)

Casing 5" dia. steel; 0 - 109 ft. 8" dia. steel; 0 - 81 ft. (TD) . (open hole below)

Perforations unknown "none"( owner interview: "knife slots")

driller unknown Kendel Drilling, Idaho Falls

Completion Date May, 1940 October 21, 1982

Original Pump 1 Settingb

3 hp 1100 ft 5 hp 1100 ft

Lithology o -60: gravel o -60: gravel 60 - 109: limestone and 60 - 120: limestone and shale shale

Water zones o -60: no water o -60: no water water at 90 ft. water at 90 ft.

Water pumped (gpm) 40 (listed on permit) 50 (listed on permit) 19 (measured at system 47 (measured to open pressure, 7102) discharge, 7102)

Wellhead Completion loosely covered casing in pitless adapter in open concrete ·pit in area; surface drainage is maintenance garage away from wellhead

Notes: a) owner reports this well was subsequently deepened to 150 ft.; we tagged apparent bottom at 150.48 ft (TOC) on 7/16/02. b) pumps and settings have likely changed over time. 7/15/02 report from Gene Wright (Teton WaterWorks): Well #1 - 3 hp pump installed 1994-1996; Well #2 - 5 hp pump installed 2000. Owner reports pump # 2 currently set at 130 ft. Pump in well #1 scheduled for replacement 10102. c) see discussion of variations in aquifer water levels, p. 16

18 North Alpine -VVVVDC Level II

On July 16 - 18, 2002, the Clinger #1 and #2 wells were pump tested for this study. Discharge was measured through an in-line flowmeter to open discharge on Well #2; water levels were measured with a manual sounder (Well #1) and with a downhole transducer and automatic datalogger (Well #2). Testing chronology:

7/16 - Well #2 turned off, Well #1 controls set to run continuously (approximately 19 gpm). This period was to stabilize groundwater levels, i.e. Well #1 running continuously to maintain at the necessary water supply, drawdown and discharge from Well #2 to be superimposed on this "background" condition.

7/17 - Well #2 on at approximately 50 gpm for 13 hours; testing was terminated due to concerns with drawdown in Well #1 approaching the pump setting. Drawdown and recovery were monitored at both wells.

Aquifer Performance. Figure 5 presents the drawdown measured over the test period in the two wells. 800 minutes (13+ hours) of continuous production of approximately 50 gpm at Well #2 produced 4.5 feet of drawdown at Well #1 (in addition to the drawdown created by its own, steady pumping at approximately 20 gpm) and 7.5 feet of drawdown at Well #2. Both sets of data show the concave upward shape (drawdown increasing, but at a decreasing rate) typical of groundwater systems moving towards a relative "stabirization" of drawdown with continued pumping.

The downward kick at the end of the plot for Well #1 is not fully understood, but is assumed due to the increased discharge accompanying decreased system pressure as the tank and piping into which the well was pumping were drained. There are no installed flow meters on either well.

Similarly, the ragged nature of the drawdown plot for Well #2 is believed to be due to uncontrolled changes in pump discharge. (Higher discharge causes more drawdown.) Observations of pump discharge found variations despite stable valve settings. As indicated on the figure, turning the pump off momentarily restored full flow - an increase from 46 gpm to 55 gpm in the first instance (350 minutes). Although this behavior suggests collection of sediment on the pump intake screen which then fell away during the momentary stoppage, very little sediment was observed in settled samples of discharge water. This issue should be examined at the next opportunity to remove the pump from Well #2. (The owner reports the appearance of sand and gravel in the discharge from this well "when the reservoir drops suddenly in the fall".)

Figure 6 presents the same drawdown data, with the time axis on a logarithmic scale. Under ideal aquifer conditions, drawdown will plot as a straight line on a graph of this type. The linear portions of these plots (when allowance is made for the variations in flow rate) are roughly parallel and suggest transmissivity values of approximately 3,000 gpd/ft. Extension of these plots over longer times, and assuming no source of recharge, suggests a pumping water level in Well #2 of approximately 106 ft if the two wells were pumped continuously (70 gpm combined) for a week, and 110ft if pumped continuously for two months.


-E ... CI) ... ftS ~ I

0 ... I .c ... c. CI)

"t:I

o 100 200

Figure 5- Depths-to-Water Clinger #1 and #2 - July 17, 2002

[ Well #2 - - - - - -Well #1 I

pumping time (min)

300 400 500 600 700 800 900 88~------~--------------------------~--------~------~--------------------------~

, ", ........ ,I -. __ ,. ..

" ...... , .. ...... " 90~--~·~--------~ .... ~_~ .... ~ .. -.. -------------------------------------------------------------4 ....... .. .. - .......... ..

.. .... III _ ... _ ........ _ ......... ...

.. ...... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 92 ......

94

96

98 4--------

100L-----------------------------------------~~~~==~~-----=--------~

20 North Alpine - \NWOC Level II

g "-CD ~ cu ~ I

0 ~

I .c ~

Co CD

"C

1

Figure 6 - Drawdown Data from Clinger #1 and #2 July 17, 2002

10

I-+-Well #2 ---Well #1 I pumping time (min)

100 1000 86+-------------------------~--------------------------~----------------------~

90

I s= 1.5 (T = 8800 9Pd/~ 92

94

96

98 I s = 4 ft (T = 3300 gpd/ft)

100

102~------------------------~------------------------~~----------------------~

21 North Alpine - VVWDC Level II

If this level of drawdown were to occur, Well #1 as presently completed, would be dry. This may be an extreme case, however, in that the groundwater levels appear to have been unusually low at the time of testing and the relationship between reservoir levels and groundwater levels (see discussion, p. 22) suggests the Palisades Reservoir I Snake River as an abundant source of recharge over longer time periods. That there may only be 10 -15 feet of saturated aquifer available to Well #1 under low groundwater table conditions is cause for concern in any case and recommends the eventual replacement of the well.

The occurrence of 4.5 ft. of additional drawdown in Well #1 (a distance of 60 ft. from Well #2) as a result of pumping Well #2 at approximately 50 gpm for 800 minutes allows estimation of an effective aquifer storage coefficient of .008 over the course of the test. This value suggests a semi-confined aquifer in which groundwater production, at least initially, comes from depressurization of certain strata rather than the simple drainage of overlying deposits. This condition is unlikely to persist over time, however, and a long-term storage coefficient on the order of 0.1 is more likely to control aquifer performance.

The ability of the aquifer tapped by the Clinger wells to meet current demand levels has been amply demonstrated historically. The results of aquifer testing presented above give no indication that this level of performance cannot be maintained in the future, and suggest that with adequate well construction, the projected increases in demand (Table 1) can also be met. For example, at an aquifer transmissivity of 3,500 gpd/ft and a storage coefficient of 0.1, three wells spaced 60 ft. apart can theoretically produce a combined total of 180 gpm for 100 days with 54 feet of drawdown (including the effects of well interference and making the quite conservative assumption of no recharge).

However, the relatively low groundwater elevation at the time of testing combined with the need to maintain residents' water supply precluded more than a relatively short test of the aquifer. Projections from these results to long-term performance, particularly at substantially higher rates than were tested, is correspondingly imprecise. Additional, multi-day testing is strongly recommended in association with the construction of additional water -supply wells, and future well design and construction should allow for drawdowns on the order of those indicated above until more definitive test results can be obtained.

Pump Performance. Electrical power use during the pump test was measured using the commercial power meter installed on this service. (Other uses through this meter were estimated to be less than 200 watts; the intervals of minimum power use were considered to minimize this source of error. Pump #2 power use was based on the additional power consumption when the pump was turned on, so should be free of error from other loads.)


Pum~ #1 Pum~ #2

Power Use (KW) 4.3 5.8

Total Dynamic Head (ft) 254 99

Discharge (gpm) 19.2 47.3

Work done (KW) 0.91 0.88

Overall efficiency (%) 21 15

A properly selected, installed, and functioning pump should achieve an overall ("wire to water") efficiency of approximately 60%. Thus, neither of these installations appears to be running at anywhere near the expected" performance. Worn parts or resistance to flow beyond that represented' by the feet of lift and discharge pressure are possible causes. Correction of these problems could significantly reduce the power requirements of the wells.

In the future, records should be kept of the exact motor and pump models installed, along with depths of setting and the details of all associated piping (type, diameter, condition, check valves, etc.). Also, power use should be monitored periodically to detect changes in pump efficiency over time.

Static Water Levels. The WSEO Statements of Completion for the Clinger #1 and #2 wells list static depths to water of 90 and 53 feet, respectively. However, these statements were completed in 1988, 48 and 6 years, respectively, after the wells were actually completed. We measured a static water level of 52 feet in Clinger #2 in July of 1995 and a level of 90 feet in July of 2002. Periodic water level measurements from other wells in the area indicate similar variations, i.e. between 5580 and 5620 ft. elevation MSL.

These are presumably tied to fluctuations in the surface elevation of Palisades Reservoir, the ultimate discharge point for groundwater from throughout the study area. Review of monthly average reservoir elevations over the last 10 years shows a variation of 113 feet (5507 to 5620 ft. elevation MSL). When our measurements of groundwater elevations in the area were made in July of 1995, the reservoir was actually slightly higher than the groundwater elevation at the Clinger wells. The reservoir had been filling over the previous several months, however, and we assumed groundwater had not yet equilibrated to the new discharge elevation into the reservoir. In July 2002, the reservoir was 50 feet lower than in July 1995, commensurate with the difference in measured depths-to-water in the Clinger wells. The apparent responsiveness of these wells to reservoir water levels provides additional evidence of favorable aquifer permeabilities. That the reservoir level had fallen below the elevation of the Snake River directly south of the wells (i.e. the Snake River was free flowing at that point) suggests the July 2002 groundwater elevation at the wells was near the minimum value likely to occur.


Conclusion I Recommendation

The aquifer developed by the existing Clinger Wells #1 and #2 is adequately productive and of sufficient water quality to meet current and moderately increased future water demands. However, the Clinger #1 Well is marginally adequate to meet current demands due to shallow depth (particularly relative to drought-period groundwater levels) and poor wellhead completion. Long-term system improvements should include proper plugging and abandonment of this well and construction of an offset replacement well.

A replacement well need not move substantially from the present location, but should be located in a more accessible, outside area and should be completed with a pitless adapter. A depth of at least 200 ft is recommended. Water quality and sediment production should be carefully monitored during drilling and the final well completion (screen, open-hole, etc.) designed accordingly.

Reference

Sunrise Engineering, Inc 1995; Alpine Junction Level I Study, report prepared for the Wyoming Water Development Commission, October, 1995.


V. EVALUATION OF EXISTING SYSTEM

The Rees Subdivision water system is made up of three primary components which will be discussed in the following separate sections of this report. Figure 2 shows the main components of the existing system based upon the limited information available.

Well Supply System: As discussed in the Section IV. Hydrogeology, there are two wells currently supplying water to the subdivision. The older of the two wells, (Clinger # 1) is located in a pit within the existing garage. This condition along with the wells limited potential for yield and 5 inch casing size make this a candidate for replacement.

However, tests performed on the more recently constructed well (Clinger # 2) indicates a sustained flow of more than 50 gpm. This well has been piped to be the primary supply for the Nordic Inn but can be interconnected to the Rees Subdivision system. This well in combination with a second well of similar capacity would likely supply the needs of both the subdivision and inn for some time.

Transmission I Distribution System: The transmission I distribution system includes all the piping associated with the water system including the transmission lines which carry water from the well source to the tank and the distribution system mains which distribute water to the individual properties and the individual service lines located on each lot connected to the system. From the very beginning of the study, it was noted that the entire distribution I transmission system serving the subdivision should ultimately be replaced.

The line sizes, which are as small as two inches, are inadequate to handle typical domestic needs. Reports have been made from plumbing contractors working on the system, that some of the galvanized lines were constructed with a thinner wall pipe (less than schedule 40) that may result in additional ruptures and problems if the pressure is increased to any degree. This would be a concern given the recommendation to construct a new storage tank at a higher elevation. Also given that most of the system is close to 50 years old, most pipelines are at the end of their useful life.

Little is also known about the individual services which supply water to the various homes in the development. However, plans should be made to replace service connections and portions of the individual service lines to minimize future leaks and improve reliability.

As noted in the discussion on the supply wells, the Rees Subdivision can also be interconnected with the Nordic Inn water supply as the two available wells serve both entities.

Storage Tank: The existing storage tank is constructed of steel and has a total useable storage volume of about 12,000 gallons (10.7 ft diameter by 18.3 ft long).

25 North Alpine -WJVOC Level II

However, only about half or 6,000 gallons of storage is being used by the existing system as the existing float switch'is presently set at about half the tank height. Adjustment of the switch is possible but may result in additional leakage as the operating level in the tank is raised for the first time in many years. The tank is completely buried but little is known about its coatings or cathodic protection if any. There were some indications of rust on the inside however no obvious holes or cracks were observed.

As in the case of the distribution system, there is little benefit to using this existing tank in any form when improvements are made to the system. It is too low in elevation to provide proper system pressure. It is also undersized for current potable needs. Furthermore, its age, type of material and placement underground

. makes it a candidate for replacement regardless of the other deficiencies. The tank should be removed from the site upon comp'letion of a new larger storage tank located at a higher elevation.


VI. IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES AND ESTIMATED COSTS

As in the case of the previous section, the improvement alternatives are similarly divided into the three main components which make up the system. This analysis also assumes that residents of the North Alpine Improvement and Service District are interested in upgrading as much of the water distribution system as possible given the age and deficient condition of the facilities. Furthermore, a comprehensive improvements package will typically allow work to be completed more cost effectively and more quickly than a more piecemeal or phased approach.

Although the discussion focuses on independent components, many of the options presented would only work in combination with specific improvements. This is particularly true of the distribution system and storage tank which are both directly affected by fire flow issues and service to areas outside of the current district. This is less of a factor for the supply wells which are primarily designed to meet the projected maximum day flow, regardless of line size or fire protection requirements.

Water Supply Wells: The well testing work conducted during the past summer has provided reasonable confidence that one and perhaps two additional wells can be constructed in the vicinity of the existing wells. The well or wells would be constructed with pitless adaptors and proper well surface seals insuring a sanitary frost-proof connection to the distribution system. The controls and power supply at the location would also need to be upgraded. Clinger Well # 1 in this option would be abandoned. Figure 7 shows a possible well layout and piping schematic that would apply to all options. Final layout of the wells and piping will depend upon specific on the ground surveys and requirements set forth by the property owner.

Transmission I Distribution System: Three options are provided as alternatives for upgrading the piping systems as generally described below:

• Minimum Improvements This option would be based upon using 4 inch PVC pipe (as a minimum), sized only to provide basic potable and irrigation needs to the subdivision. This size line would be the least expensive but would limit options for any fire protection (other than the provision of a tanker fill hydrant). In addition, this option would limit the ability to provide service to areas outside of the current district.

• Midlevel Improvements This option would be based upon a minimum pipe size of 6 inches to provide in addition to potable needs some limited fire protection. Some large sized lines would be used to improve efficiencies in the main transmission line to the storage tank. A minimum fire protection criteria of 500 gpm for two hours would be used as hydrants spaced at intervals of about 600 feet would be included. This option would also have the ability to provide service to a limited area of expansion.


TRACT 2

WELL NO.1 (TO BE ABANDONED)

~ NOTE: ALL LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE N

::i PRELIMINARY, SUBJECT TO FINAL DESIGN AND ~I APPROVAL BY LAND OWNER.

ffil c.. ~ c..

WELL NO.3 (PROPOSED FOR \ EXISTING \ WELL NO.4

s RENDEZVOUS ENGINEERING

..... iii;.E

CONSTRUCTION, 2003) WEL~O. 2 (FUTURE)

@ . r-:\

I \: i \1' SCALE: 1" = 20'

< . <

\ ' ' ~_ , , _ , . SEE SCHEMATIC TO TANK & REES

, . _ . . - .. - , , _ . . SUBDIVISION . --- .. -- .. --. .. .-- .. -- .. --- .. .---.

" l' . 1 PROPOSED FLOWMETER VAULT

__ -+-T""'I~~ __ - 'vi .... ---~., 'vi VI 'vi ___ _

.. -o-'Qj , . - .. - 'vi ,.-

EXISTING VALVE VAULT (TO BE ABANDONED)

EXISTING LINE TO NORDIC INN

LEGEND

,

.............. __ .-,.-.-. .. .-- .. -. .. ----... .. _ ..

FIRE HYDRANT WITH STUB FOR FUTURE CONNECTION

NEW SERVICE LINE TO NORDIC INN (CONNECT TO EXISTING LINES)

TRACT 1

- 'vi UNDERGROUND WATER LINE

- .. - , . - WATER EASEMENT

@ -0-l' 't1

ROAD EASEMENT

WELL

POWER POLE

GUY WIRE

FIRE HYDRANT

FIGURE 7 WELL AREA SITE PLAN

North Alpine - VWVDC Level II p.28

• Maximum Level Improvements This option would provide what would be considered the highest feasible distribution system upgrade for a residential development using minimum of 8 inch PVC distribution mains and a fire flow criteria of 1000 gpm for 2 hours. This option would also provide the greatest flexibility to provide service outside of the district. The main increased cost for this option would be for the increase in pipe size from 6 inch to 8 inch as the same hydrant density would be proposed.

For all distribution system options, the improvements would include the reconnection of service lines to the new distribution mains along with the provision for individual meters as required by most agencies providing funding. For existing homes, this would either involve meters connected to the piping in crawl spaces with remote readouts or use of frost proof meter boxes at the road right of way.

For the connection to the Nordic Inn, this reconnection (presently a 2 inch line) would include a pressure reducing valve and meter to maintain flows similar to what has occurred in the past. The combined potable and irrigation demand of this facility is estimated to be 50 gpm during the peak summer months. Figure 8 shows a schematic for this plan involving a below ground vault to minimize visual impacts. Also shown on Figure 9 is a proposed· schematic of the power service plan that would be needed to serve the wells and vault. The power connections are typically located above ground to facilitate maintenance, however, a suitable location should be identified in accordance with the landowner requirements.

In addition, all options, regardless of pipe size would include a completely looped distribution system to both improve hydraulic performance and to minimize the potential for stagnant water. For the minimum improvement option where the number of fire hydrants would be limited, blow-offs or drains would be added to allow flushing and testing of the mains for operation and maintenance purposes.

Also, AWWA C-900 pressure rated PVC was used for all options based upon experience with bids from numerous recent projects which demonstrate that PVC is the least costly option for piping where conditions are appropriate. In this location, PVC appears suitable with regard to operating pressures and anticipated trenching conditions. PVC piping has flexibility with regard to the fittings available and does not require any special fusion or bonding procedure. In addition, a wider range of contractors are familiar with the use and installation of PVC pipe than any other kind of piping material commonly used.

Regardless of the advantages of PVC, it may become practical during the detailed design phase of this project to consider use of High Oensity Polyethylene (HOPE) Pipe for certain sections of the transmission line. HOPE pipe is constructed with fused ends and has advantages over PVC on steep slopes where there is the potential for typical gasket-type joints used with PVC to separate. The HOPE can be installed in long sections fused together before being placed in the trench. This option also may be beneficial for construction on steep hillsides.


'C W

FROM WELL

.. .

.<\ ,.

FIGURE 8 FLOW METER / CHLORINATION VAULT SCHEMATIC

NO SCALE

. .. 4 ..

METERING PUMP

r- -----. I I I I

4

FM

, <1 ..

I L ___ _ L.. __________ _

.. <I ....-.-----,...-ot

PRV (HIGH FLOW)

PRECAST CONCRETE VAULT

8" TRANSMISSION LINE

I

I I I I

ACCESS

LEGEND: SERVICE TO NORDIC INN

TO FI RE HYDRANT I FUTURE STUB III

FM PRV CR

ISOLATION VALVE FLOWMETER PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE FLOW METER CHART RECORDER

NOTE: VAULT TO HAVE LIGHTS, HEAT AND VENTILATION.

0L-________________________________________________________________________________________ __

reD < m.

l' w

FIGURE 9 SUPPLY WELL POWER PANEL SCHEMATIC

NO SCALE

NOTES: 1) ASSUMED 30 480V POWER IS AVAILABLE AT THIS LOCATION.

2) CONFIGURATION IS PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITH FINAL DESIGN.

/' WEATHER PROOF PANEL

3) PANEL LOCATION SUBJECT TO LANDOWNERS APPROVAL.

METER ON TRANSFORMER

o

I II

MAIN

MAIN: T:

LC:

LC

~

TO VAULT

I

WELL NO.1 10 HP

~

-----TOWELL NO.1

II

WELL NO.2 10 HP

~

"'"""'-TOWELL NO.2

MAIN POWER PANEL STEPDOWN TRANSFORMER LOAD CENTER, 120VAC

I II

WELL NO.3 10 HP

(FUTURE)

~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also for all options, a network hydraulic analysis was performed to determine the operating pressures and available water supply for fire flow and normal use. See Figure 10 for a schematic showing the proposed distribution and transmission system based upon a USGS orthophoto quad of the area.

Storage Tank Options: Storage tank sizing would parallel the analysis made for the distribution system with minimum, mid level and high level options for consideration. The options would be based upon fire flow needs and the potential for future expansion as well as cost. The range of possibilities for storage tanks is much wider than for distribution systems given the ability to build custom tanks to any dimension, the option to construct buried or above ground tanks and the different materials available for tanks. However, to provide the District with some limitation and guidance for making a decision regarding the storage tank, the following options are presented:

Tank Option 1: 50,000 Gal. Fiberglass. This is the recommended minimum tank size to provide operating and emergency storage without any specific allowance for fire protection. This configuration would be based upon the use of two 25,000 gallon fiberglass tanks buried side by side on Forest Service lands. This volume of storage would provide a minimum of one day's use during the summer for the Rees subdivision at buildout and the existing Clinger facilities without irrigation use. This size is also the largest practical size for fiberglass tanks to be transported to the site. This arrangement is to provide the District with a lower cost option. This would require that irrigation be curtailed in the event that all well pumps were inoperative. With well pumps operating, this option would allow for some flow restricted fill hydrants (limited by the distribution system piping) to fill tanker trucks used to shuttle water to a fire event.

Tank Option 2: 120,000 Gal. Concrete. This option would provide a 500 gpm fire flow for 2 hours (60,000 gallons) plus the same operating and emergency storage as in Option 1. The concrete tank could be constructed as a buried tank or a ground level tank. The buried option is preferable as little or no maintenance would be required for the life of the facility, there would be less potential problem with vandalism, ice formation and there would be minimal visual impact. The Forest Service as the land management agency would also likely favor the buried option.

Tank Option 3: 200,000 Gal. Concrete. This option would provide a 1000 gpm fire flow for 2 hours (120,000 gallons) plus operating and emergency storage along with an allowance to serve areas outside of the Rees Subdivision. This is the largest tank considered for this specific service area given the limited number of existing users and uncertainty of future users. The same type of buried concrete tank as described in Option 2 would be used.

For all options listed, a buried tank is suggested mostly to minimize future maintenance and to limit visual impacts on Forest Service lands. For the larger tanks, a concrete design is required as steel tanks are not by code allowed to be

32 North Alpine -WNDC Level II

buried due to problems with corrosion over time and fiberglass tanks are limited in size. Also, due to seismic concerns in the area, a special earthquake design is proposed for the buried concrete tanks which provides for independent movement of the floor, walls and roof as developed by DYK, Inc. Similar tanks have been constructed for five different locations in the Jackson area ranging in size from 80,000 gallons to 300,000 gallons. Also, two additional tanks of this type are scheduled for construction during 2003 in the Jackson area, providing some opportunity for shared mobilization costs.

Controls for the tanks would likely be based upon a radiotelemetry system rather than buried cables. The radio systems have proven to operate more reliably as compared to cables, which are subject to excavation and failure over time. A signal analysis test would need to be performed to -make sure there is adequate communication between the two locations. Also, ·the radiotelemetry systems allow the transfer of a wide range of data such as continuous tank level with multiple start and stop points and can be more easily integrated into a larger distribution system. This would only be a factor in the event an additional remote supply well site was used in the future or the system was interconnected with a more regional system. As an option, a multi conductor telemetry cable can be buried with the new transmission line.

Also, in order to keep the operation of the system as simple and cost efficient as possible, all options considered are based upon the use of an elevated tank. This assumes that the US Forest Service on their lands would permit a tank, as there are no suitable sites on private lands. Figure 11 shows a proposed site plan and possible location for a tank and transmission line based upon actual on the ground surveys. Two tanks were recently (1995) permitted by the Forest Service for the Town of Alpine. Preliminary discussions with Forest representatives regarding this specific site have also been favorable.

Cost Estimates: The following Tables 6 to 9 present detailed itemized cost estimates for the three base options discussed. The components were grouped into base, mid and maximum levels to provide a range of costs for consideration. The costs are separated into five system components: 1) supply, 2) transmission, 3) distribution, 4) storage as well as 5) engineering and administration costs. All cost estimates include a 15% contingency factor.

Also presented in Table 9 is the "preferred option" which represents a combination of the mid and maximum level improvements favored by a majority of homeowners during the October 23, 2002 public meeting. This option involves a 120,000 gallon tank with eight (8) inch distribution lines. The well supply plan would be the same for all options. This option also includes the cost to install a single family service to the Woodland parcel.

Tables 10 and 11 summarize estimated capital costs and operations costs respectively for the three primary options and the modified "preferred option". A summary of the principal design criteria for each of the options is also presented with Table 10. The total project cost for the preferred option is estimated to be $817,930.


z o ::l

:::T » "'0 5"

a> ~ ('")

r a>

<

a>

\@'

@'

®

/ I l t:S

'>

()cs

I I

ii

-0

o en

»~

z-w

-o~

-1

-1

"

»;:

CG

) z»

c

"z;

:c

cncn

m

-IS::~

mCi)~

-0 e

n ):

0

zz

r Z m

--~

r---

~

/

®

1//

/'

/

&>

2)

1/1

I /

I /

/ /

I /

/ /

--;

®

m

>< en --i z G') en

-t

o ~ G') m

~ z A

en

()

» I m

~

II ~ 8

t>l~

~~

~t::

l

~~~ e

~~

~~

, I I I \

I:lj

)0

o ~

r o

» 0

z Z

-I

-I

~

r o

-c

Z

;xJ

m

C/l

-0

:;0

o -0

o en

m

o en

--i o

m~

::;iG

> <

m

o,~

~z

OA

?~

I I

" <

-I

r m

G)

<:

C

m

~

z Z

-I

0

0 m

m

;x

J ;x

J m

G'

) ~

;xJ

m

0 :l:

C

m

Z

Z

0

~ ~ ~ Z

C

/l s:: en .C/l (5

Z

r Z

m

~I~--------------------------------~

The operation and maintenance. costs are estimated to be about $10,000 per year and are assumed to be essentially the same for all alternatives. The annual operation costs have been estimated to cover only the basic necessities of the system operation for the initial stages of the project in order to'keep overall theses fees, which are paid by a relatively few number of people, within affordable limits.


TABLE 6. OPTION 1: BASE LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS

No·1 ITEM I ESTIMATED QUANTITY

UNIT ESTIMATED I UNIT COST

TOTAL ~ REMARKS I 1 Mobilization 1 LS $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 2 Site Preparation 1 LS $ 1,SOO.00 $ 1,SOO.00 3 10" Surface Casing 20 LF $ '2S.00 $ SOO.OO 4 Cement Seal 20 LF $ 60.00 $ 1,200.00 S 8" Nominal Well Drilling 200 LF $ 44.00 $ 8,800.00 6 8" Nominal Steel Casing 200 LF $ 20.00 $ 4,000.00 7 8" Drive Shoe 1 EA $ 2S0.00 $ 2S0.00 New Well # 3, drilling and pump 8 Well Development 16.00 HR $ 17S.00 $ 2,800.00 9 Mobilize Test Pump 1 LS $ 1,SOO.00 $ 1,SOO.00

installation

10 Test Pumping 24.00 HR $ 100.00 $ 2,400.00 11 Site Restoration 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 12 Pump / Motor Well # 3 1 LS $ 7,SOO.00 $ 7,SOO.00 13 Electrical Cable 1 LS $ 600.00 $ 600.00 14 Pitless Adaptor / Well Cap 1 LS $ 1,SOO.00 $ 1,SOO.00 1S Drop Pipe, 3 inch 160 LF $ 13.00 $ 2,080.00 16 Pump / Motor Well # 2 1 LS $ 7,SOO.00 $ '7,SOO.00

Upgrade to W~II # 2, New pump and 17 Electrical Cable 1 LS . $ ,600.00 $ 600.00 18 Drop Pipe, 3 inch 1S0 LF $ 13.00 $ 1,9S0.00

drop pipe

19 Well Piping, Fittings 1 LS $ S,OOO.OO $ S,OOO.OO 20 Meter in Vault 1 LS $ S,OOO.OO $ 5,000.00 Equipment for both wells, upgrade 21 Telemetry, RTU 1 LS $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 electrical service 22 Electrical, Service 1 LS $ 7,SOO.00 $ 7,500.00 23 Abandon Existing Well 1 LS $ SOO.OO $ 500.00 24 Chlorinator 1 LS $ 2,SOO.00 '$ 2,500.00 Liquid Chlorine Feed, paced off of flow

Water Supply $ 79,380.00

25 Mobilization 1 LS $ 500.00 $ SOO.OO 26 Clearing 1 LS $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 27 Class 150 PVC, 4 inch 14S0 LF 1$ 18.00 $ 26,100.00 Well to Tank 28 Class 200 PE, 4 inch 200 LF $ 30.00 $ 6,000.00 PE for Steeper sections, well to tank 29 Fittings, 4 inch S EA $ 3S0.00 $ 1,7S0.00 30 Valves, 4 inch 3 EA $ 600.00 $ 1,800.00 31 PRVin vault 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 Flow meter and PRV for service to 32 Flowmeter in Vault 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 Clinger Properties per agreement 33 Site/Road Restoration 1 LS $ 2,SOO.00 $ 2,500.00 Steep Hillside, Forest Areas

Transmission $ 43,150.00

34 Mobilization I 1 LS 1$ 1,500.00 $ 1,SOO.00 3S Class 150 PVC, 4 inch S600 LF $ 18.00 $ 100,800.00 36 Fittings, 4 inch 10 EA $ 350.00 $ 3,SOO.00 37 Valves, 4 inch 4 EA $ 600.00 $ 2,400.00 38 Blow-Off 1 I LS $ 750.00 , $ 7S0.00

I I I

1,200.00 i $ Allowance for meter included,

39 Services, Existing Homes 35 EA 1$ 42,000.00 reconnection to existing lines

40 Services, Vacant Lots 23 EA $ 300.00 $ 6,900.00 41 Site/ Road Restoration 1 LS $ S,OOO.OO $ S,OOO.OO Grading, gravel

Distribution $ 162,850.00

42 Mobilization 1 LS $ 1,SOO.00 $ 1,500.00 43 Clearing 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,SOO.00 44 Fiberglass tanks, 25,000 gallon 2 EA $ 30,000.00 $ 60,000.00 Fiberglass, buried tanks, installed 45 Tank Piping 1 LS $ S,OOO.OO $ 5,000.00 46 Tank Excavation 1 LS $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 47 Bedding, backfill 1 LS $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 48 Transducer, Telemetry Control 1 LS $ 15,000.00 I $ 15,000.00 Radio Telemetry 49 Power Service I 1 I LS $ 5,000.00 1$ S,OOO.OO Tank Site 50 Abandon Existing Tank 1 LS $ 3,SOO.00 $ 3,500.00

Storage $ 121,500.00 I

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION I !$ 406,880.00 I I I

S1 Special Permitting Allowance i 1$ 7,SOO.00 Forest Service Tank Site Issues 52 Easements I Allowance I 1$ S,OOO.OO Easements on west side for distribution I

53 Legal Allowance 1 !$ S,OOO.OO Review documents

54 Engineering, Design, Permittin~ 8.0% I

1$ 35,600.00 Iwell drilling I ---,--~~--

55 Construction Phase 10.0% i 1$ 40,700.00 Survey layout, inspection, QAt QC 56 Contingencies 15.0% i$ 61,000.00 PerWVVDC

Engineering, Permitting, Administration, Contingency-- is 154,800.00 --or

! TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE ! 1$ 561,680.00 37 North Alpine - WNDC Level II

TABLE 7. OPTION 2: MID LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS

NO. ITEM ESTIMATED UN~ ESTIMATED

TOTAL REMARKS QUANTITY UNIT COST

1 Mobilization 1 LS $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 2 Site Preparation 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 3 10" Surface Casing 20 LF $ 25.00 $ 500.00 4 Cement Seal 20 LF $ 60.0 $ 1,200.00 5 8" Nominal Well Drilling 200 LF $ 44.00 $ 8,800.00 6 8" Nominal Steel Casing 200 LF $ 20.0 $ 4,000.00 7 8" Drive Shoe 1 EA $ 250.00 $ 250.00

New Well # 3, drilling and pump 8 Well Development 16.00 HR $ 175.00 $ 2,800.00 9 Mobilize Test Pump 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00

installation

10 Test Pumping 24.00 HR $ 100.00 $ 2,400.00 11 Site Restoration 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 12 Pump / Motor Well # 3 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 13 Electrical Cable 1 LS $ 600.00 $ 600.00 14 Pitless Adaptor / Well Cap 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 15 Drop Pipe, 3 inch 160 LF $ 13.00 $ 2,080.00 16 Pump / Motor Well # 2 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 Upgrade to Well # 2, New pump and drop 17 Electrical Cable 1 LS $ 600.00 $ 600.00 18 Drop Pipe, 3 inch 150 LF $ 13.00 $ 1,950.00

pipe

19 Well Piping, Fittings 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 20 Meter in Vault 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 21 Telemetry, RTU 1 LS $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 Equipment for both wells, upgrade 22 Electrical, Service 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 electrical service 23 Abandon Existing Well 1 LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00 24 Chlorinator 1 LS $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00


25 Mobilization 1 LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00 26 Clearing 1 LS $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 27 Class 150 PVC, 6 inch 1450 LF $ 20.00 $ 29,000.00 Well to Tank 28 Class 200 PE, 6 inch 200 LF $ 32.00 $ 6,400.00 PE for Steeper sections, well to tank 29 Fittings, 6 inch 6 EA $ 400.00 $ 2,400.00 30 Valves, 6 inch 3 EA $ 750.00 $ 2,250.00 31 PRVin vault 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 Flow meter and PRV for service to Clinger 32 Flowmeter in Vault 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 Properties per agreement 33 Site/Road Restoration 1 LS $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 Steep Hillside, Forest Areas


34 Mobilization 1 LS $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 35 Class 150 PVC, 6 inch 5600 LF $ 20.00 $ 112,000.00 36 Fittings, 6 inch 10 EA $ 400.00 $ 4,000.00 37 Valves, 6 inch 4 EA $ 750.00 $ 3,000.00

38 Services, Existing Homes 35 EA \$ 1,200.00 $ 42,000.00 Allowance for meter included, reconnection to existing lines

39 Services, Vacant Lots 23 EA $ 300.00 $ 6,900.00 40 Site/ Road Restoration 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Grading, gravel 41 Fire Hydrants 5 EA $ 2,800.00 $ 14,000.00 Per Town of Alpine Specifications


42 Mobilization 1 LS $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 43 Clearing 1 LS $ 1,500.00 I $ 1,500.00

I 44

Concrete Tank, 120,000 gallo 1 LS $ 185,000.00 I $ 185,000.00 Earthquake resistant design, buried tank

45 Tank Piping 1 LS $ 4,000.00 I $ 4,000.00 46 Tank Excavation 1 LS $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 47 Tank Backfill 1 LS $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 48 Transducer, Telemetry Contre 1 LS $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 Radio Telemetry 49 Power Service 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 50 Abandon Existing Tank 1 LS $ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00

Storage $ 251,500.00

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION i $ 567,330.00 !

51 Special Permitting Allowance i i$ 8,000.00 Forest Service Tank Site Issues 52 Easements Allowance i $ 5,000.00 Easements on west side for distribution 53 Legal Allowance i i$ 5,000.00 Review documents 54 Engineering, Design, Permitti 7.0% ! i$ 42,700.00 Includes geologist during well drilling

I I I Survey layout, periodic inspection, ON 55 Construction Phase 8.0% l l 1$ 45,400.00 QC 56 Contingencies 15.0% I !$ 85,000.00 Per'NWDC

Engineering, Permitting, Administration, Contingency $ 191,100.00 I i I !

I TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE I !$ 758,430.00 38 North Alpine - WWDC Level II

TABLE 8. OPTION 3: MAXIMUM LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS

NO. ITEM ESTIMATED

UNIT ESTIMATED

TOTAL REMARKS QUANTITY UNIT COST

1 Mobilization 1 LS $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 2 Site Preparation 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 3 10" Surface Casing 20 LF $ 25.00 $ 500.00 4 Cement Seal 20 LF $ 60.00 $ 1,200.00 5 8" Nominal Well Drilling 200 LF $ 44.00 $ 8,800.00 6 8" Nominal Steel Casing 200 LF $ 20.00 $ 4,000.00 7 8" Drive Shoe 1 EA $ 250.00 $ 250.00 8 Well Development 16.00 HR $ 175.00 $ 2,800.00 New Well # 3, drilling and pump installation 9 Mobilize Test Pump_ 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 10 Test Pumping 24.00 HR $ 100.00 $ 2,400.00 11 Site Restoration 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 12 Pump / Motor Well # 3 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 13 Electrical Cable 1 LS $ 600.00 $ 600.00 14 Pitless Adaptor / Well Cap 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 15 Drop Pipe, 3 inch 160 LF $ 13.00 $ 2,080.00 16 Pump / Motor Well # 2 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7;500.00 Upgrade to Well # 2, New pump and drop 17 Electrical Cable 1 LS $ 600.00 $ 600.00 18 Drop Pipe, 3 inch 150 LF $ 13.00 $ 1,950.00

pipe

19 Well Piping, Fittings 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 20 Meter in Vault 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 21 Telemetry, RTU 1 LS $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 Equipment for both wells, upgrade electrical 22 Electrical, Service 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 service 23 Abandon Existing Well 1 LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00 24 Chlorinator 1 LS $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00


25 Mobilization 1 LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00 26 Clearing 1 LS $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 27 Class 150 PVC, 8 inch 1450 LF $ 23.00 $ 33,350.00 Well to Tank 28 Class 200 PE, 8 inch 200 LF $ 35.00 $ 7,000.00 PE for Steeper sections, well to tank 29 Fittings, 8 inch 6 EA $ 450.00 $ 2,700.00 30 Valves, 8 inch 3 EA $ 850.00 $ 2,550.00 31 PRVin vault 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 Flow meter and PRV for service to Clinger 32 Flowmeter in Vault 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 Properties per agreement 33 Site/Road Restoration 1 LS $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 Steep Hillside, Forest Areas


34 Mobilization 1 LS ,$ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 35 Class 150 PVC, 8 inch 5600 LF $ 23.00 $ 128,800.00 36 Fittings, 8 inch 10 EA $ 450.00 $ 4,500.00 37 Valves, 8 inch 4 EA $ 850.00 $ 3,400.00

I Allowance for meter included, reconnection to 38 Services, Existing Homes 35 I EA $ 1,200.00 $ 42,000.00

existing lines 39 Services, Vacant Lots 23 EA 1$ 300.00 $ 6,900.00 40 Site/ Road Restoration 1 LS '$ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Grading, gravel 41 Fire Hydrants 5 EA $ 2,800.00 $ 14,000.00 Per Town of Alpine Specifications

Distribution -" $ 206,600.00

42 Mobilization 1 LS \$ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 43 Clearing 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 44 Concrete Tank, 200,000 gallo 1 LS i$ 250,000.00 $ 250,000.00 Earthquake resistant design 45 Tank Piping 1 LS $ 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 46 Tank Excavation 1 LS $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00 47 Tank Backfill 1 LS $ 18,000.00 $ 18,000.00 48 Transducer, Telemetry Contre 1 LS $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 Radio Telemetry 49 Power Service 1 LS ;$ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 50 Abandon Existing Tank 1 LS $ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00

Storage $ 327,000.00 I

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION I $ 666,080.00

51 Special Permitting Allowance I $ 8,000.00 Forest Service Tank Site Issues 52 Easements Allowance I I 1$ 5,000.00 Easements on west side for distribution 53 Legal Allowance I

, 1$ 5,000.00 Review documents ,

i

I Engineering, Design, ! i i Includes allowance for geologist during well 54

Permitting 7.0%

I I $ 49,600.00

drilling I -----~----+--$---··53,300.00 .. -1---

55 Construction Phase 8.0% r---- Survey layout, periodic inspection, ON QC 56 I Contingencies 15.0% 1 $ 100,000.00 Per'INVDC

Engineering, Permitting, Administration, Contingency $ 220,900.00

TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE I ! j$ 886,980.00 I I

39 North Alpine - WWDC Levell!

TABLE 9. OPTION 2: MID LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS -Preferred Option/8 inch Distribution Lines

B ITEM ESTIMATED

UNIT ESTIMATED

TOTAL I REMARKS I QUANTITY UNIT COST

. 1 Mobilization 1 LS $ 1,200.00 $ 1,200.00 2 Site Preparation 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 3 10" Surface Casing 20 LF $ 25.00 $ 500.00 4 Cement Seal 20 LF $ 60.00 $ 1,200.00 5 8" Nominal Well Drilling 200 LF $ 44.00 $ 8,800.00 6 8" Nominal Steel Casing 200 LF $ 20.00 $ 4,000.00 7 8" Drive Shoe 1 EA $ 250.00 $ 250.00 New Well # 3, drilling and pump 8 Well Development 16.00 HR $ 175.00 $ 2,800.00 9 Mobilize Test Pump 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00

installation

10 Test Pumping 24.00 HR $ 100.00 $ 2,400.00 11 Site Restoration 1 LS 1$ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 12 Pump / Motor Well # 3 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 13 Electrical Cable 1 LS $ 600.00 $ 600.00 14 Pitless Adaptor / Well Cap 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 15 Drop Pipe, 3 inch 160 LF $ 13.00 $ 2,080.00 16 Pump / Motor Well # 2 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 Upgrade to Well # 2, New pump and 17 Electrical Cable 1 LS $ 600.00 $ 600.00 18 Drop Pipe, 3 inch 150 LF $ 13.00 $ 1,950.00

drop pipe

19 Well Piping, Fittings 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 20 Meter in Vault 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Equipment for both wells, upgrade 21 Telemetry, RTU 1 LS $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 electrical service 22 Electrical, Service 1 LS $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 23 Abandon Existing Well 1 LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00 24 Chlorinator 1 LS $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00


25 Mobilization 1 LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00 26 Clearing 1 LS $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 27 Class 150 PVC, 8 inch 1450 LF $ 24.00 $ 34,800.00 Well to Tank 28 Class 200 PE, 8 inch 200 LF $ 35.00 $ 7,000.00 PE for Steeper sections, well to tank 29 Fittings, 8 inch 6 EA $ 450.00 $ 2,700.00 30 Valves, 8 inch 3 EA $ 850.00 $ 2,550.00 31 PRVin vault 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 Flow meter and PRV for service to 32 Flowmeter in Vault 1 LS $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 Clinger Properties per agreement 33 Site/Road Restoration 1 LS $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 Steep Hillside, Forest Areas


34 Mobilization 1 LS $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 35 Class 150 PVC, 8 inch 5600 LF $ 23.00 '$ 128,800.00 36 Fittings, 8 inch 10 EA $ 450.00 $ 4,500.00 37 Valves, 8 inch 4 EA $ 850.00 $ 3,400.00

38 Services, Existing Homes 35 EA $ 1,200.00 $ 42,000.00 Allowance for meter included, reconnection to existing lines

39 Services, Vacant Lots 23 EA i$ 300.00 $ 6,900.00

39A Service to Woodland Site 1 LS '$ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 I u~u Teel,I.:> Incn line TOf a single

40 Site/ Road Restoration 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 Grading, gravel 41 Fire Hydrants 5 EA $ 2,800.00 $ 14,000.00 Per Town of Alpine Specifications


42 Mobilization 1 LS $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 43 Clearing 1 LS $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 44 Concrete Tank, 120,000 gallon 1 LS $ 190,000.00 $ 190,000.00 Earthquake resistant design, buried tank 45 Tank Piping 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 46 Tank Excavation 1 LS $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 47 Tank Backfill 1 LS 1$ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 48 Transducer, Telemetry Controls 1 LS 1$ 15,000.00 ! $ 15,000.00 Radio Telemetry 49 Power Service 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 50 Abandon Existing Tank 1 LS 1$ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00

Storage $ 257,500.00

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION I $ 613,030.00

51 SpeCial Permitting Allowance i $ 8,000.00 Forest Service Tank Site Issues 52 Easements Allowance $ 5,000.00 Easements on west side for distribution 53 Legal Allowance i [$ 5,000.00 Review documents

54 Engineering, Design, Permitting 7.0% ! 1$ 45,900.00 Includes geologist during well drilling 55 Construction Phase 8.0% $ 49,000.00 Survey layout, periodic inspection, ON 56 Contingencies 15.0% i $ 92,000.00 PerWNDC

Engineering, Permitting, Administration, Contingency $ 204,900.00

TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE i $ 817,930.00 I i

40 North Alpine - WNDC Level II

TABLE 10. CAPITAL COST COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES

I ITEM I BASE LEVEL MID LEVEL MAXIMUM LEVEL PREFERRED

IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS AL TERNATIVE

Design Criteria Projected Well Capacity, gpm 110. 110. 110. 110.

Maximum Da~ Flow 154,0.0.0. 154,0.0.0. 154,0.0.0. 154,0.0.0. Number of Wells 2 2 2 2

-- I--

Fire Flow, gpm 0. 50.0. 10.0.0. 10.0.0. _._---Fire Flow Duration, hr - 2 2 1.5 -

Transmission Line Size, Wells to Tank 4 8 10. 10. --f--- -

Distribution Line Size 4 6 8 8 -

Fiberglass Concrete Concrete Concrete Tank Material Type ---- r--..

Tank Size, Gal 50.,0.0.0. 120.,0.0.0. 20.0.,0.0.0. 120.,0.0.0.

Water Supply $ 79,380..0.0. $ 79,380..0.0. $ 79,380..0.0. $ 79,380..0.0.

Transmission $ 43,150..0.0. $ 47,550..0.0. $ 53,10.0..0.0. $ 54,550..0.0.

Distribution $ 162,850..0.0. $ 188,90.0..0.0. $ 20.6,60.0..0.0. $ 221,60.0..0.0.

Storage $ 121,50.0..0.0. $ 251,50.0..0.0. $ 327,0.0.0..0.0. $ 257,50.0.:0.0.

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $ 406,880.00 $ 567,330.00 $ 666,080.00 $ 613,030.00

Special Permitting $ 7,50.0..0.0. $ 8,0.0.0..0.0. $ 8,0.0.0..0.0. $ 8,0.0.0..0.0. Easements $ 5,0.0.0..0.0. $ 5,0.0.0..0.0. $ 5,0.0.0..0.0. $ 5,0.0.0..0.0. Legal $ 5,0.0.0..0.0. $ 5,0.0.0..0.0. $ 5,0.0.0..0.0. $ 5,0.0.0..0.0. Engineering, Design, Permitting $ 35,60.0..0.0. $ 42,70.0..0.0. $ 49,60.0..0.0. $ 45,90.0..0.0. Construction Phase $ 40.,70.0..0.0. $ 45,40.0..0.0. $ 53,30.0..0.0. $ 49,0.0.0..0.0. Contingencies $ 61,0.0.0..0.0. $ 85,0.0.0..0.0. $ 10.0.,0.0.0..0.0. $ 92,0.0.0..0.0.

Engineering, Permitting, Contingencies $ 154,800.00 $ 191,100.00 $ 220,900.00 $ 204,900.00

TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE $ 561,680.00 $ 758,430.00 $ 886,980.00 .$ 817,930.QO

41 North Alpine - W\NDC Level II

TABLE 11. ESTIMATED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST SUMMARY

TOTAL ANNUAL TOTAL

ITEM TOTAL ANNUAL

COST PER MONTHLY

DESCRIPTION COST

OCCUPIED LOT COST PER

OCCUPIED LOT

Reserves $2,500 $71.43 $5.95 Set aside for replacement of pumps, electrical equipment

Allowance of $200 per month

Power $2,400 $68.57 $5.71 for pumping and

miscellaneous heat, lights ventilation

System Operator: 1 hour per Labor $3,360 $96.00 $8.00 week @$40/hr plus

additional 32 hours misc.

EPA Safe Drinking Water Act Testing $1,800 $51.43 $4.29 testing for community

system, lab fees, shipping

TOTAL $10,060 $287.43 $23.95

Note: 1. Total Occupied Lots (November, 2002) = 35

2. O&M Assumed to be the same for all alternatives

42 North Alpine - WNDC Level II

VII. FINANCING OPTIONS AND USER FEE ANALYSIS

The following represent the most commonly 'used sources of funding for the planning, design, and construction of water supply improvements in the State of Wyoming and Lincoln County:

WWDC -Rural Domestic Water System Program

The Governor appointed Wyoming Water Development Commission provides funding for public water systems with priority given to water supply, storage and transmission facilities. The agency does not typically fund distribution facilities or water treatment systems. Grants at 500/0 of the total construction cost are available for new projects to qualified applicants or sponsors. A local match of 50% is required which can be made up of loans provided by the VWVOC at a current rate of 6.00% APR for up to 30 years or other funding sources. Legislative oversight for this program is provided by the Select Water Committee made up of five state senators and five state representatives.

Criteria for eligibility in the program limit the assistance to public water systems with 20 or more service connections. Also additional information on the ability and willingness to pay the matching portion of the project is required when the state investment exceeds $10,000 per tap for public water systems. In addition, sponsors must be public entities (or form a public entity early in the process) and must not involve private developers who could potentially benefit from a project.

The VWVDC recognizes three levels of projects, which typically progress in detail and specificity as described below:

Level I - Reconnaissance Studies - These studies represent preliminary analyses and comparisons of development alternatives.

Level 11- Feasibility Studies - The typical Level II process consists of two phases which serve first to address project feasibility and then, if the project is determined feasible, to refine the project to the status necessary for a Level III funding request.

Level III - Project Development - This phase includes final design, permitting, land acquisition, and construction of the project.

Level I and Level II projects are often funded by the VWVOC at no cost to the sponsor. Level II programs frequently involve the drilling of new exploratory wells, which are initially funded by the VWVOC. The wells, if successful, are then incorporated into the construction portion of the project (Level III) at the funding rate established for the project. This places essentially all risk for the well drilling on the State rather than the sponsor and is an important benefit to small community systems struggling financially to make improvements.

Applications for new projects are accepted on an annual basis and must be submitted with the required information prior to September 15th

. The projects are reviewed by


the \NWDC professional staff, which makes recommendations to the Governor appointed commission and Select Water Committee. Approval by both these entities allows the project to be a part of the annual WWOC legislative program, which must be approved by both the Governor and full Legislature during their "regular annual session.

The \NWOC also maintains the groundwater exploration program that provides grant funds at the 75% level. The balance of funding must come directly from the sponsor as there are no loan options with this program. A request for funding can come at any time during the year as these funds are not tied to the same legislative process: Most funds are designed for use on wells considered exploratory where success may be in question. However, \NWOC officials have indicated that applications for can be submitted for all groundwater projects that involve the "development of new sources.

SLIB - State Loan and Investment Board

The Wyoming State Loan and Investment Board (previously known as the Farm Loan Board), which consists of the top five elected officials in the state, provides grants and loans through the Federal Mineral Royalty and the Joint Powers Act programs respectively. The grants and loans are administered by the Office of State Lands and Investments. Grant applications are considered twice a year at the January and July meetings of the Board. Grants are typically considered at 50% of the total eligible project costs. For water projects, the most current loan rate has been 6.000/0 APR with a typical term of 20 years.

Although no formal application form is required, applicants must provide a wide range of information about the project, including cost estimates and maps, and about the entity making the application. Grant application deadlines are the third Thursday of April and the third Thursday of October (90 days before the actual State Loan and Investment Board meetings in July and January). Entities including special districts and municipalities are eligible for the funding. School Districts are specifically not eligible for this type of funding.

Priority for the grant funds is given to projects necessary to meet federal or state health and safety requirements. Also water and sewer facility improvements are an acknowledged priority. Unlike the 'fiNVDC, no restriction is placed upon the use of funds for distribution system improvements or water treatment facilities. However no legal fees are eligible in this program. These funds are sought by communities and districts throughout the State for a wide range of projects in addition to water and sewer facilities. Consequently, total funding requests are often several times the amount of funds available.

Grants under this program also require consent from the local governing bodies which for North Alpine would include both Lincoln County and the Town of Alpine. Advance time should be set aside for the preparation of the required resolutions that would need to be authorized by the governing bodies for this grant program.

44 North Alpine -WVVDC Level II

DEQ-SRF - Drinking Water State Revolving Fund

The 1998 Wyoming State Legislature passed legislation (State Statute 16-1-301 through 16-1-308) that authorizes the implementation of a State Revolving Fund (SRF) for public water supply systems. The program permits the State to receive an estimated $69-million over a seven year period. Although the funds originate from the federal government, the program is implemented and administered by the Wyoming State Loan and Investment Board, the Wyoming Water Development Commission and the Department of Environmental Quality. The Legislature Select Water Committee provides oversight for this program.

The primary purpose of the program is to provide low interest rate loans - 2.5% APR currently over a 20-year term - for public systems to address public health and Safe Drinking Water Act compliance issues. The program is designed to help systems that have exceeded specific MCLs, most specifically from causes beyond the control of a given system. In the State of Wyoming, issues which typically cause a given system to rank high, include positive tests for coliform bacteria, exceeding of turbidity standards, and inadequate or aging treatment facilities.

The program is intended to be paid back with revenues generated by a municipality or special district. Consequently, no bond election is intended. However, the need for elections to incur debt has been the subject of considerable debate and legal discussions and should be reviewed by qualified attorneys working for the Town or District to avoid potential problems on a new project.

One key requirement of this program is the preparation of an Environmental Assessment. A standard document with responses from key agencies of concern appears in Appendix D.

RUS - Rural Utilities Service Grants and Loans

This federal funding program is administered by the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) as a division of the U.S. Department of Agriculture with specific preference to small municipalities under a population of 10,000. Funding is available for both water and wastewater projects. Unlike other funding programs, the RUS gives priority through a ranking system to lower income areas, projects involving health and safety issues and small population areas.

Grant programs are typically limited to low income areas only which, based upon the available income data, would preclude most areas in north Lincoln County. However loans at a current rate of 5.0 % APR are available for all projects with terms usually up to 30 years. The interest rate follows the commercial market and is adjusted on a quarterly basis. The loans are available to municipalities, Water Districts, and Improvement and Service Districts for most reasonable water or sewer related improvements. Project specific engineering and legal fees are also eligible as are costs for easement or right of way procurement. Certain specialized equipment such as high capacity fire protection systems, oversized wells and computerized meter


reading systems typically are excluded. The loans can also be used as the matching funds for grants provided by other agencies such as the State Land and Investment Board and Water Development Commission.

In past years when the loan rate for V\MJDC financing was raised to 7.25% APR (from a previous 4%, APR), these lower interest rate funds provided by the RUS have been depleted before the end of the fiscal year. Therefore, although there is no application deadline, interested applicants should plan in advance to apply for the funds to avoid a delay to the next funding cycle. However, representatives of the program have indicated that no qualified project has been denied funding over the long term.

Prior to the approval of loan funds, a formal "general obligation bond election" must be held in accordance with state statues. The election is .estimate to add an additional $3500 to $5000 to the project cost and is an eligible cost item.

Table 12 provides a summary of the four principal water supply funding programs outlined above and compares grant percentages and interest rates. It is important for applicants looking to maximize funding to become familiar with all programs to optimize interest rates and insure the availability of funds in a timely manner.

Funding Analysis

Tables 13 to 16 provide estimates of debt service costs for the various water system improvements recommended, including the preferred option. Based upon this analysis, estimated monthly user fees to pay back the loan portion of the improvement costs are presented. The primary agencies considered in the analysis include the Water Development Commission,(WWDC), State Land and Investment Board (SLIB) and the DEQ State Revolving Fund (DEQ-SRF). Total grant funding at the 50% level is assumed for all options. This would include the use of SLIB funding for the non 'J\MIDC eligible portions of the cost such as distribution upgrades and services.

Distribution system improvements which include distribution lines and service connections are not eligible for 'J\MIDC funding. Consequently, it is anticipated that funding for these improvements will be through the State Land Investment Board, which also provides 50% grants. Also, engineering and permitting costs associated with the distribution system have been prorated based upon construction costs for division between 'J\MIDC and SLIB funding. However, the DEQ-SRF loan would be used for all improvements.

A total of 60 lots were used in estimating debt service. This assumes the sale of lot 58A, the current storage tank site, for a residential site and acknowledges an existing lot split on lot 36. Also, a 20-year term for interest rates was used to help reduce the annual fees. An interest rate of 2.5%, based upon the current DEQ-SRF rate, was used for this analysis.

Also, provided in Tables 17 A and 17B are summaries of the estimated debt service for the various alternatives investigated. The summaries include operation and maintenance costs as well as debt service. Also, costs are estimated on the basis of both annual and monthly payments. It is assumed that vacant lots (currently a total of

46 North Alpine -WWDC Levell!

25) will pay only debt service (about $36 per month) whereas occupied lots (currently a total of 35) will pay both debt service and operation and maintenance (about $60 per month).

Bond Election

An official"bond election" will be required to take place before the District is allowed to incur debt, regardless of the funding source. The election includes "qualified electors" defined as individuals who are both residents of the District and registered voters in the State of Wyoming.

The bond (loan) question is required to include the following information:

" ... the purpose of the bonds (loans), the maximum principal amount thereof, the maximum number of years allowed for the indebtedness and the maximum rate of interest to be paid thereon."

It is likely that the bond election will take place via a mail vote in accordance with state statues regarding special elections. A minimum advance time of 60 days should be planned for this effort including coordinate with Lincoln County authorities.

Recommendation for 2003

The general membership of the District voted in the October 23, 2002 general meeting to move forward with a "Modified Improvements Option 2", also referred to as the Preferred Option. The majority of those present supported an increase in distribution piping size from 6 inch to 8 inch to provide for future needs and higher fire protection flows (See Appendix C for a summary of the meeting). The total cost for this item is presented in Table 9. Debt service calculations for this amount appear in Table 16 where the following grant and loan components, are anticipated. These estimates, which assume a 500/0 grant portion, are the basis for a request for Level III funding that will become part of the 2003 Omnibus Water Bill for Construction, as summarized below:

ITEM CALCULATED ROUNDED

VWVDC GRANT $256,726 $257,000

SLIB GRANT $152,240 $152,000

~D~E~Q-~S~R~F~L~O~A~N~ ____ ~$~4~08~!9~6~5 ____ ~$~4~09~!O~O~O

TOTAL PROJECT $817,930 $818,000

In addition, it is recommended that the North Alpine Improvement and Service District investigate the use funds from the groundwater exploration program, which provides funding at the 75 percent level for the well drilling portion of the work. This could potentially reduce the loan about $20,000, which at 20 years and 2.5%) would result in a reduction debt service of about two dollars per month per lot owner.


TABLE 12 COMPARISON OF PRINCIPAL WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM FINANCING PROGRAMS

TYPICAL LOAN TYPICAL BOND

TYPICAL INTEREST LOAN TERM ITEMS ELIGIBLE FOR APPLICATION ELECTION PROGRAM GRANT Ok RATE (YRS.) FUNDING4) 8) DEADLINE REQUIRED

Water Supply

WNDC 50% 6.00% 203) Water Storage

September 15 Yes Water Transmission Engineering/Admin.

Same as WNDC plus April 15

50% 6.00% 203) Water Distribution

SLiS Water Treatment and October 15 Yes

(No Legal Costs)

203) Same as SLiS

November5) No DWSRF 0% 2.50% Emphasis on Public

Health Issues

RUS 0%1) 5.00 %2) 303) Same as SLiS plus No Specific Yes8) Project Specific Legal Deadline6

) Costs

1) RUS Grants are available for low-income areas only and Alpine would not currently qualify.

2) RUS Interest rates based upon market and is adjusted quarterly.

3) Terms forWNDC and SLiS can be extended to 30 years and RUS to 40 Years depending upon specific project issues.

4) List of eligible items is not total inclusive. Consult with agencies directly for more specific information.

5) Priority lists and ranking begins approximately one year before funds become available at the first part of the federal fiscal year on October 1.

6) Available funds are frequently committed early in the fiscal year which starts October 1 prompting applicants to apply early in the funding cycle.

7) RUS specifically requires formal bond election in accordance with State statutes. State Statutes may require bond elections for special districts to assume any type of debt.

8) WNDC also has 75% grant money without loan money under the groundwater exploration program.

48 North Alpine - WWDC Level II

TABLE 13. DEBT SERVICE ESTIMATE: BASE LEVEL FUNDING REQUESTS WITH DEQ SRF LOAN

NO. OF LOTS DEQ-SRF LOAN RATE TERM, YEARS 'NWDC GRANT RATE SUB MINERAL ROYAL TV GRANT

60 2.50%

20 50%

50%

REQUESTED FUNDING AMOUNTS

DESCRIPTION TOTAL WNDC SUB MRG DEQ SRF GRANT (GRANT) LOAN

Water Supply $ 79,380 $ 39,690 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 39,690

Transmission $ 43,150 $ 21,575 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 21,575

Distribution $ 162,850 $ - 0.0% $ 81,425 50.0% $ 81,425

Storage $ 121,500 $ 60,750 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 60,750

SUb-Total $ 406,880

Engineering, Permitting, $ 92,843 $ 46,421 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 46,421

Contingencies - VVWDC

Engineering, Permitting, Contingencies - $ 61,957 $ - 0.0% $ 30,979 50.0% $ 30,979

Distribution Sub-Total $ 154,800

TOTALS $ 561,680 $ 168,436 30.0% $ 112,404 20.0% $ 280,840

WNDC = Wyoming Water Development Commission DEQ SRF = Department of Environmental Quality, State Revolving Fund Loan fee = 1/2 point (0.5%)

ESTIMATED ESTIMATED

ANNUAL MONTHLY

COST PAYMENT PER LOT

50.0% $ 2,546 $ 3.54

50.0% $ 1,384 $ 1.92

50.0% $ 5,223 $ 7.25

50.0% $ 3,897 $ 5.41

50.0% $ 2,978 $ 4.14

50.0% $ 1,987 $ 2.76

50.0% $ 18,015 I $ 25.021

SUB MRG = State Loan and Investment Board, Mineral Royalty Grant, for Distribution System and related engineering SEMI ANNUAL PAYMENT = $ 9,007.54

49 North Apline - WNDC Level II

TABLE 14. DEBT SERVICE ESTIMATE: MID LEVEL FUNDING REQUESTS WITH DEQ SRF LOAN

NO. OF LOTS DEQ-SRF LOAN RATE TERM, YEARS WWDC GRANT RATE SLIB MINERAL ROYAL TV GRANT

DESCRIPTION

Water Supply

Transmission

Distribution

Storage

Sub-Total

Engineering, Permitting, Contingencies - VVWDC

Engineering, Permitting, Contingencies --Distribution

Sub-Total

TOTALS

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

60 2.50%

20 50%

50%

TOTAL

79,380

-47,550

-188,900

-251,500

567,330

127,471

63,629

191,100

758,430

$

$

$

$

$

$

$


VVWDC SUB MRG DEQ SRF GRANT (GRANT) LOAN

39,690 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 39,690

23,775 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 23,775

- 0.0% $ 94,450 50.0% $ 94,450

125,750 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 125,750

63,735 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 63,735

- 0.0% $ 31,815 50.0% $ 31,815

252,950 33.4% $ 126,265 16.6% $ 379,215

VVWDC = Wyoming Water Development Commission DEQ SRF = Department of Environmental Quality, State Revolving Fund Loan fee = 1/2 point (0.5%)

ESTIMATED ESTIMATED

ANNUAL MONTHLY


50.0% $ 2,546 $ 3.54

50.0% $ 1,525 $ 2.12

50.0% $ 6,059 $ 8.41

50.0% $ 8,067 $ 11.20

50.0% $ 4,088 $ 5.68

50.0% $ 2,041 $ 2.83

50.0% $ 24,3261 $ 33.791

SLIB MRG = State Loan and Investment Board, Mineral Royalty Grant, for Distribution System and related engineering SEMI ANNUAL PAYMENT = $12,162.78

50 North Apline - VVWDC Level II

TABLE 15. DEBT SERVICE ESTIMATE: MAXIMUM LEVEL FUNDING REQUESTS WITH DEQ SRF LOAN

NO. OF LOTS DEQ-SRF LOAN RATE TERM, YEARS \NWDC GRANT RATE SLiS MINERAL ROYALTY GRANT

60 2.50%

20 50%

50%


DESCRIPTION TOTAL WNDC SLiS MRG DEQ SRF GRANT (GRANT) LOAN

Water Supply $ 79,380 $ 39,690 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 39,690

Transmission $ 53,100 $ 26,550 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 26,550

Distribution $ 206,600 $ - 0.0% $ 103,300 50.0% $ 103,300

Storage $ 327,000 $ 163,500 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 163,500

Sub-Total $ 666,080


ContinQencies -- WWDC

Engineering, Permitting, $ 68,517 $ - 0.0% $ 34,259 50.0% $ 34,259

Contingencies -- Distribution

Sub-Total $ 220,900

TOTALS $ 886,980 $ 305,931 34.5% $ 137,559 15.5% $ 443,490

WNDC = Wyoming Water Development Commission DEQ SRF = Department of Environmental Quality, State Revolving Fund Loan fee = 1/2 point (0.5%) SLiS MRG = State Loan and Investment Board, Mineral Royalty Grant SEMI ANNUAL PAYMENT = $14,224.31

51

ESTIMATED ESTIMATED

ANNUAL MONTHLY


50.0% $ 2,546 $ 3.54

50.0% $ 1,703 $ 2·.37

50.0% $ 6,626 $ 9.20

50.0% $ 10,488 $ 14.57

50.0% $ 4,887 $ 6.79

50.0% $ 2,198 $ 3.05

50.0% $ 28,4491 $ 39.51 I

North Apline - WNDC Level II

TABLE 16. PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE -- FUNDING REQUESTS WITH DEQ SRF LOAN

NO. OF LOTS DEQ-SRF LOAN RATE TERM,YEARS WNDC GRANT RATE SUS MINERAL ROYAL TV GRANT

60 2.50%

20 50%

50%


DESCRIPTION TOTAL WNDC SUS MRG DEQ SRF GRANT (GRANT) LOAN

Water Supply $ 79,380 $ 39,690 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 39,690

Transmission $ 54,550 $ 27,275 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 27,275

Distribution $ 221,600 $ - 0.0% $ 110,800 50.0% $ 110,800

Storage $ 257,500 $ 128,750 50.0% $ - 0.0% $ 128,750

Sub-Total $ 613,030


ContinQencies - WWDC

Engineering, Permitting, Contingencies - $ 82,879 $ - 0.0% $ 41,440 50.0% $ 41,440

Distribution Sub-Total $ 204,900

TOTALS $ 817,930 $ 256,726 31.4% $ 152,240 18.6% $ 408,965

WNDC = Wyoming Water Development Commission DEQ SRF = Department of Environmental Quality, State Revolving Fund Loan fee = 1/2 point (0.5%) SUS MRG = State Loan and Investment Soard, Mineral Royalty Grant SEMI ANNUAL PAYMENT = $13,116.97

52

ESTIMATED ESTIMATED

ANNUAL MONTHLY


50.0% $ 2,546 $ 3.54

50.0% $ 1,750 $ 2.43

50.0% $ 7,108 $ 9.87

50.0% $ 8,259 $ 11.47

50.0% $ 3,914 $ 5.44

50.0% $ 2,658 $ 3.69

50.0% $ 26,2341 $ 36.441

North Apline - WNDC Level II

TABLE 17A. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES - ANNUAL COSTS PER LOT 50% GRANT -- DEQ SRF LOAN 2.50/0 LOAN FOR 20 YEARS

ITEM

TOTAL LOTS: 60 OCCUPIED LOTS: 35

Water Supply

Transmission

Distribution

Storage

Engineering, Permitting, Contingencies

TOTAL ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE PER LOT

TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

TOTAL ANNUAL FEES PER OCCUPIED LOT

TOTAL ANNUAL FEES PER VACANT LOT

BASE LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS

$42.43

$23.07

$87.05

$64.95

$82.75

$300.25

$287.43

$587.68

$300.25

53

MID LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS

$42.43

$25.42

$100.98

$134.44

$102.15

$405.43

$287.43

$692.85

$405.43

DEQ SRF INTEREST: 2.50% TERM: 20YR

MAXIMUM LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS

$42.43

$28.39

$110.44

$174.80

$118.08

$474.14

$287.43

$761.57

$474.14

PREFFERED AL TERNATIVE

$42.43

$29.16

$118.46

$137.65

$109.53

$437.23-

$287.43

$724.66

$437.23

North Apline - \f\IWDC Level II

TABLE 17B. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES - MONTHLY COSTS PER LOT 50% GRANT -- DEQ SRF LOAN 2.50/0 LOAN FOR 20 YEARS

TOTAL LOTS: 60 OCCUPIED LOTS: 35

ITEM

Water Supply

Transmission

Distribution

Storage

Engineering, Permitting, Contingencies

TOTAL MONTHL Y DEBT SERVICE PER LOT

TOTAL MONTHLY OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PER LOT

TOTAL ANNUAL FEES PER OCCUPIED LOT

TOTAL ANNUAL FEES PER VACANT LOT

BASE LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS

$3.54

$1.92

$7.25

$5.41

$6.90

$25.02

$23.95

$48.97

$25.02

DEQ SRF INTEREST: 2.50% TERM: 20 YR

MID LEVEL MAXIMUM LEVEL PREFFERED IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS AL TERNATIVE

$3.54 $3.54 $3.54

$2.12 $2.37 $2.43

$8.41 $9.20 $9.87

$11.20 $14.57 $11.47

$8.51 $9.84 $9.13

$33.79 $39.51 $36.44

$23.95 $23.95 $23.95

$57.74 $63.46 $60~39

$33.79 $39.51 $36·.44··

54 North Apline - W\NDC Level"

VIII. PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS

The following is a summary of the applicable permits, land acquisitions and easements needed to accomplish the recommended alternatives. Permits that are likely to be required for the project include:

• DEQ Permit to Construct for new improvements and system modifications.

• DEQ Capacity Analysis as required by Chapter 22 to show compliance with technical, management and fiscal criteria.

• State Engineer's Well Permit for new or enlarged supply wells. This includes the permit to drill (U.W. 5), statement of compietion (U.W.6) and statement of beneficial use (U.W. 8). An enlargement may also be required for the existing well to expand the overall service area.

• Forest Service Special use permit for underground transmission line and storage tank site.

• Lincoln County Building Permit for any structures.

• FCC Licensing for Radio Telemetry Controls, if desired.

• Easements for looped lines on east side of the subdivision along power line; additional easements on Clinger property for wells and utility vault.

A separate line item has been added in the cost estimates for "special permitting" or permits processes that are anticipated to exceed the normal DEQ permit to construct, which is based upon typical construction plans and specifications. The most significant is the Forest Service Special Use Permit for the transmission line and tank. This permit is expected to take some time to complete and will require an expedited on behalf of the Forest Service to complete in time for construction in 2003. Depending upon the issues and level of cooperation, the tank construction may need to extend into 2004. No wetlands permitting is anticipated on this project for the areas where disturbances are proposed. Also, no endangered species are anticipated to be affected by this proposal, regardless of the option selected.

Enclosed in Appendix D is a copy- of the Environmental Assessment as completed to date for this project. Included are preliminary response letters from several key agencies.


APPENDIX A

North Alpine Improvement and Service District Background Documents

North Alpine - WWDC Levell!

t-Or~ BOOK·

1 ~PR PAGE ,'{) '/ 885050 WARRANTY DEED

Anne B. Clinger, Trustee of the Anne' B. Clinger Revocable' TrU'stdated "M~fch 5,

1990, grantor, of Alpine, Lincoln County, Wyoming, for and in consideration of Ten and

No/100 Dollars ($10.00), and other valuable considerations, in hand paid, receipt whereof

is hereby acknowledged, CONVEYS and WARRANTS to the North Alpine Improvement

and Service District No.1, a political subdivision of the State of Wyoming, grantee, of PO

Box 3776, Alpine, WY 83128, the following described real estate, situate in Lincoln

County, and State of Wyoming, hereby releasing and waiving all rights under and by virtue

of the homestead exemption laws of the State, to-wit:

A portion of Lot No. 58 of the Rees Subdivision, Lincoln County, Wyoming, described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast Comer Stone Section 20121 first course West 126.4 feet; thence second course South 285 feet to Northwest corner line of Lot No. 57, thence East 126.4 feet to Northeast corner of Lot No. 57, thence North to 1/4 corner stone Section 20/21.

SUBJECT TO all covenants, easements, exceptions, restrictions, reservations and rights of way of sight or record.

WITNESS my hand as of the 17th day of October, 2002.

STATE OF WYOMING

COUNTY OF h I ~ t,p/v; ss.

Anne B. Clinger, Trus e

The -foregoing Warranty Deed was acknowledged before me by Anne B. Clinger, Trustee of the Anne B. Clinger Revocable Trust dated March 5, 1990, this 18' day of October, 2002.

Witness my hand and official seal.

Diana Spencat'- raylor State of Wyoming. Notary Public

County of Uncoln

My~~;:l v~~t'6

NbTARY PUBLIC ,,)

My commission expires: _:;'_1 _/ _?;_It?'_' '~1_~_.i?_· ,#._,:..;...."./ ___ _

u

U3Jlbl.--Jj

· ... :t "

.-. ~". - ~ t_' L

,. BOOK __ $02PRPAGE ,Ub_

ASSIGNMENT OF EASEMENT

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That the undersigned, Anne B. Clinger,

a single woman and as Trustee of the Anne B. Clinger Revocable Trust dated March 5,

1990, and John Michael Clinger, a single man, assignors, of Alpine, Lincoln County,

Wyoming, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good

and valuable considerations, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, do hereby

assign, grant and release unto the North Alpine Improvement and Service District No.

1, a political subdivision of the State of Wyoming, grantee, of PO Box 3776, Alpine, WY

83128, all of their right, title and interest in and to that certain easement interest located in

Lincoln County, Wyoming, as more particularly described below:

That certain easement for installation, operation and maintenance of a water line and ingress and egress as described in that easement recorded August 29, 1991, in Book 300 PR, page 422.

Grantors have full right to assign their interest in said easement, and this

assignment is intended by grantors to be a full and complete assignment of all of their

rights and privileges under the described easement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands as of the 17th day of

October, 2002.

STATE OF WYOMING

COUNTY OF 1\/ ~rl~t~1 11 ss

The foregoing Assignment of Easement was acknowledged before me by Anne B. Clinger, a single"womap,. and as Trustee of the Anne B. Clinger Revocable Trust dated March 5, 1990, this l ;~' day of October, 2002.

1

7U9


~~~~~£ NOTARY PUBLIC ~

My commission expires: ;2 7 /II~ ;Z. ~ DS

STATE OF WYOMING

COUNTY OF L, H"cdJll

. ss

The foregoing Assignment of Easement was acknowledged before me by John Michael Clinger, a single man, this J~ day of October, 2002.


Otana Spencer-Taylor State of WyomIng. Notary PublIc

Cowrty of UncoIn

Mt~ .... ~ ~,/~~~ NOTARY PUBLIC ?

My commission expires: J 7 /VI a lj ;t (JO :) I

2

03016793 \ __ ".' :.. I " ~:.:,..:

3 U ~) 0 5 .~~ L c.. ~.< • .-

WELL AND WATER PIPELINE EASEMENT

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That the undersigned, Anne B. Clinger,

a single woman and as Trustee of the Anne B. Clinger Revocable Trust dated March 5,

1990, John Michael Clinger, a single man, Karen Anne Hops, a single woman, and Brent

Elwood Johnston, a single man, grantors, of Alpine, Lincoln County, Wyoming, for and in

consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable

considerations, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, do hereby grant and release

unto the North Alpine Improvement and Service District No.1, a political subdivision of

the State of Wyoming, grantee, of PO Box 377£>, Alpine, WY 83128, a perpetual well and

water pipeline easement and right-of-way for the in~tallation, construction and continued

maintenance of water wells and water pipelines and related facilities over, under, through,

across and along the lands described below for the purpose of providing culinary water to

said District's customers as more particularly described below, and to its successors and

assigns, to enter upon said lands for this purpose, situate in the County of Lincoln, State of

Wyoming, more particularly described as follows:

See Exhibits "A", "B", "C", and 0 attached and incorporated herein by this reference.

Together with all rights of ingress and egress necessary or convenient for all rights

and privileges incident to said water wells and water pipelines. Grantors, for the

consideration aforesaid, hereby agree not to construct or maintain any building or structure

of a permanent nature upon the described easement that would interfere with grantee's

use of said easement.

The grantors hereby waive and release all rights to said property under and by virtue

of the homestead exemption ·Iaws of this state to the extent that such rights may interfere

with the intent of this easement for the purposes of installing, constructing and maintaining

water wells and water pipelines.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands as of the 17th day of

October, 2002.

,,"~ -, ,,-

, t ..... --.. -::t'-' ~~~"

.. ::"" /.-.-~-:. '':': "~~-\.~~...,,-::''' ~~"--.-r. __ 'frJo t

Anne B.Clinger /

1

(1/

:./.-, .

STATE OF WYOMING

COUNTY OF ~/ntdn ss

\

1 j 3

Karen Anne Hops by Anne B. Clinger, her attorney-in-fact

Brent ElwoocY-/J

The foregoing Well and Water Pipeline Easement was acknowledged before me by Anne B. Clinger, a single woman, as Trustee of the Anne B. Clinger Re~cable Trust dated March 5, 1990, and as attorney-in-fact for Karen Anne Hops, this , ~ day of October, 2002.


Dt_ Spencer-Taylor Slat- of Wyoming - Notary pubnc

County of lincoln

..,CIMIIIIIIft&pN ;2 '1 - /1141.11 ~".s-:

My commission expires: ;) 7 ,41 q \.j ;l ~"s

" STATE OF WYOMING

COUNTY OF ~ J ~ !.{)/11

. ss

The foregoing Well and Water Pipeline Easement was acknowledged before me by John Michael Clinger, a single man, this I \.r.~ day of October, 2002.


2

My commission expires: :)7 "..£{ay ~6~

STATE OF WYOMING ss

COUNTY OFb I ;'Mn

The foregoing Well and Water Pipeline Easement was acknowledged before me by Brent Elwood Johnston, a single man, this I? day of October, 2002.


Diana Spencer-Taylor State of Wyoming - Notary PubIc

County of lincoln

MyCclrnmillion ~d 7 M A:f ~s ~~r~J~ N ARYPUBLIC

My commission expires: _~_7_~---",t{~1./f-_r:t_r:~ __ - __ _ /

3

Jun 10 02 10:43& Dices '-'I. Levis (307) 654-7645 p.1S

r'.f ........ llMI Surftre .. , .... N.$dwW .................. 1 ..

~A."" ............... ., ...... A.k'-W ............. ,.. IUIlYlTOll so ... u. "~ . ... ....,. ........ WII' ~W,....lllOIIl .u...~.JII.

Description for

JOHN MICHAEL CLINGER

for

WATER .. lINE

ANNE B. CUNGER LANDS

'To wit:-

EXHIBIT "A"

A strip of land ten (10) feet in width being. part of Tract 1 of the Rees Subdivision of

record in the Office of the Oerk of Un(:oln County as prat 171 with the center-line de

scribed as follows:

BEGINNING at the point on the east line of a well house, N43°-01'W, 620,57 feet from

the southeast comer of the NE~SE~:of Section 20, T37N, R118W, lincoln County,

Wyoming found as described in the Comer Record filed In said Office;

thence N86°-38 'E, 63.01 feello a valve;

thence S88°·17'E, 188.19 feet to an intersection with tM west Une of that (rad of record

in said Office in Book 374 of Photostatic Records on page 78, Nooo-15.1'E, 41.25 feet

I from the southwest comer of said tract;

TOGETHER wilh a well-house desaibed as follows:

BEGINNING at a point N43°-Ql 'W, 620.57 feet from said southeast corner;

thence S04°-41'E, 6.67 (eet to the southeast comer;

thence 585°-19'W, ten feet to the southwest comer;

thence N04°-41 'VY, len feet to the northwest corner;

thence N89°-19 t E, ten feet to the northeast comer;

thence S04°-41'E~ 3.33 feer to the point of BEGINNINC;

all in accordance with the plat prepared to be filed in said Office titled, "ANNE B.

CLINGER PLAT OF TRACTS IN SE~SW}4 SECTION 20 lOT 3 (NE}1NW~) SECTION 29

i T37N R118W LINCOLN COUNTY, WYOMING; revised 16 December 1996.

,,::'l.?QJ~ 5 December 1996, revlsed 16 December t 996

Iwss des clinger2 p.2

"Modification In any way of the roregoins description terrnin~tes liability 01 the surveyor"

'7 i 5

~un lU U~ lU:~4a p • .L I

I'ICMIIIMIII.INI Sr ....... ~ ............. IH SaIII ........... ............. ,.., ""' .... A.SchtlW JIeJII* ... H .. , .. Wl\'DOC KHEJaL, lTD. _ ....... w,.IIalJlll

1&11--..,... .. 1)l1li1 Ni<I ............... 1)110

Description for

JOHN MICHAEL CUNCER

for

WATER-UNE

EXHIBIT "BII

CLINGER - JOHNSTON TRACT

To wit:-

" strip of land ten (10) feet In width being part of Tract 1 of the Rees Subdivision of

record in the Office of the Clerk of Uncoln County as Plat No. 171 with the center-line

desalbed as follows:

BEGINNING at a point on the west line. ·olthat tract of record in Book 374 of Photostatic

Records on page 78 in said Office, NOoo-1S.1IE 41.25 feet from the southwest corner;

thence S88°·17I E, 13.71 feet to a 410$ •. PVC angle in the pipeline;

then.ce NOO°-06 1W, 220.79 (eet to an intersection with the north line of said Tract 1, Eas~

12 feet from the southwest comer of lot 1 of said Subdivision;

all in accordance with the plat prepared to be filed in said Office titled, -ANNE B.

CLINGER PLAT OF TRACT IN SE14SW14 SECTION 20 Lor 3 (NE~NW~) SECTION 29

T3~~W ~C~MING; revised 16 December 1996.

5 December 1996" revised 16 December 1996

wsS des clinger2 p.3

"Modification in any way of the forqofng description terminates liability or the surveyor"

'716

Jun 10 02 10:438 DicesW. Leuis (307) 654-7645 p.14

1'Io ........ ~s_. r.iulN,kMofd ................ I .. ScM.\.ScNoW IqIIINIIM .... Jilt ...... _A.1dwW ...,.... .... ,JA $UIIYOOII SCHIIIIL. LTD, ... ...."Wt_ ... e)l1)

a-tr_wor-.'lllOl Ntan. \YtanoirIa IJ~.O

Description

from

EXHIBIT "c" - Page 1 of 2

ANNE B. CLINGER

lor

WATER.- UNE

through

LOT 58 Of REES SUBDIVISION

Towit:-

A strip of land ten (10) reet in width being part of Lot 58 of the Rees Subdivision of record

in the Office of the Clerk of Lincoln County as prat No.1 71 with the center·line described

as follows:

BECINNINC at a point south line of said lot 58, N69°·56'·56"W, 121.40 feet from the

southeast comer of said Lot 58 marked by a 5/8 x 24 Ins. steel reinforcing rod with

aluminum cap inscribed, "SURVEYOR SCHERBEllTD BIG PINEY WY PLS5308";

thence NOO°-OO'-OltfE, parallel with the west line of the east, 126.40 feet of said Lot 58,

124.33 feet;

thence N32°-321-35"E. 104.24 feet to the center poInt of a water tank;

TOGETHER with a tract of land lWenty°(20) (eet in diameter for the water tank with the

center point being, 56]D-S7t-23wW, 70,47 feet from the east one quarter-comer of Section

201 T37N, R118~ lincoln County, Wyoming found as described in the Comer Record

filed in said Office;

SUBJECT to a revision of this description in accordance with w~ S. 34-1-141 after a fieJd

review of the accuracy of this survey des.cription;

all in accordance with "Exhibt A W attached herewith and made a part thereof.

I ·'-1 ~)/cL

16 December 1996

sSdes clinger2 p.4

"Modification in any way of tne: foregoing description tefminales liability of tile 5ulVeyor"

7i7

.,

... if II J

scole 1 - - 50'

note: Gil blaring. and (ji,\oncd measured.

LEGEND

Lot 58

2!SO. 4

lot 56 o indicates Q Comer Rocard an file In the Office of the Clerk

of LIncoln Count)'-

indicates a 5/8"x2."" s\eel reinforcln9 rod with • 2" aluminum cap inscribed ·SURVEYOR SCHERBEl. LID.

81G PINEY, W'( PLS5368", set this survey.

o Indicotes a 1/2-x23" st~1 reinforcing rod found this survey.

• indicotes 0 1/2"1(23- steel reinforcing rod found and replaced '?l 0 S/8"x24· steel rod with aluminum cop insaibed SURvEYOO SCHERBEL. LTD. BIG PINEY

prepared by 51JRV£YOR SCHERBEL. LTD. YfV PLS5368 ....... compu.t. Se: e: \tc\dlng«.pro 8 July 1991 81<. WH2 p.28. 30-32 revlsod 12 July 1991. 16 Oec::ember 1996

34.83'

I I

5 '1

Lot 57

589'48'56" 1/4 cor. 126.40 •.•••. 20/21

•• !li/.-,..- ••• ;;'i~~

.~., ,,0.

Part Lot 58

126 ••.

wot.,. tank

E:J:h1,b -£t A Lot 58

Rees S'Ubd;,vision -with.i...,... tluJ

NEf/4SEI/4 SECTION 20 T37N RffSW

,"'; . : ' . ., ....

LINCOLN COUNTY. WYOMING

()

TO WIT:

=E~BITD= DESCRIPTION FOR WELL I WATER LINE EASEMENT

LOCATED IN mE NEl/4SEl/4 SECTION 20, TI7N, Rl18W~ 6th P,M.

LINCOLN COUNTY, WYOMING

1'19

l\ parcel of land located in the NE1I4SE1/4 of Section 20, T37N, R118W, 61f1

P.M.. Lincoln County, Wyoming; said parcel being a portion of Tract 1 of the Rees

Subdivision of record in the Office of the Clerk of Lincoln County, Wyoming as Plat No.

171; said parcel beina more particularly described as follows:

BEGINNING at a point from which the northeast comer of said NEl/4SEl/4 of

Section 20 bears N23°35' 18"E. 903.22 feet;

thence S03D48tOO'~, 46.00 feet;

thence S86°12'OO''W, 20.00 feet; '.

thence N03c48'OO·'W, 46.00 feet;

thence N86°12'OO"E, 20.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING;

ENCOMP ASSlNG an area of920 square feet, more or less;

SUBJECT TO any other easements. rights-or-way, covenants, conditions.

restrictions, agreements, reservations or encumbrances of sight and/or record;

the BASIS OF BEARING being N90000'OO''W along the north line of said

NEli4SE1I4 of Section 20.

Rendezvous Engineering, P .c. Jackson, Wyoming September -5, 2002 Well_Water Line Easement.Doc

BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WYOMING

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) OF THE ANNE B. CLINGER PUBLIC ) DOCKET NO. 80015-WA-02-1 UTILITY FOR AUTHORITY TO SELL ) (RECORD NO. 7676) UTILITY ASSETS TO NORTH ALPINE ) IMPROVEMENT & SERVICE DISTRICT NO.1)

ORDER (September 10, 2002)

This matter is before the Commission upon the application of the Anne B. Clinger Public Utility, et aI., hereinafter referred to as Anne B. Clinger or the Company, for authority to sell utility assets to North Alpine Improvement and Service District No.1, hereinafter referred to as North Alpine.

The Commission, having reviewed the application, its files regarding Anne. B. Clinger, applicable Wyoming utility law, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, FINDS and CONCLUDES:

1. Anne B. Clinger is a public utility as defined by W.S. § 37-1-101 (a)(vi)(G) and, as such, subject to the Commission's jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of W.S. § 37-2-112.

2. Anne B. Clinger, a.k.a Rees Housing Subdivision, provides domestic water services to 29 customers in the Rees Subdivision located in North Lincoln County near Alpine, Wyoming, and domestic and irrigation water to 1 customer in a contiguous parcel just outside the boundary of the Rees Subdivision.

3. North Alpine was established on April 3, 2001, as an improvement and service district pursuant to the provision of W.S. § 18-12-101 et seq. North Alpine consists of the Rees Subdivision and associated area currently served by the Company and another parcel of land located just to the north and west of the Rees Subdivision.

4. On July 18, 2002, Anne B. Clinger filed its application seeking approval to sell all its utility assets and all associated water systems to North Alpine. Upon approval of thts sale,North Alpine and its Board would then improve, operate, and maintain the water system.

5. On July 18, 2002, the Commission issued an Order for Public Notice which provided for a deadline of August 23, 2002, in which interested parties could file a statement, request for hearing or other representation with regard to the Company's application. A copy of the Order for Public Notice was mailed to each of the

Company's customers. No protests, comments, or requests for hearing were filed with regard to this matter.

6. In the application, the Company states that all charges or other fees will remain the same, and that the sale will not affect the service that customers currently receive. Pursuant to the terms of the Utility Sales Agreement, North Alpine has obligated itself contractually to continue Anne B. Clinger's service to its customers and to conduct engineering studies to improve the water system.

7. Pursuant to the provisions ofW.S. § 37-1-104, the Commission may deny a proposed reorganization, which is defined as any transaction which results in a change of ownership of a majority of the voting capital of a public utility, if, after public notice and opportunity for hearing, it is determined that the reorganization will adversely affect the utility's ability to serve the public.

8. The Commission finds and concludes that the sale of Anne B. Klinger's utility assets to North Alpine does not violate the provisions of the above referenced Wyoming statute. Based upon the application, this transaction will have no adverse impact on customers in Wyoming, and does not jeopardize the interests of any of the affected parties.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:

1. Pursuant to open meeting action taken on August 28, 2002, the application of Anne B. Clinger Public Utility for authority to sell all its utility assets and all associated water systems to North Alpine Improvements and Service District No. 1 should be, and hereby is, approved, effective immediately.

2. Anne B. Clinger Public Utility's tariffs are hereby cancelled, effective immediately.

3. Any Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to operate a water utility and provide water utility services to customer in Wyoming which Anne B. Clinger Public Utility might hold, is hereby cancelled, effective immediately.

MADE and ENTERED at Cheyenne, Wyoming, this 10th day of September, 2002.

(SEAL)

ATTEST:

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WYOMING

STEVE ELLENBECKER, Chairman

STEVE FURTNEY, Deputy Chairman

KRISTIN H. LEE, Commissioner

DOUGLAS J. MOENCH, Assistant Secretary

UTILITY SALES AGREEMENT

Sellers, Anna B. Clinger, individually and as trustee of the Anne B. Clinger

Revocable Trust dated March 5, 1990, John Michaal Clinger aka John M. Clinger aka

Mike Clinger, the Anne B. Clinger Public Utility (lithe Utility") according to its certificate

of authority granted by the Wyoming Public Service Commission ("the PSC"), Karyn

Hops and Brent Johnston, of clo John Michael Clinger, PO Box 3068, Alpine, WY

83128, ("Sellers" herein), agree to sell. and North Alpine Improvement and Service

District No.1, a political subdivision of the State of Wyoming (sometimes referred to

herein as "the District"), of PO Box 3776. Alpine, WY 83128, ("Buyer' herein), agrees

to buy the property described be\ow.

RECITALS

1. For many years, Sellers have operated the Utility and all associated wHter

systems located in Lincoln County, Wyoming, now consisting of the East 126.4 feet of

Lot 58 in the Roes Subdivision t Well No. 1 with associated Permit No. UW 102467

Well No. 2 with associated Permit No. 102468, pipelines( easements described on

Exhibits A, B, and C attached, an easement for access to rnaintain and operate V'/ell

No.2 and associated pipeline(s), associated equipment and any and all other assets of

the Utility and associated system. The Utility and associated system provide domestic

water to the Rees Subdivision and domestic and irrigation water to a contiguous parcel

just outside"the boundary of the Rees Subdivision.

2" Buyer is a duly organized improvement and service district pursuant to

W.S. 18-12-101 et seq., having authority to acquire, operate and maintain dornestic

water systems in the State of Wyoming.

3. Sellers desire to sell, and Buyer desires to acquire. improve, operate, and

maintain the water system currently owned and operated by the Utility pursuant to the

terms set forth below.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein.

the parties agree as follows:

1. Price and Terms of Payment. The total price is $58,000.00 payable to

Sellers as follows:

1.1 Earnest money in the amount of $1,000.00 paid to Sellers. receipt of

which is acknowledged, to be applied to the purchase price.

1.2 The balance of $57.000.00 at closing.

2. Provisions regarding the PSC. The parties stipulate and agree that the

Utility is regulated by the PSC and that this sale may occur only with the approval of the

PSC. As soon as possible after executing this agreement, the parties agree to file a

joint application with the PSC for approval of this transaction. If for any reason, the

PSC fails to approve this transaction, this agreement shall become null and void and

Sellers shall return Buyer's earnest money.

3. Encumbrances. Sellers covenant that all of the property to be conveyed

will be free and clear of liens and encumbrances and fully paid for.

4. :Transfer of the Property. The Sellers will convey all of the Utility's assets

to the Buyer at closing by proper documentation as appropriate together with

easements as described on Exhibits A, B, and C and an easement for access to

maintain and operate Well No.2 and associated pipeline{s). In connection with the

conveyance. Buyer agrees to become responsible to provide domestic water to the

property currently receiving water from the Utility. Furthermore l Buyer agrees to

indemnify and hold Seilers harmless from any further liability to provide water as tile

Utility has heretofore done, end this covenant shall survive the closing and be binding

on Buyer thereafter.

2

Sellers understand and agree that Buyer may improve either Well No. 1 or

Well No. 2 and that it is possible that Buyer's engineers may recommend that a new

well be drilled. Sellers agree to cooperate with Buyer for the drilling of a new well as

long as it does not permanently damage or burden Sellers' land.

5. Covenant to Continue Providing Water to Sellers' Property. As part of the

consideration for this sale, Buyer covenants to continue providing water to that portion

of Sellers' real estate that is currently served by Well No.2. The amount an~ usa of

water provided shalt be the amount needed by Sellers as determined by them in their

sole discretion. Buyer shall provide the water at no cost to Sellers. Buyer warrants that

its compliance with this covenant shall not ever result in Sellers' property ever being

included in the District without Sellersl prior written consent. Buyer representf. to

Sellers that it has authority to enter into this covenant pursuant to W.S. 18-12-103(a)

and 18-12-112.

The legal description of the real property to which this covenant applies is RS

follows ( see also attached map showing property):

Tract 1 of the Rees Subdivision of record in the Office of the Clerk of Lincoln County as part of the N1/2SE1/4 of Section 20; T37N, R118W, 6th P.M., Lincoln County. Wyoming.

That part of Lot 1 and of the NE1/4SE1/4 of Section 20, T37N, R118W. Lincoln County. Wyoming. and also part of that tract of land of record in the ·Office of the Clerk of Lincoln County in Book 10 PR on page 151, described as follows:

BEGINNING at a point on the east boundary of said Section 20 fron1 which the east quarter corner thereof bears N .oo41'W. a distance of 1364.91 feet; thence running N.OO - 41'W, along the said east boundary for a distance of 84.8 feet to the southeast corner of Tract No. 1 in said Section 20; thence running S.B9°03"W. for a distance of 425.27 feet along the south boundary of said Tract No.1; thence running S.OD57'E. for a distance of 202.11 feet; thence running N.73°33'E. for a distance of 435.77 I more or less, to a point on the east boundary of said Section 20: encompassing an area of 1.38 acres,.more or less.

3

Together with all improvements thereon.

Nevertheless, this covenant to provide water to Sellers shall be limited only to

property within the bounds as described immediately above and that is retained by the

Sellers and shall terminate on the death of the last survivor of Anne 8. Clinger. John

Michael Clinger, Brent Johnston and Karyn Hops.

This covenant shall survive closing and be binding on the parties thereafter

according to its terms.

6. Acceptance of Documents of Conveyance. Acceptance of the documents

of conveyance by Buyer will be full performance by Sellers of all terms, conditions, and

agreements except for those that are to survive the closing according to the terms of

this agreement.

7. Possession. Buyer shall be entitled to possession of all of the Utility's real

and personal property at the time of closing.

8. Payment of the Expenses of this Transaction. The expenses of this

transaction such as title insurance, closing fees. recording fees, and filing fees shall be

paid one-half by each party. Each party shall pay the legal fees for their own attorney.

9. Closing. The parties intend that date of closing shall be on or before Jury

1, 2002. or as they may otherwise agree. However, they also recognize that thIs

transaction is dependent on approval of this sate by the PSC. If PSC approval is not

received by July 1, 2002, the parties agree that the closing shall occur within 30 day!> of

the date of receipt of PSC approval.

10. Def~

10. 1 If Buyer defaults in the performance of this agreement, Sellers have

the option of accepting the earnest money as liquidated damages or pursuing

4

any other lawful right or remedy to which Sellers may be entitled. If Sellers elect

to accept the earnest money. Sellers shalt retain the earnest money. If Sellers

elect to accept the earnest money as liquidated damages, that will constitute the

Sellers' sole remedy for Buyer's default and is not to be considered a penalty or

forfeiture. If Sellers seek any other remedy, they shall return the earnest money

to Buyer.

10.2 If Sellers default, Buyer may pursue any other lawful right or remedy

to which Buyer may be entitled.

10.3 In the event of default by either party in addition to any other

remedies provided herein or by law, the non-defaulting party shall have the right

of enforcing the remedy of specific performance against the defaulting party and

in such action the defaulting party shall not claim or maintain that the offended

party has an adequate remedy at law.

10.4 In the event of litigation between the parties concerning this

agreement or its subject matter, the prevailing party in that litigation shall be

entitled to recover their attorneys fees and costs in addition to any other rfJlief

received.

11. Title and title insurance. Sellers will give and Buyer will accept a

marketable' title to the real estate being sold. Sellers shall within a reasonable tirne

after closing furnish to Buyer a title insurance policy in the amount of the purchase price

of the real estate showing marketable and insurable title free of any liens,

encumbrances or defects. Within 14 days of the execution of this agreement b\1 all

parties. Sellers shall furnish to Buyer a commitment for a title insurance policy showing

the condition of the title to the property. Buyer shall have 14 days from receipt of the

commitment or until 24 hours prior to closing, whichever is less. in which to object in

writing to the condition of the title as described in the commitment. If Buyer does not

object. it shall be deemed to have accepted .the conditions of the title. It is agreed that

5

if the title of the property is not marketable, or cannot be made so within 14 days after

notice containing a written statement of defect is delivered to Sellers, Buyer's earnest

money will be promptly returned to Buyer.

If Buyer elects to secure a chattel abstract or other similar lien report on

the personal property being sold pursuant to this agreement. the above provisions

governing review of a title commitment shalt also apply to Buyer's review of a chattel

abstract or similar report.

12. Buyer's inspection. Buyer agrees that its officers or agents have had the

opportunity to make a full and complete inspection of the property, that it enters into this

agreement to buy the property based solely on their inspection and that it is buying the

property in its present condition "as is" and not based on any representations made by

Sellers.

13. Sellers' Payments- Sellers covenant that prior to closing they will have

paid any and all indebtedness of the Utility including without limitation any and all

current operating expenses.

14. TaxCJaims. Sellers represent that no taxes are outstanding against the

Utility or its assets other than Lincoln County taxes or assessments which shall be

prorated as of the date of closing.

15. Representations by Sellers. Sellers make the foHowing representations

and warranties to Buyer, all of which shall survive the closing:

a. Sellers are the owners of and have good and marketabJe title to the

Utility's property being sold pursuant to this agreement.

b. Sellers have not entered into any contract or lease relating to the Utility

or any of the property-being sold herein.

6

c. No judgments, liens, actions or proceedings are pending or threatened

against Sellers in connection with the Utility.

d. No violations of any kind are pending or threatened against the Utility

or property being sold herein.

e. SeUers have to their knowledge complied with all laws, rules, and

regulations relating to the Utility and the property being sold herein.

f. SeJlers are not insolvent and will not be rendered insolvent by the

transfer contemplated by this agreement. Sellers are able .to meet

their business obligations as they become due.

16. Hazardous Materials. Sellers represent and warrant that the real estate is

in full compliance with all federal, state and local laws. ordinances. and regulations

relating to Hazardous Materials as defined in Federal and state statutes and regulations

because the property being conveyed has never been used for the storage of or ary

activities using such Hazardous Materials.

17. Risk of Loss. Prior to the date of possession, all risk of loss shall remain

with Sellers.

18. Entire Agreement and Binding Effect. All agreements between the parties

are merged in this agreement. This agreement may not be changed orally and is to

apply to and bind the heirs, personal representatives, executors. administrators,

successors. and assigns of the respective parties. This agreement may be modified

only by a subsequent written agreement executed by all of the parties to this

agreement.

19. Commission. The parties stipulate and agree that there is no broker

involved in this transaction and consequently no commission to be paid.

20. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this agreement.

7

~. DATED as of this ~ day of June, 2002.

4 - _OJ

'/'?v ,-{,/ ---~n---n'e B. Clinger-:-tndividually an

as Trustee

inger Public Utility _---.------.,., ",--- '.

/

.. ._.&."0: .-~ 'z. --;:~ Micha ! Clinger - -~ Authorized O~r-_o

North Alpine Improvement and Service District No.1. a Political Subdivision of the 3tate of Wyoming corporation, by

(

.",

8

APPENDIX B

Well Log Information

North Alpine - VWJDC Level II

Mar 30 02 01:38p Hinckle~ Consulting 307-745-0499

FOIIMU·WD RIi'I s·..,

STATE OF WYOMING 0'1"101 OF TttIa'ATaINCMNI!M

HIItSCHLIR IIUILDING CHIY!NNI, WYOMING .. 2

(llJ1)m ....

STATEMENT OF COMPLETION AND DESCRPTION OF WELl. OR SPRING

98553 I NOTE: Do not fOld INI film!. U .. typ8Wdtvr ! . at prtnt nee!y wIIh black Ink. .

PERMIT NO. U.W. ________ NAME OF WELL (SPRING) M,=O=.E-='-=l __________ _

1. NAME OF OWNER GtJNN:!!AR~O~M=O::::E~ ____________________ _

2. ADORESS ______ ~P.~o~.~am~~1~67~~~~~~~~----~~------------------PI,I" check If adeltasa hIS changed frOm that shawn on ptnnll 0

City Alpine State ~ Zip Code . 83128 Phone No. 3Q7=654-75Q3

3. USE OF WATER: 00mesCtc i1 Stock Watering 0 Irrigation 0 Municipal 0 Industrial 0 MIsceItan80U8 0 explain proposed use (Emmple: One single family dweftlng) _________________ _

Single Family IMUinq

4. LOCATION OF WELL (SPRING): J!L. 14 ~ ~ of Sectlon.1!L , T . .J.L N., R.ilL W., of the 6th P.M. (or W.R.M.),

SubdMsion Name Bees SUbdivision of AlPine Lot 12 SIc)d(_' __ _

If surveyed. bearing, distance end reference point: _____________________ _

5. 1YPE OF CONSTRUCTION: DrlRad~ ___ ~A1r~Ro=t:aIy=.4. _____ DugO Driven 0 OtherD (Type of RIg)

Describe:

6. CONSTRUCTION: Total Depth of W~ 520 ft. a. DIameter of borehole (BIt stze) 8 & 6 Inches.

b. Cuing Schedule New Il9 UsedO

~ diamelerfrom __ 0._ It. to ~ ft.

~ diameter from ~ft. to ~ It.

Material

Material

DepIh 10 SIalic Wafer level 300 (Below land surface)

Steel Gage .250

Steel Gage .250

ft.

c. Was casing cemented: YesO No!:! Cemented Interval. From ____ _ feet to feet.

d. Number of sacks of cement used type of cement _______________ _

9. Perforallons: Type of I*f9rator used __ ....;CU:;:..t=.;tinq::=·:;;z...::;'l'o::;;n::h= _______________ _ Size of p8lf0rations • Inches by 6 inches.

Number of perforations and depths where perfarated; 80 perforaI/on8 frorn_ 522_00_ ft. to 500 feet.

~ perforations from ~ ft. to ~ feet.

f. Was wei screen NlJlled? YesD No ~ Diameter: slot siZl: __ sec from feet to _~...."..... Diameter. slot size: set from teet to ----4~

g. Was well gravel packed? VesD No f&J Size Of gravel --------.l\r h. Was sulface casing used: Ves 0 No ~ Was It cemented in place? Yes 0 No!J

7. NAME & ADDAeSS OF DRILLING COMPANY '1llcmas Brothers Drilling, !nc. 307-886-3916 Rt tl Afton, wr 83110

8. DATE OF COMPLETION OF WELL (Including pump InslaHatlon) OR SPRING (first used) _........:9;;...-.,;;;1:;:..1-...:::9..:;;,5 __ _

9. PUMP INFORMATION: Manufacturer Red Jacket Type SUbnersible Souroe Of power Publ1c Horsepower _3_ Depth Of Pump Setttnu or Intake 492' Amount of Water BeIng Pumped 10 Gallons Per Minute. (For SprIngs or flowing wells, see item 10.) Total Volumetric; Gafions Used Per Calendar Vear. ___________________ _

10. FLOWING WELL (Owner Is rnponslble for control of flowing weH •• If well yields arteSian ftow, yield is ___ gal.lmin. Surface pressure Is __ IbJsq. inch, or ___ feet of water. The flow is controlled by: valve 0 cap 0 plug 0 Does weflleak around casing? Ves 0 No 0

98553 Pennlt No. U.W. _______ _ Book No. 763 Page No. __ 5_4_

p.9

Mar 30 02 01:39p Hinckle~ Consultin~ 307-745-0499

11. If spring, how was It constructed? (Some method of artlllclal diversion, I.e., Spring bOl(, cribbing, ele .. Is necessary to qualify for a water right.) ___ . ______ ... __ . ______ . __ . ___________ ._

.-.-----... ----.. --.------.~-.-------------------_._----------_. 12. PUMP TEST: Was a pump test rl'lade7 Yes 0

If SO, by whom _____________ _ Address _____ . Yield: gal.lmln. with foot drawdown after ____ hours. Yield: ____ gal.lmln. with foot drawdown after ___ hours.

13. LOG OF WELL: Total depth drilled 520 teet. Depth of completed well 520 feet. Diameter of well La-L..lnches. Depth 10 first water bearing formatlOrt 200 feet. Depth to principal water bearing formation. Top 340 feello Bottom --S2.O..-._ feet.

Ground Elevatlon, if known

DRILL CUTTINGS DESCRIPTION:

From To Material Remarks Indicate Water Bearing Indicate Perforated Feet Feet Type, Texture Color (Cementing. Shutoff) Formation & Name Casing Location 1 20 Sandv Clay 20 40 Cla" a Boudler 40 60 " K

60 80 Clay & CObbles 80 100 " II

.-100 120 " " 120 140 Clay & Gravel 140 160

c, a

160 175 II " 115 200 Gray Shale (SOl1( ) 1st water 200 250 " . 250 300 .. .. 300 340 1 .. 340 380 Fractured Shale Water 2 - 5 <]J;IR

I 380 400 Shale 400 450 Shalel4S0 , sao Shale ) , ( 500 520 Shale,

14. QUALITY OF WATER INFORMATION: Does a chemical andIor bacterlologicat water quality analySis accompany this form? Vas 0 No iJ It is recommended that chemical and bacteriologic water quality analyses be perfonned and that the report(s) be Hied with th9 r8COfds of this welt. (Contact Oepa:tmeot of Agriculture, Analytical lab Services. laramie. 742-2984.) If not, do you consider the water as: Good liJ Acceptable 0 Poor 0 Unusable 0 REMARKS: __________________________________________________________ __

Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this form and to the best of my knowledge and belief it is true, corr~ and complete.

Oct, 12 ,19fi-Signature of QwM{ or Authorized Agent Date

prOR STATE ENGINEeR'S USE ONl V

OCT 1 7 199~ Dale 01 Receipt _...::....;; _______ • 19 __ Date of Approval / /-~ ~ • 19 . .2t:

Date 01 Priority MAli'3 ,. ~~ _____ , 19 __ ~:::> e~*,

p.l0


STATE OF WYOMING OFFICii OF THI STATE INGlNHR

HIRICHUR IUILDING CttEVENNe. WYOIIIINCIIICID2

(307) m·lIS. STATEMENT OF COMPLETION AND DESCRIPTION OF WELL OR SPRING

NO~ .

NOTE; Do noIlDId \his Iorm. Use typewrller 1 or prlnl neauy wl1l\ Dlack ink.

PERMIT NO. U.W. #99439 ____ NAME OF WELL (SPRING) ~M~CNwEIUAto!:jLi-*:.,lt--___ _

1. NAME OF OWNER KENNETH C & MARGA.RET N. MCNEAr. '

2. ADDRESS BOX 1 0 & 3426 Plot- ohodc if IIddresa has c;1'Ianged rrom Ih.lanowll on P1trmil 0

City AT.pINE State WYOMING Z/pCode 83128 Phone No. (307) 654-7620

3. USE OF WATER: DomestiC iJ Stock Watering 0 Irrigation 0 Municipal 0 Industrial 0 Miscellaneous 0 Explain proposed use (Example: One single family dwelling) ___ _

to serve two sing'e family dwelliags

4. LOCATION OF WELL (SPRING): ..btIL- % -S.1L ~ of Section -2.n. , T. ~ N., R. u.a.. W.o of the 6th P.M. (or W.A.M.),

SUbdivision Name --.lR"'Iw:E~S~ __ ~ _______ lot 15 Block ___ _

IfsUNeyed. bearing. diitaoce and raference point ____________________ _

5. lYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: Drtlled[JJ _ ....... r ..... o .... t .... /I ..... r.,...1 __________ DugO Driven 0 OtherO (TWIe 01 Alg)

D~~ _____________ • _________________________________________ __

6. CONSTRUCTION: Totat Depth of WolIISpring 4nn a. Diameter of borehole (Bit size) 6 inches.

b. casing Schedule New iii UsedO

.fi.....5L8ilameler from ~ ft. to ~ ft.

~iametef from ..2.20.-. ft. to ~ ft.

ft. Depth to Sialic Water Level ) 4 J

(Below land surface)

Material steel Gage .250

Material _oilplltuJ,.;;c _____ Gage aeb:4 0

H.

c. Was casing cemented: YesO Noli! Cemented lntel'vaf. From ________ feetto ________ 1eeL

d Number of sacks of cement used type of cenJ8I1t _______________________ _

8. Perfomlions: Type of perforator used _____________________ _ Size of perloralions Inche& by Inches.

Number of perforations and c:leptha where perforated: ___ perforations from ___ ft. to ___ feel ___ perforationS from ___ ~ ft to ___ feeL

f. Was well screen Installed? YesO No !ill Diameter: slot size: ____ set from ______ feet to ----t~ Diameter slot slze: set from feet to __ ;--'

g. Was well gravel packed? YesD No i1 Size of gravel _________ _

h. Was surface casing used: Yes 0 No iJ Was II cemented In place? Yes 0 No 0

7. NAME & ADDRESS OF DRILLING COMPANY JACK WEBER 1240 GREGORY LANE JACKSON, WY. 83001

6. DATE OF COMPLETION OF WelL (lnclucllng pump installation) OR e~AING (first llsed) JUNE 24, 1996

9. PUMP INFORMATION: Manufacturer Reel Jacket; Type _____ S~uoS&b ........ ______ _ Source of power Elect.. Horsepower ..LlLDepth of Pump Setting or Intake _3 811<.'6><-1 ____ _ Amount of Water Being Pumped 25 Gallons Per Minute. (For Springs or flowing wells. see item 10.) Total Volumetric GaAons Used PerCaiendarVear. ___ ..... 3_25 ........ , 0 .... 0...,0"--_____________ _

10. FLOWING WELL (Owner is responsible for control of flowing well). If weft yields artesian flow, yield is ___ gaUmin. Surface pressure Is __ Ib./sq. inch, or ___ feet of water. The flow Is controlled by' valve 0 cap 0 plUg 0 Does well leak around casing? Yes 0 No 0

Permll No. U.W. _....:I# ... 9;r..;;9~41..013L.019 ____ _ 8001< No. 769 Page No. _4...,0,,---_

p. 11


11. II spring, how was It constructed? (Some melhod of artificial diversion, 1.8" spring box, cribbing, elc •• is neceSSOly to qualify for a watllr right) _

------.----------.-----

12. PUMP TEST: Was a pump tesl made? Yes kl Noli) If so, by wnom --"dur...li...lI..&J,.\;e~r __________ Address ______ .•.•. _______ .. _ .... _ Yield: 1 5 galJmln. with 22 Q fOOl drawdown after _---'-<1I'-'2~ hours. Yield: -..l.L-- gal.lmln. with.. 400 foOl drawdown after 1 hours.

13. LOG OF WELL: Total depth drilled 400 feet. Oeplt! of completed well 400 feet. Diameter of we" _.-L- inches. Deplt! to first water bearing formation 1 43 feet. Depth to principal water bearing tonnation. Top ____ feet to Bottom ____ feet

Ground Elevation, if known _______ .

DRILL CUrnNGS DESCRIPnON:

From f To Material Remarks Foot ,Feet Type, Texture Color (Cementing, Shutoff)

Indicate Water Bearing indicate Periorated Formation & Name Casing Location

i n 4 t.OD soil ~--~~2~:1~~h~rn~.~a~i~it~---;------------~----------+---------~

21 50 brn clay v/chi D! •

aravel 50 143 Quart" arllv~l 143 148 If,rulst:one arava1

w/chios hrn elv 14B 165 Ilf-'--"--~ hiird

iwatltr " 1 1/2 clim 1---1:-6:-:5:---+---=-2"""3 7=-----t'b--=r~n s 11 tstone • 1 ~ /

ledae of l1ustc ne 237 285 liMestone 265 365 limestone. vate 385 400 ~rn silt stone 1~/

IliDleSl~ona

14. aUALITY OF WATER INFORMATION: Does a chemical and/or bacteriolOgical water quality analysts accompany this form? Yes 0 No ~ 11 is recommended that chemical and bacteriologic water qua6ty analyses be performed and that the report(s) be fIl6d with the records of this well. (Contact Department of Agriculture, Analydcal Lab SfJfVices, Laramie, 742-2984.) If not. do you consider the water as; Good Gd Ac:ceptableO Poor 0 Unusable 0

REMARKS: __________________________________________________________ ___

Under penamas of perjury, I ~Iare that I have examined th~ form and 10 the best of my knowledge and belief it Is true, correct and Complete.

FOR STATE ENGINEER'S USE ONLY

Date 01 Receipt JUl 11\996 _______________ ,19 __ __

Date of Priority _~{ T:..:u:l:!Wf-4Z~ ___ , 19 .tr-

p.12

APPENDIX C

Public Meeting Information

North Alpine - VV\NDC Level II

Scoping Meeting North Alpine Water Supply Project July 10,2002 - Meeting Notes Alpine Community Center, 7:00 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.

I. Project Description and General Information - Chris Abernathy a. Background of WWDC, Description of Application Process, Consultant Selection

Process b. No money required for study, 100% funding by WWDC c. Project begins 6/15/02, Draft report due 10/1/02, final report due 11/1/02 d. Budget, $60k for study

II. Project Team - Bob Ablondi a. Prime Engineer: Rendezvous Engineering b. Geology/hydrology Subconsultant: Hinckley Consulting c. Local Engineer: Sunrise Engineering

III. Scope of Services - Bob Ablondi a. Level 2 study

Focus on existing problems in the Rees Subdivision generate alternatives develope cost estimates investigate funding sources compile into a report outlining options

b. Look at existing SID needs/supply, look at regional needs/supply c. Several options will be put presented in the study d. A new well could be recommended as a part to study that would continue level II into

2003. The well would be tested and proven before District takes it on

IV. Tentative schedule-Bob Ablondi a. Project begins 6/15/02, Draft report due 10/1/02, final report due 11/1/02 b. Well Test in the next two weeks as soon as possible c. Progress meeting in August (tentative) d. Public meeting with draft report in October e. Final report submitted in N~vember in time for funding cylcle with WWDC

V. Key Issues-Bob Ablondi a. Wells - older wells

approx 50gpm: Clinger well, actual yield to be determined sanitary issues with "pit well" add new well offset from existing and maintain date of priority

b. Storage - contrruct storage tank on Forest Service land to provide gravity flow Existing tank: steel, old, near end of useful life Get started with Forest Service permits for storage tank early in the process to allow possible construction in 2003, permitting may take over one year

c. Distribution System - old system should be replaced Upgrade system with larger pipes, buried to prevent freezing

d. Possible funding sources

Page 1 of2

WWDC - 50/50 grant on matching funds RUS - Rural Utility Services federal program, hard to qualify for grants because of the need to show near poverty level income WYDEQ Revolving fund - 2.5% loan, on upgrading health related issues

VI. Contacts-Bob Ablondi

Chris Abernathy, Study Manager Wyoming Water Development Commission Herschler Building Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002 (307)777-7626

Bob Ablondi, Project Manager Rendezvous Engineering, P.C. P.O. Box 4858 Jackson, Wyoming 83002 [email protected]

Answers to questions from Audience

by Bret Winkler 7111/02

Study will include evaluation and recommendation for distribution system upgrades/options Forest Service may be interested in tank as a source of fIre suppression water which may provide incentive for USFS to approve a tank site on their land Once study is completed and report is submitted, the water district is able to select option best suited to its requirements, a vote would need to be held to approve assessments to pay for loan funds needed to construct the system. The construction project will be put out to competitive bid and the Water District will be able to select contractorslEngineers within state guidelines. If project continues beyond current application period, a "continuing status" will need to be fIled with WWDC with no additional fIling fees required for continuing study Piggy backing of grants is possible, RUS grants have "strings attached" (requires near poverty level income to qualify), and may not be the best option, but other organizations are available for funding. All funding options will be explored on paper Water district should expect to have some debt service as 100% grants are not likely, rather a 50% grant is most likely Fees can be charged for future subdivision tie ins or additional hook ups to help offset costs Water district will have authority over water use. USFS will not be able to dictate use of water, nor will Town of Alpine be able to dictate water use.

Page 2 of2

Meeting minutes - North Alpine Improvement and Service District # 1

Held at Alpine Community Center Date October 23,2002

Present - Diggs Lewis~ Director Mae Asher, Director Bob Ablondi, Project Manager, Rendezvous Engineering Chris Abernathy, Study Manager, Wyoming Water Development Commission Bret Winkler, Project Engineer, Rendezvous Engineering Jason Linford, Sunset Engineering

Bob Ablondi opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. by briefly explaining the 1995 Levell study and how the just completed Level II study differed from the earlier study. He then went on to clarify what the study entailed. First, they did the well testing. The first objective of this what to find out how good the two wells were by doing a two day '"draw dou-n test. " Their recommendation is that the district drills a new well to replace well # 1, which is an older well.

Then the engineers looked at the existing system, including the holding tank, transmission lines and the distribution lines. They discovered that the holding tank is old, rusty and is only partway full. Bob pointed out that, "the tank is beyond its useful life." They found the transmission and distribution lines to be antiquated. They did not dig up any lines because they didn ~t want to cause any additional problems with this system.

Bob then explained that they were proposing three different options for the district to agree on. The first would be a "bare bones option." A new well will have to be dug. (This is true for all three options.) The storage tank would be replaced with two 25,000 gallon fiberglass tanks and the replacement lines would only be 4" lines. This option would not provide for fire protection or further expansion.

The second optio~ a new well, a 120,000 gallon concrete storage tank, and 6" transmission and distribution lines.

The third optio~ a new well, a 200,000 gallon concrete storage tank and 8''' transmission and storage lines. The second and third options do provide for fire protection and future expansion.

Bob presented two different payment options, one with the remaining loan being provided by the Wyoming Water Development Commission at 6% interest. The other, through the DEQ, with a 2.5% interest rate.

Diggs Lewis brought up the fact that the board is planning to sell the lot with the existing water storage tank and use the proceeds to payoff district's existing debt. The new storage tank will be placed on National Forest Service land at a higher elevation.

Chris Abernathy then explained that the district doesn~t have to accept any of these options, that they can do nothing, wait a year or agree on an option. He also explained that the loan with them would be automatic, but that the loan through the DEQ was federal money a...nd would also entail an environmental study.

The enclosed resolution win be mailed to the Wyoming Water Development Commission to proceed with Phase Three of the project, the construction phase. Diggs Lewis and Mac Asher will go to Casper, Wyoming, on November 14, 2002, to present the district~ s plan to the state.

Gerry Goulding, the attorney for the district is presently working on the district ~ s by-laws. They should be completed in the next couple of months. The final closing on the purchase of the water system from the Klinger's has been completed.

The board of directors submitted Matthew Johnson's name to the EPA to be the district's Certified Chief Operator. The district will also need to find a backup operator.

The lot owners attending this meeting approved, with a majority vote, option #2, but ",ith 8" transmission and distribution lines. The figures of the three options are enclosed.

Oct 25 02 03:11p Lewis 18125/2882 el:43 8587S99185 ALLEN W DOTV

(a07) 654-7645 PAGE 81

Qc~ 25 O~ J2:17p D1CC~ W. L •• ls

Otl-Z~-~~~ Je:5T A~ (d07, GS4-?G45

NORTH ~ IMMOYEi8IT ANO savtef DlS1IIC111O. 1 1EtOL&mON 110. 10-23..02

On 00taIM, 23. 2002. the 80eId of Diredors r" eo.no ~ • ~ ...... of ell lot ..,.,. in h NortI'l Alpine ~nt ..-1d ..... D'-IIld No. 1

r ... l*trtcll. ThIt tIUfPGDII 01.,. ....,. ... 10 Gi6cUss the apIiona ...... 10 the

o-.:r .. impfGWinfJ ...... ~ and the..,.... c:MN _..., 0IIIIcIft. The

84M ,... camm ... ta from lot ~ ~ the engIMM __ - .. aptionI

... N'lciltld~. ~. havfng .......", vnanimoua ...,.,.. from thole Peeent'" ..-c:t .....,... No. 2 (12O.ooo~" _. tank. fJ.inch diItIibuIon ....

•• ~ to ,the Rendez.vouI E .... ing Companv ..... I NDtth Alpine WIIIIr

~ ~ MId 101Z01D2). upon motion .., rNIde ..... ....... it ..

~""""by"8oaJd.foIIowa:

~ iD .. UMnimous advice fIQrn the Jot owner • ...-eftf at .. "....; ..

., ... 8CCOI •• to .. bn1 __ of tNt "d, the Boafd .... di,..... .,. ~.

W*' 0.. •• ", .... CommiIaioft Oft ~ 1, 2002. to ptODMd wiIh the ....... '"

~ .....

p.2 "'.81

p.l

WWDC - NORTH ALPINE WATER PROPOSAL OPTIONS from meeting J 0/23/02

Name Lot # Option Option Option Remarks #1 #2 #3

Yvonne Lewis 11 X + 8 inch pipe

Yvonne Lewis 12 X + 8 inch pipe

Beverly Asher 5 X + 8 inch pipe

David W. Speaks 46 X + 8 inch pipe

Michelle Rinaldi 51 X + 8 inch pipe Hill Flvnn

Debbie Copper 26 X + 8 inch pipe

Karen Fett 21 X + 8 inch pipe

Karen Fett 22 X + 8 inch pipe

Nancy Hansen 3 X + 8 inch pipe

Jan Hagan 4 X + 8 inch pipe

Matt Johnson 45 X + 8 inch pipe

Doloris and Forrest 17 X N P.l)P.ThllTo-

Nick and Mary Ellen 1 X + 8 inch pipe T .1chter

L.E. Schoenhals 52 X

L.E. Schoenhals 53 X

Gary Ash P~t l1ClP.

6 X

Jack Stone 16 X 2.5% and 8 inch pipe

Carla Stone 14 X 18A 8 inch pipe

Carla Stone 19 X 18A 8 inch pipe

Dori and Susie 38 X with 8 inch pipe TT . Dori and Susie W2 Lot 36, 37 X with 8 inch pipe TT . '~\NKt:S

Dave and Bari 34 X -n _1 .. 1 "'. :nlllZ

Dave and Bari 35 X Hncho17: Tom Migel by Diggs 44 X T .p'wj~ Tom Migel by Diggs 43 X T .p.wic;:

Chris and Terry "6 47 X with 8 inch line

II

Charlie Fugazzi 50 X with 8 inch line

MEETI.NG NOTES LEVEL II NORTH ALPINE WATER SUPPLY PROJECT

PRESENTATION OF DRAFT REPORT October 23, 2002

ALPINE COMMUNITY CENTER 7:00 PM

INTRODUCTIONS

PROJECT OVERVIEW 1995 Level I Study - Lincoln County Sponsor

- 2002 study sponsored by North Alpine Service & Improvement District - regional issues were considered in report. It may be possible to

configure water system to keep open options on a regional water system

WELLS

TANK

- Wells located by Nordic Inn (Clinger #1 & Clinger#2) - Well #1 located in the garage. This well is currently directed to the Rees

SID. This well is old and located in a pit. There are sanitary concerns with this well

- Well#2 located nearby outside the garage this is a newer well with a pitless adapter and is currently directed to the Nordic Inn.

- Wells #1 & #2 are inter-connected and flows from either well can be directed to either the Rees SID or Nordic Inn

- Pump test both wells (well #1 = approx 20 gpm, Well #2 approx 60 gpm) - Well #1 test was limited by existing pump and avoiding draw down of

water below pump level. With a low yield and existing sanitary concerns, this well doesn't have a future on the proposed system. Costs associated with upgrading well #1 make it more attractive to drill a new well.

- Well #2 test utilized existing pump. Tested at approx 60 gpm. This is good compared to some wells in the area. This well has a more conventional casing which allows upgrading the pump.

- Future supply will utilize existing well #2 with a properly sized pump and a new well. Drilling in the same area as existing wells will increase the likelihood of drilling a successful well

- Existing tank is 12,000 gallon rather than the reported 20,000 gallon. - Tank is currently operating % full due to float settings. - Existing tank site is too low in elevation to be useful in the future water

system design - Sanitary condition of existing tank is marginal

Existing tank is not adequate to supply the 32 currently occupied lots. A new tank would be needed to supply the Rees subdivision's platted 60 lots.

DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM Existing system is old with a small diameter pipe. This system is not worth salvaging.

AL TERNATIVES - Alternatives were discussed ranging from lowest cost option to highest

cost option - The supply costs for all options are the same and involves drilling a new

well and improving existing well #2. - Storage has a larger cost range due to the different size tanks

constructed of different materials. - The least cost option is to use 2-25,000 gallon tanks to provide a total of

50,000 gallons of storage. With this size storage tank, fire flow would not be an option, therefore, 4" line for distribution system would be adequate.

- The higher cost options utilize concrete tanks. The lower cost concrete tank is 120,000 gallons, which would be adequate for a 500 gpm fire flow. With this fire flow, 6" supply line to the distribution system would be needed.

Woodland property is not included in the system because the land isn't needed for a well site

The potential gravity service area was shown on the map only to indicate where gravity service was possible. The water district will have the decision on who to include on the system.

- The highest cost storage option includes a 200,OOO-galion storage tank. This ta'nk is capable of 1000 gpm fire flow. With this fire flow, an 8" supply line to the distribution system would be needed. The distribution system would require a pipe upgrade to accommodate this fire flow.

TRANSMISSION LINE - The transmission line is routed up the hill in the most direct rout rather

than up the road. This ~s the shortest route, and the least expensive. An option may be available to route the transmission line along the Clinger property line to reduce the number of bends along the line.

The existing well #1 will be abandoned only after a new well is drilled and proven adequate. WWDC does have a program to fund wells, but using this program could delay construction one funding cycle (one year). Well#1 water rights could be transferred to the new well and maintain the seniority date for the original 20 gpm well. Additional flow would have a 2003 seniority date.

Alpine would benefit from a connection to the Rees water system, but the Rees Subdivision would not benefit from this connection because Alpines water tanks are too low to serve the Rees Subdivision.

The maximum number of homes that the system would likely be able to support is the existing 60 platted lots plus an additional 20 homes, plus the Clinger's historical demand of 60 gpm.

Flow meters can be used to determine supply and demand information which could be used to when deciding about the adequacy of the system to accommodate new water district members and hookups.

COST 50% Grant 1 50% Loan

- The loan portion has several options. WWDC provides loan money at 60/0 but only funds transmission lines. Distribution lines would need another loan source. SLIB loans at 6% and SRF loans at 2.5%). Because of restrictions on loan money, the loans would likely need to be combined to cover the entire project.

Fire insurance rates could be lower with a fire system and hydrants, which could offset some of the costs.

Proposed costs would be about average with other WWDC projects. These costs are based on a 30 year term. A 20 year term may be required by SRF.

Preferred option needs to be selected by 11/1/02. A letter needs to be sent to WWDC identifying the preferred alternative and request the next level of study.

Bond election would be required for the district to incur debt. A majority of "qualified electors" is required. Non-resident owners might be able to vote "by affidavit." Each voter gets one vote rather than one vote per lot.

WWDC - NORTH ALPINE WATER SUPPLY PROJECT October 23, 2002 meeting Alpine Community Center

Sign in sheet

Name

Bret Winkler Bob Ablondi Chris Abernathy Nick & Elly Lichter Diggs Lewis Yvonne Lewis Megan Johnson Matt J. Gary Ash Patt Goe Jason Linford Jerry & Judy Woodland Susie &Don Hawkes Karree Fett Jack & JoAnn Stone Gwerly Asher K.E. Asher

Representing

Rendezvous Engineering Rendezvous Engineering WWDC

Director

Secretaryl Accountant

Sunrise Engineering

Forrest & Dolores Neuerburg Tim & L.E. Schoenhais Jan Hagan Dave & B. Buchholz Nancy Hansen Debbie Cooper 0.1. W. Michelle Rinaldi Carla Storne Bert McNeel Town of Alpine

email

[email protected] [email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

APPENDIX D

Environmental Assessment

North Alpine - WWDC Level II

NORTH ALPINE SER VICE & IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WATER

SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Assessment Funded in Part by

WYOMING WATER DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

PREPARED BY:

SUNRISE ENGINEERING, INC. P.O. Box 609

47 East 4th Ave. Afton, WY 83110 (307) 885,8500

WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSEMENT

For the

NORTH ALPINE SERVICE ~

IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

Prepared by:

SUNRISE ENGINEERING, INC. 47 E. 4th Avenue P.O. Box 609 Afton, WY 83110 Ph. (307) 885--8500

NORTH ALPINE SERVICE & IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED OF PROJECT ....................................................... 1 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................. 1 1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED OF PROJECT ................................................................. 1

2.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT ACTION ........................................ 2 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENTAL/ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSEQUENCES ........................................................................................ 3 3.1 LAND USE ....................................................•.............................•.......................... 3

3.1.1 Affected Environment ........................................................................................ 3 3.1.2 Environmental Consequences ..................................................................... n •• 3 3.1.3 Mitigation ....................................................................................................... 3

3.2 FLOODPLAINS ........................................................................................................ 3 3.2.1 Affected Environment ........................................................................................ 3 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................... 3 3.2.3 Mitigation ....................................................................................................... 4

3.3 WETL.ANDS ........................................................................................................... 4 3.3.1 Affected Environment ...........•..............•....•.•.................................................. 4 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ...........................•........................................... 4 3.3.3 Mitigation ....................................................................................................... 4

3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES ..................................................................................... 4 3.4.1 Affected Environment ................•...................................................•............... 4 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences ...•.......•...............•........................................... 4 3.4.3 Mitigation ........................................................................................................... 4

3.5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ..........•...............................••...........................•...... 5 3.5.1 Affected Environment ...................................................................................... 5 3.5.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................... 5 3.5.3 Mitigation ..•.....•.•.•..... ~: .................................................................................... 5

3.6 - WATER QUALITY ISSUES ................................................................................. 6 3.6.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................... 6 3.6.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................... 6 3.6.3 Mitigation ....................................................................................................... 6

3. 7 COASTAL RESOURCES ..................................................................................... 6 3.7.1 Affected El'lVirOlllnellt .................................................................................... 6 3.7.2 Environmental COllseqllences ....................................................................... 6 3. 7.3 Mitigation ....................................................................................................... 6

3.8 SOCIO-ECONOMICIENVIROMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES ......................... 7 3.8.1 Affected El'lVirOlllllent .................................................................................... 7 3.8.2 Environmental Con seq lien ces ....................................................................... 7 3.8.3 Jltlitigatiolt ....................................................................................................... 7

~. ·\\~.t . Sunrise Engineering, Inc. , :::::::=::=-

- S E I ~ North Alpine Service & Improvement District Environmental Assessment ~

Table of Contents Page i


3.9 MISCELLAN'EOUS ISSUES ... ~ ..............................................•............................. 7 3.9.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................... 7 3.9.2 Environmental Consequences .......•............................................................... 7 3. 9.3 Mitigation .......................•.....•...............•................................................•......... 7

4. 0 SUMMAR Y OF MITI GA TI ON................. ........•.......... ............. ........... ........ 8 5. 0 CORRESPONDENCE ...................................................................................• 9 6. 0 EXH.IBITSIMAPS ........................................................................................ 10

Sunrise Engineering, Inc. North Alpine Service & Improvement District Environmental Assessment

Table of Contents Page ii


1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED OF PROJECT

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The North Alpine Service and Improvement District is located in an unincorporated area of Lincoln County about one half mile north of the Alpine City limits .. The District includes a total of about 65 acres as shown on the attached map. (See shaded area on Figure 1). Figure 8 shows the proposed improvements to the system. The proposed improvements include the construction of a new well in close proximity to the current well location. The well will be constructed on private ground in an existing residential area. The existing water supply system will be replaced with approximately 5,600-ft. of 8-inch PVC pipe with meters, fittings, hydrants, and valves. These waterlines will be located in existing streets and easements adjacent to the worn out waterlines. A 120,000 gallon tank has been proposed as well as 1,650-ft. of 8-inch waterline from the wells to the tank.

The tank is proposed to be constructed on the Targhee National Forest as well as approximately 550-ft. of waterline to the tank. It is understood that a special use permit must be obtained from the Forest Service prior to construction on any Forest Lands. Tank construction would require approximately .15 acres of land disturbed. The tank is proposed to be buried, and upon completion the disturbed area would be reseeded with mixture of grass seed approved by the Forest Service. The 550-ft waterline to the tank and access road would disturb approximately .25 acres. A gate is proposed at the Forest Boundary to restrict access onto the Forest

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED OF PROJECT

The current culinary water system has reached its design life. The existing piping is undersized and worn out. The existing tank is beyond its design service life and is not located at an elevation to provide pressures and fire flows to the users. Several residents have almost no water pressure. The current system does not have any fire fighting capacity. There is no water storage available to fight fires. The system does not have the ability to deliver the water necessary for fire protection. Also, there are no hydrants. The A water system that can provide fire protection is extremely important in the densely wooded area or the District.

The improvements to the system that have been previously mentioned will provide water storage, water pressure, water source, and fire protection to the residents of the District.

~ Sunrise Engineering. Inc. ~ S E.JIt North Alpine Service & Improvement District Environmental Assessment

Section I Page I


2.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT ACTION

As was indicated above, the existing piping of the system is worn out. There is no other option than to replace the waterlines. The waterlines could be replaced with varying sizes, but District has decided to install 8-inch lines and hydrants to provide fire protection.

A study of the current water system indicated a sho.rtage of water source. Well #1 is located in an existing garage and cannot be retrofit with a larger pump, due to the size of the casing, to provide more water source. It was determined that a new well be constructed in close proximity to the existing wells. This well could be located in another area, but additional piping would have to be installed for the water to reach the system. This is not a viable option.

The water storage tank is proposed to be located on the Targhee National Forest. This is necessary to provide the needed elevation to supply water pressure in the District for daily use as well as in the event of a fire. The only other alternative would be to construct a tank at a lower elevation on private land and pump the water to the system users. A hydropneumatic pump station would have to be constructed outside the storage tank to provide water pressure and water supply for fire protection. This would be too expensive for the District to construct, operate and maintain and is not considered a viable option.

~' Ii Sunrise Engineering, Inc. A" S E I North Alpine Service & Improvement District Environmental Assessment ~

Section 2 Page 2


3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENTALIENVIRONMENTAL

CONSEQUENCES

This section of the report will document the environmental resources of the affected area. The environmental consequences of each affected resource will be discussed. Possible mitigation measures necessary to avoid or minimize any adverse imp~cts to a specific environmental resource will be identified.

3.1 LAND USE

3.1.1 Affected Environment

The proposed waterline improvements would be constructed in existing right-of-ways. The tank and a portion of the transmission line pipeline route lies within the Forest boundary. The pipeline and tank will be buried. The ground surface will be restored to near native condition.

3.1.2 Environmental Consequences

None apparent.

3.1.3 Mitigation

None anticipated.

3.2 FLOODPLAINS


The proposed improvements are not located within a floodplain.


None apparent.


Section 3 Page 3


3.2.3 Mitigation

None anticipated.

3.3 WETLANDS


The Army Corps of Engineers have indicated that there will be no wetlands effected by the proj ect.


None apparent.

3.3.3 Mitigation

None anticipated.

3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES


No historical or archeological sites m-e known within the project limits.


None apparent.

3.4.3 Mitigation

Specifications will be written to state that if any such sites are uncovered during construction appropriate agencies will immediately be notified.


Section 3 Page 4


3.5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES


The Fish & Wildlife Service, in a letter dated November 22, 2002, listed the following as Threatened Species may be present in the project area:

- Bald Eagle - Grizzly Bear - Gray Wolf - Canada Lynx

The Local Wyoming Game and Fish Department was contacted concerning these species. It was indicated that they were not aware of any of the listed species in the project area. It is not likely that the listed species will be adversely affected by the project.

A letter was received from the Wyoming Game and Fish Department dated December 4th,

2002. This letter indicated that the proposed tank site is located in crucial winter/yearlong range for the Fall Creek elk herd, Sublette mule deer herd, and Sublette moose herd. It was also indicated that they did not expect the impacts of the project to be significant and suggested mitigation shown below.


None apparent.

3.5.3 Mitigation

The access road to the tank wilt be closed after construction to avoid long tenn disturbance. This will be accomplished with a gate at the Forest Boundary. Only authorized personnel will be allowed access to the tank for maintenance purposes and routine road maintenance occur at mid-day. Construction can occur only from June 15th

to November 15th in order avoid critical winter and parturition periods. Also, the access road and storage tank will not be fenced, in order to reduce the chances of entanglements by big game.

Specifications will be written to state that if any of the listed species are seen or noticed, appropriate agencies will immediately be notified and construction will cease until further notice to proceed is given.


Section 3 Page 5


3.6 WATER QUALITY ISSUES


Construction will not take place through or near any waterways.


None apparent.

3.6.3 Mitigation

None anticipated.

3.7 COASTAL RESOURCES


Not applicable.


Not applicable.

3.7.3 -Mitigation

Not applicable.

~ Sunrise Engineering, Inc.

S E I North Alpine Service & Improvement District Environmental Assessment ~

Section 3 Page 6


3.8 SOCIO-ECONOMICIENVIROMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES


It is felt that this water improvement project will create a better quality of life for the residents of the District. There would not likely be any significant change on demographics of the area.


None apparent.

3.8.3 Mitigation

None anticipate.

3.9 MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES


None.


None:

3.9.3 Mitigation

None

~'!III$:1 ='= Sunrise Engineering, Inc.

S E I --:: North Alpine Service & Improvement District Environmental Assessment ~

Section 3 Page 7


4.0 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The access road to the tank will be closed after construction to avoid long term disturbance. Only authorized personnel will be allowed access to the tank for maintenance purposes and routine road maintenance occur at mid-day. Construction can occur only from June 15th to November 15th in order avoid critical winter and p~tion periods. Also, the access road and storage tank will not be fenced, in order to reduce the chances of entanglements by big game.

An immediate cease of construction activities will occur if any of the listed species are seen or noticed, appropriate agencies will immediately be notified and construction will cease until further notice to proceed is given. The construction specifications will provide this capability.

CUL TURAL RESOURCES

An immediate cease of construction activities will occur if unknown cultural resources are encountered. The construction specifications will provide this capability.

~. Iii Sunrise Engineering, Inc .

• I S E I North Alpine Service & Improvement District Environmental Assessment ~

Section 4 Page 8


5.0 CORRESPONDENCE

The following letters of correspondence were sent out requesting input.

• State Historic Preservation Office

• Natural Resource Conservation Service

• Wyoming Game & Fish Department

• Federal Bureau of Land Management

• Wyoming Department of Natural Resources

• U.S. Fish & Wildlife

• Corps of Engineers

• U.S. Forest Service

Those letters are included in the following section. The agency's responses are also included after that correspondence. No adverse affects from this proposed project were noted by any of the respondents.

~.' \~ Sunrise Engineering. Inc.

S E I North Alpine Service & Improvement District Environmental Assessment ~

Section 5 Page 9


6.0 EXHIBITS/MAPS

A list of the exhibits are as follows:

Figure 1 shows the project location.

Figure 8 shows the proposed improvements for the District.

Tank Earthwork Profile.

A list of the letters sent to the different agencies on November 14,2002 are as follows:

State Historic Preservation Office

Natural Resource Conservation Service

Wyoming Game & Fish Department

Federal Bureau of Land Management

Wyoming Department of Natural Resources

U.S. Fish & Wildlife

Corps of Engineers

U.S. Forest Service

A list of the responses from the different agencies are as follows:

Wyoming Game & Fish Department

State Historic Preservation Office

U.S. Fish & Wildlife

Corps of Engineers

u.S. Forest Service

~ Sunrise Engineering, Inc.

dated 12-04-02

dated 12-11-02

dated 11-22-02

dated 12-17-02

dated 11-19-02

~ S .E~ North Alpine Service & Improvement District Environmental Assessment Section 6

Page 10

5

s

\. \, '1 ~--HOt~Ol) \. 1. .. >-...... '---=

') ... \ " ) t ~ "0_ '

. " '-... '

NORTH ALPINE DISTRICT SHOVVN BY SHADING

POSSIBLE SERVICE AREA BASED UPON TANK LOCATION

- - - - DIVIDE BETVVEEN UPPER AND LOVVER PRESSURE ZONES

--

40 --

--

30 --

10 -- .

0-1...

- -

(7;\ EARTH WORK PROFILE ~ SCALE: 1 "=20'

- - -----

efJ~ ff7fJJC NORTH ALPINE ~JLEoT cEfsEol PGE

SUNRISE::' UTA rpPD CtTTDDTy OATE ORAWINC NO ENGINEERING r-----"-1.11_1 D_.A.Jl,_v_ IU_jT=-.-T=-=.-h:.-=--____ ~1:£2.::2~O~OL~'-:: _...!:..A~1---1

INC. TANK PROFILE SCALE SHEET NO " AS NOTED 1 OF 1

s~~ SUNRISE ENGINEERING, INC. ENGWEERING

INC. P.D. Box 609 + Afton, WY 83110 + Phone (307)885-8500 + Fax (307) 885-850/

MESA. AZ BOISE. JD

. \\

AFTON. WY FIUMORE. UT WASHINGTON, UT SALT UoKE em UT -/,

Jt- November 14, 2002

State Historic Preservation Office John Keck, Director Berrett Building 2301 Central Avenue Cheyenne, vrY 82002

RE: WWDC N. Alpine Water Study

Dear John:

The North Alpine Service & Improvement District is in the process of perfonning an environmental review in order that it may assess the environmental impacts of constructing improvements to their culinary water system. The District is located just north of the Town of Alpine, WY on the north side of the Snake River. An Area Map and Vicinity Map have been provided for your convenience. Improvements to the system will include the following:

1. 2. 3.

Upgrade existing waterlines to 8-inch. Construct a 120,000 gallon concrete water storage tank. Construct a new well.

The waterlines would be located in existing streets and easements, within the Rees Subdivision, adjacent to the existing worn out waterlines. The tank is proposed to be constructed on the National Forest (a special use permit is required). The well is proposed to be located on private land.

The current system has reached its design life and is worn out. Several residents have almost no pressure. The current system does not have any fire fighting capacity which is extremely important in the densely wooded area. The proposed improvements would alleviate the problems of the current system.

We would respectfully appreciate your timely review of this request. Please provide this information within 10 days from the date of this letter, to help us avoid delays.

Thank you for your assistance. If you have any questions regarding this request, please call at (307) 885-8500.

Sincerely, '/ /

/? ~ , ~ -~~"r~ / ason 1. LInford, P .E. L/< .'

Project Engineer

Enclosures

NORTH ALPINE SERVICE & INP1?OVEMENT DISTRICT I

VICINITY.1.VAP

.. ' . puL.-STATE OF WYOMING

... -.. - ...

NORTH ALPINE SERVICE &- IMPROVEMENT -DISTRICT I

AREA MAP

~= SUNRISE ENGINEERING, INC. ~.BNG~ER.lNG P.o. Box 609 + Afton, WY 831 10 + Phone (307) 885-8500 + Fax (307) 885-8501

! \\

-f. . November 14, 2002

Natural Resource Conservation Service Ed Burton, Director 100 East "B" Street, Room 3124 Casper, WY 82601


Dear John:

MESA.AZ BOISE. ID AFTON, WY FILLMORE. UT WASHINGTON. UT SALT UKE em UT

The North Alpine Service & Improvement District is in the process of perfonning an environmental review in order that it may assess the environme,.ntal impacts of constructing improvements to their culinary water system. The District is located just north of the Town of Alpine, WY on the north side of the Snake River. An Area Map and Vicinity Map have been provided for your convenience. Improvements to the system will include the following:

l. 2. 3.

Upgrade existing waterlines to 8-inch. Construct a 120,000 gallon concrete water storage tanle Construct a new well.

The waterlines would· be located in existing streets and easements, within the Rees Subdivision, adjacent to the existing worn out waterlines. The tank is proposed to be constructed on the National Forest (a special use permit is required). The well is proposed to be located on private land.


We would respectfully appreciate your timely review of this request. Please provide this information WIthin 10 days from the date of this letter, to help us avoid delays.


Sincerely,

/ ;?/ ~./ 0~rrfr~ ./Jason J. Linford, . .

Project Engineer

Enclosures

6~=- SUNRISE ENGINEERI~G, INC. ,"iNGJltgERING P.O. Box 609 + Afton, WY 83110 + Phone (307) 885-8500 + Fax (307) 885-8501

... \\

-; November 14, 2002

Wyoming Game & Fish Department 5400 Bishop Boulevard Cheyenne, vrY 82002


Dear Sir:·

MESA.AZ BOISE. lD AnON, WY FILLMORE. UT WASHINGTON, UT SALT UKE em UT

The North Alpine Service & Improvement District is in the process of performing an environmental review in order that it may assess the environmental impacts of constructing improvements to their culinary water system. The District is located just north of the Town of Alpine, vrY on the north side of the Snake River. An Area Map and Vicinity Map have been provided for your convenience. Improvements to the system will include the following:

1. 2. 3.

Upgrade existing waterlines to 8-inch. Construct a 120,000 gallon concrete water storage tan1e Construct a new well.



We would respectfully appreciate your timely review of this request. Please provide this information within 10 days from the date o-f this letter, to help us avoid delays.


Sincerely,

/~L/ ~~~-~

/ Jason J. Linford,~ Project Engineer

Enclosures

~~::: SUNRISE ENGINEERING, INC. "ENG. !tfEC.BRIN'G

..u'f' P.O. Box 609 + Afton, WY 83/J0 + Phone (307) 885-8500 + Fax (307) 885-8501

MESA, AZ BOISE. lD AFTON, WY FillMORE. UT WASHINGTON. UT SALT U.KE em UT

! \\ .I' I,

)f. November 14, 2002

Federal Land Management Attn: AI Pierson 5353 Yellowstone Road Cheyenne, vrY 82009


Dear Mr. Pierson:

The North Alpine Service & Improvement District is in the process of performing an environmental review in order that it may assess the environmental impacts of constructing improvements to their culinary water system. The District is located just north of the Town of Alpine, vrY on the north side of the Snake River. An Area Map and Vicinity Map have been provided for your convenience. Improvements to the system will include the following:

l. 2. 3.






Enclosures

~= SUNRISE ENGINEERING, INC. "iNGftfgERING P.O. Box 609 + Afton,WY 83110 + Phone (307) 885-8500 + Fax (307) 885-8501 ,

. /'. November 14, 2002 )I.

WDA Natural Resources Attn: Grant Stumbough 2219 Carey Avenue Cheyenne, vrY 82002


Dear Mr. Stumbough:

MESA. AZ BOISE,ID

AFTON. WY FIllMORE, UT WASHINGTON, UT SALT UKE CITY, UT

The North Alpine Service & Improvement District is in the process of performing an environmental review in order that it may assess the environmental impacts of constructing improvements to their culinary water system. The District is located just north of the Town of Alpine, WY on the north side of the Snake River. An Area Map and Vicinity Map have been provided for your convenience. Improvements to the system will include the following:

l. 2. 3.




We would respectfully appreciate your t-imely review of this request. Please provide this information within 10 days from the date of this letter, to help us avoid delays.


Sincerely,

~ W ,... " ~' ,.," ..

. ?,;..q'A - ~/~ .. 7' / //-/' ./' /.

,/ Jason J. Inford,~ .... // Project Engineer

Enclosures

~=- SUNRISE ENGINEERING, INC. ENGINEERING .'INC. P.O. Box 609 + Afton, WY 83/ JO + Phone (307)885-8500 + Fax (307) 885-850/

! ,

-f.. November 14, 2002

Mr. Mike Long, State Supervisor US Fish & Wildlife Service Ecological Services 4000 Airport Parkway Cheyenne, VVl{ 82001


Dear Mr. Long:

MESA.AZ BOISE., ID AFTON, WY FIUMORE.,UT

WASHINGTON, UT

SALT lAKE em UT

The North Alpine Service & Improvement District is in the process of performing an environmental review in order that it may assess the environmental impacts of constructing improvements to their culinary water system. The District is located just north of the Town of Alpine, WY on the north side of the Snake River. An Area Map and Vicinity Map have been provided for your convenience. Improvements to the system will include the following: .

1. 2. 3.






Sincerely,

~<-/~~// /~~/~"; '-/ ,/

Jason J. Linford, P .E. Project Engineer

Enclosures

~=- SU~RISE ENGINEERI~G, INC. ENGINEERING

I INC. P.o. Box 609 + Afton. WY 83110 + Phone (j07) 885-8500 + Fax (307) 885-8501

MESA.AZ BOlSE.lD

AFTON. WY FIlLWORE. UT WASHINGTON. UT SALT UKE em UT

. / \\ I "y.' November 14, 2002

Mr. Matt Bilodeau Cheyenne Regulatory Office US Army Corps of Engineers 2232 Dell Range Blvd., Suite 210 Cheyenne, VVY 82009


Dear Mr. Bilodeau:


l. 2. 3.






Sincerely, ~ ... . .. ~

~"" ....... ~~~A '/ ~ ~- e~ - -k ,/",",,~...c ... ~~/ '-

.,/7 .' "" /' /. Lp]/ // Jason J. LInford, .R'

Proj ect Engineer

Enclosures

SUNRISE ENGINEERING, INC.

oj November 14, 2002

Mr. Brent Porter US Forest Service 3659 E. Ririe Hwy Idaho Falls, ID 83401

P.O. Box 609 + Afton, WY 83110 + Phone (307) 885-8500 + Fax (307) 885-8501


Dear Mr. Porter:

MESA.AZ BOISE. ID AFTON. WY FILLWORE. UT WASHINGTON, UT SALT UKE CITY, UT


1. 2. 3.






Sincerely, ~/ /~/.. _."

y~n, ·~o./"""'-/y /" ,/",

/ Jason. Lin£ , P.E. Project Engineer

Enclosures

Jason J. Linford, P .E. Proj ect Engineer Sunrise Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 609 Afton, WY 83110

Dear Mr. Linford:

WfOMING GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT ~"-- •. ,'.:~ .... ':.' ~T __ , ___

~ "Conserving Wildlife - Serving People"

December 4, 2002

WER 10470 Sunrise Engineering, Inc. North Alpine Service and Improvement District Town of Alpine Culinary Water System Linco In County

The staff of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department has reviewed your letter requesting information regarding the Town of Alpine culinary water system. We offer the following comments.

The proposed project area is crucial winter/yearlong range for the Fall Creek elk herd, Sublette mule deer herd, and Sublette moose herd. Additionally, big game use the area as parturition habitat, and the area is an important daily and seasonal travel corridor for big game animals.

The Wyoming Game and Fish Commission's Mitigation Policy defines crucial winter ranges as vital habitat, meaning that it is habitat that directly limits a population of animals, and directs our Department to recommend no loss of habitat function. We do not expect the impacts of this project to be significant. Impacts can be mitigated through the suggestions that follow.

A new access road will be constructed to access the water tank on U.S. Forest Service land in Section 21. We encourage closure of access roads constructed on public land after construction to avoid long-term disturbance of big game wintering and parturition areas.

We encourage that construction and post-construction maintenance activities avoid the winter (November 16-April 30) and parturition (May 1 - June 15) periods as much as possible. During these time periods, we also encourage that routine maintenance at the water storage site be conducted at mid-day to minimize human disturbance to wildlife.

Headquarters: 5400 Bishop Boulevard, Cheyenne, WY 82006-0001 Fax: (307) 777-4610 Web Site: http://gf.state.wy.us

~r. lasonLinford December 4, 2002 Page 2 - WER 10470

We recommend that the access road, well site', and water storage tank area not be fenced, in order to reduce the chances of entanglements by big game.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

BW:TC:as cc: USFWS

Sincerely, . /

·L3?;;t:·l>ti~&~ BILL WICHERS DEPUTY DIRECTOR

OMING Barrett Building

DEPARTMENT OF STATE PARKS & CULTURAL RESOURCES STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE

230 I Central Ave. Cheyenne. WY 82002

(307) 777·7697 FAX (307) 777·6421

Dec 11,2002

Mr. Jason J. Linford Project Engineer Sunrise Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 609 Afton, Wy 83110

Re: WWDC North Alpine Water Study; Constructing Improvements to Culinary Water System (SHPO File # 1202SES014)

Dear Mr. Linford:

Sara Sheen of our staff has received information concerning the aforementioned project. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment.

We have reviewed the project report and find the documentation meets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716-42). No sites meeting the criteria of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places will be affected by the project as planned. We recommend Sunrise Engineering, Inc. allow the project to proceed in accordance with state and federal laws subject to the following stipulation: if any cultural materials are discovered during construction, work in the area should halt immediately and the Sunrise Engineering, Inc. staff and SHPO staffmust be contacted. Work in the area may not resume until the materials have been evaluated and adequate measures for their protection have been taken.

This letter should be retained in your files as documentation of our determination that no historic properties will be affected by th is project.

Please refer to the SHPO file number cited above on any future correspondence dealing with this project. If you have any questions, contact Sara Sheen at 307-777-7498 or me at 307-777-6311.

Sincerely,

A :,4 ,

2u+fU~ J yK. folt eview and Compliance Program Manager

Jim Geringer, Governor. John T. Keck, Director

United States Department of the Interior.

ES-61411 W.19/wy6578/dy

Mr. Jason J. Linford Sunrise Engineering, Inc., P.O. Box 609 Afton, WY 83110

Dear Mr. Linford:

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Ecological Services 4000 Morrie A venue

Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001

November 22, 2002

Thank you for your letter of November 14, 2002, received in this office November 18, regarding your request for our comments and input on the proposed construction of improvements to the culinary water system located just north of Alpine, Wyoming in Teton County.

In accordance with section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), my staff has determined that the following threatened or endangered species, or species proposed for listing under the Act, may be present in the project area.

Listed and Proposed Species Species Bald Eagle

(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Grizzly Bear _

(Ursus arctos horribilis) Gray Wolf

(Canis lupus) Canada Lynx

(Lynx canadensis)

Status Threatened

Threatened

Threatened

Threatened

Expected Occurrence Nesting. Winter resident. Migrant.

Montane forests

Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

Montane forests

Bald Eagle: In order to reduce adverse effects to the bald eagle, a disturbance-free buffer zone of I-mile should be maintained around eagle nests. Activity within I-mile of an eagle nest may disturb the eagles and result in incidental "take." If a disturbance-free buffer zone of 1 mile is not practical then the activity should be conducted outside of the nesting season which is from Feb 15 to Aug to protect nesting birds and Nov 1 to April 15 to protect roosting birds

Grizzly Bear: The grizzly bear has a broad range of habitat tolerance. Contiguous, relatively undisturbed mountainous habitat having a high level of topographic and veget~tive diversity characterizes most areas where the species remains. Habitat loss and direct and indirect humancaused mortality is related to the decline in numbers. Bears have been attracted to carrion, waste products of construction camps, recreational camps and sprawling residential areas that have encroached into their habitat and consequently increased human-bear interactions (Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan, 1993).

Gray wolf: All wolves within Wyoming are now considered part of the non-essential experimental population. Although wolves remain listed and protected under the Act, additional flexibility is provided for their management under the provisions of the final rule and special regulations promulgated for the nonessential experimental population on November 22, 1994 (59 FR 60252). Requirements for interagency consultation under section 7 of the Act differ based on the surface ownership and/or management responsibility where the animals occur. Additional management flexibility is provided for managing wolves existing outside units of the National Park or National Wildlife Refuge System (e.g., Forest Service lands). Wolves designated as nonessential experimental in these areas are treated as proposed rather than listed. Two provisions of section 7 apply to Federal actions outside National Parks or National Wildlife Refuges: (1) section 7 (a)(1), which states all Federal agencies shall utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of listed species; and (2) section 7 (a)(4), which requires Federal agencies to confer with the Service on actions that are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species.

Under all management jurisdictions, the action agency needs to assess the potential impact of any proposed action on the gray wolf. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) recommends that Federal Agencies analyze impacts on nonessential populations, along with other populations of fish and wildlife, when complying with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. Any protective measures in addition to those outlined in the final rule or additional review procedures, are at the discretion of the Federal Action Agency.

Canada Lynx: In the final rule for listing the Canada lynx (March 2000), the Service identified that significant threats to the lynx were (1) loss and/or modification of habitat; (2) past commercial harvest (trapping), which is partially responsible for the extremely small lynx population; (3) inadequate regulatory mechanisms to protect lynx and their habitat; and (4) other factors such as increased human access into suitable habitat and human-induced changes in habitat allowing other species (e.g., bobcats and coyotes) to move into lynx habitat and compete with them. Examples of human alteration of forests include loss of and conversion of forested habitats through urbanization, ski area and other developments; fragmentation that leads to isolation of forested habitats by highways or other major construction; and certain timber harvesting practices and fire suppression measures.

In Wyoming, the lynx lives in subalpine/coniferous forests of mixed age and structural classes. Mature forests with downed logs and windfalls provide cover for denning sites, escape, and

2

protection from severe weather. Early successional forest stages provide habitat for the lynx's primary prey, the snowshoe hare. The home range of a lynx can be 5 to 94 square miles. They are capable of moving extremely long distances in search of food. Lynx are highly dependent on snowshoe hare, but when hare populations drop they also prey on other small mammals and birds. This change in diet causes sudden drops in the productivity of adult females and survival of young.

The Service would caution you when making "no effect" rulings on Canada lynx, specifically if the ruling is based on the fact that there are no recent records of their occurrence in an area. It is difficult to accept these types of "no effect" rulings for the following reasons:

1. Lynx in the southern Rockies are few in number and very difficult to locate, and lack of verification in an area does not preclude them from existing there.

2. The Service is obligated both to protect and recover threatened and endangered species. An action can adversely affect or jeopardize the continued existence of a species through its affects on an existing population and/or on the potential habitat of a species that incrementally reduces the ability to recover or reestablish the species.

Historically, lynx have been observed in every mountain range in the State. Concentrations of observations occur in western Wyoming in the Wyoming and Salt River ranges and continuing north through the Tetons and Absaroka ranges in and around Yellowstone National Park. Numerous records have also come from the west slope of the Wind River Range, with fewer observations in the Bighorn and Uinta mountains (Reeve et al. 1986).

Migratory Birds: Please recognize that consultation on listed species may not remove your obligation to protect the many species of migratory birds, including eagles and other rap tors protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA).

The MBTA, 16 U.S.C. 703, enacted in 1918-; prohibits the taking of any migratory birds, their parts, nests, or eggs except as permitted by regulations and does not require intent to be proven. Section 703 of the Act states, "Unless and except as permitted by regulations ... it shall be unlawful at any time, by any means or in any manner, to ... take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill, or possess ... any migratory bird, any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird ... " The BGEPA, 16 U.S.C. 668, prohibits knowingly taking, or taking with wanton disregard for the consequences of an activity, any bald or golden eagles or their body parts, nests, or eggs, which includes collection, molestation, disturbance, or killing.

Work that could lead to the take of a migratory bird including an eagle, their young, eggs, or nests (for example, if you are going to erect new well sites, roads, or power lines in the vicinity of a nest), should be coordinated with our office before any actions are taken. Removal or

3

destruction of such nests, or causing abandonment ora nest could constitute violation of one or both of the above statutes. Removal of any active migratory bird nest or nest tree is prohibited. Permits for nest manipulation, including removal or relocation may, under certain circumstances, be issued for inactive nests only. For golden eagles, inactive nest permits are limited to activities involving resource extraction or human health and safety. Mitigation, as determined by the local U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service field office, may be required for loss of these nests. No permits will be issued for an active nest of any migratory bird species, unless removal of an active nest is necessary for reasons of human health and safety. Therefore, if nesting migratory birds are present on, or near your project area, timing is a significant consideration and you need to allow for this in your project planning.

If nest manipulation is proposed for this project, the project proponent should contact the Service's Migratory Bird Office in Denver at 303-236-8171 to see if a permit can be issued for this project. No nest manipulation is allowed without a permit. If a permit cannot be issued, the project may need to be modified to ensure take of a migratory bird or eagle, their young, eggs or nest will not occur.

Consultation: Should the proposed action incur future federal agency involvement (through funding, permitting, licensing, or other authorization), then the involved federal agency will be required to assure that its responsibilities under section 7(a)(2) of the Act are met. Section 7 (a)(2) requires consultation with the Service when a federal action (as identified above) may affect a listed endangered or threatened species. This consultation will ensure that any action authorized, funded or carried out by a federal agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. The process is initiated by the federal agency after it has determined if its action may affect (adversely or beneficially) a listed species. Section 7(a)(4) requires conferencing with the Service when a federal action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a proposed species or result in destruction or an adverse modification of proposed critical habitat.

Section 7(c) of the Act requires that a biological assessment be prepared for any Federal action that is a major construction activity to determine the effects of the proposed action on listed and proposed speCies. If a biological assessment is not required (Le., all other actions), the lead Federal agency is responsible for review of proposed activities to determine whether listed species will be affected. We would appreciate the opportunity to review any such determination document. If it is determined that the proposed activities may affect a listed species, you should contact this office to discuss consultation requirements. If it is determined that any Federal agency program or project "is likely to adversely affect" any listed species, formal consultation should be initiated with this office. Alternatively, informal consultation can be continued so we can work together to determine how the project could be modified to reduce impacts to listed species to the "not likely to adversely affect" threshold. If it is concluded that the project "is not likely to adversely affect" listed species, we should be asked to review the assessment and concur with the determination of not likely to adversely affect.

4

For those actions where a biological assessment is necessary, it should be completed within 180 days of receipt of a species list, but can be extended by mutual agreement between the lead agency and the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). If the assessment is not initiated within 90 days of receipt of a species list, the list of threatened and endangered species should be verified with this office prior to initiation of the assessment. The biological assessment may be undertaken as part of the agency's compliance of section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A), and incorporated into the NEP A documents. The Service recommends that biological assessments include:

1. a description of the project; 2. a description of the specific area potentially affected by the action; 3. the current status, habitat use, and behavior of threatened and endangered species in the

project area; 4. discussion of the methods used to determine the information in item 3; 5. direct and indirect impacts of the project to threatened and endangered species,

including impacts of interrelated and interdependent actions; 6. an analysis of the effects of the action on listed and proposed species and their habitats

including cumulative impacts from Federal, State, or private projects in the area; 7. measures that will reduce or eliminate adverse impacts to threatened and endangered

species; 8. the expected status of threateneo and endangered species in the future (short and long

term) during and after project completion; 9. determination of "is likely to adversely affect" or "is not likely to adversely affect" for

listed species; 10. determination of "is likely to jeopardize" or "is not likely to jeopardize" for proposed

species; 11. alternatives to the proposed action considered, a summary of how impacts of those

alternatives on listed and proposed species would differ from the proposed action, and the reasons for not selecting those alternatives;

12. citation of literature and personal contacts used in the assessment.

A Federal agency may designate a non-Federal representative to conduct informal consultation or prepare biological assessments. However, the ultimate responsibility for section 7 compliance remains with the Federal agency, and written notice should be provided to the Service upon such a designation. We recommend that Federal agencies provide their non-Federal representatives with proper guidance and oversight during preparation of biological assessments and evaluation of potential impacts to listed species.

If there is no Federal involvement in the project (e.g., permitting, funding, actual construction), and take of a threatened or endangered species may occur as a result of the project, a permit pursuant to section 10 of the Endangered Species Act may need to be obtained. Section 9 of the Act prohibits the "take" of any threatened or endangered species. Take is defined as to harass,

5

harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. If the project may result in the take of a listed species the project proponent should contact the Service to discuss the need for appropriate permits under section 10 of the Act. Section 7(d) of the Act requires that the Federal agency and permit or license applicant shall not make any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources which would preclude the formulation of reasonable and prudent alternatives until consultation on listed species is completed.

Regarding species proposed for listing or listed as an experimental, non-essential population, Federal agencies (other than the Fish and Wildlife Service and 'National Park Service) must determine whether any of their proposed activities are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species. If jeopardy is likely, that agency must confer with the Service.

We will work with the lead Federal agency in the section 7 consultation process. The analysis of project impacts must assess direct impacts of the project, as well as those impacts that are interrelated to or interdependent with the proposed action. Impacts to listed species on nonFederal lands must be evaluated along with such impacts on Federal lands. Any measures that are ultimately required to avoid or reduce impacts to listed species will apply to Federal as well as non-Federal lands.

Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed work. Please keep this office informed of any developments or decisions concerning this project. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your responsibilities under the Act, please contact Darryl York of my staff at the letterhead address or phone (307) 772-2374, extension 24.

Sincerely,

~ ct 15_9 ~ ~~hael~.Long ~ Field Supervisor

, Wyoming Field Office

cc: Nongame Coordinator, WGFD, Lander, WY Statewide Habitat Coordinator, WGFD, Lander, WY

6

REPLY TO

ATTENTION OF:

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT

WYOMING REGULATORY OFFICE

2232 DELL RANGE, BLVD., SUITE 210

CHEYENNE, WYOMING 82009-4942

December 17, 2002

Thomas B. Johnson, P.E. Project Manager

Mr. Diggs Lewis North Alpine Service

and Improvement District P.O. Box 3301 Alpine, Wyoming

Dear Mr. Lewis:

This letter is in response to a request we received on November 18, 2002, from Sunrise Engineering, Inc. for a jurisdictional determination concerning construction of a new water supply and distribution system within the Rees Subdivision. The project area is located in the northeast quarter southeast quarter of Section 20 and the southwest quarter northwest quarter of Section 21, Township 37 North, Range 118 West, Lincoln County, Wyoming.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulates the placement of dredged and fill material into wetlands and other waters of the United States as authorized primarily by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). The term "waters of the United States" has been broadly defined by statute, regulation, and judicial interpretation to include all waters that were, are, or could be used in interstate commerce such as rivers, streams (including ephemeral streams), reservoirs, and lakes as well as wetlands adjacent to those areas. The Corps regulations were published in the November 13, 1986, edition of the Federal Register (Vol. 51, No. 219) at 33 CFR Parts 320 through 330. Information on Section 404 program requirements in Wyoming can be obtained by visiting our website at http://www.nwo.usace.army.millhtmllod-rwylWyoming.htm.

Based on the information provided and a review of the National Wetlands Inventory map for the area, it has been determined that there are no wetlands or other waters of the United States in the project area. Therefore, Department of the Army authorization is not required for the project because it does not require any discharge of fill material in wetlands or other waters of the United States.

This determination does not eliminate the requirement to obtain any other applicable federal, state, tribal, or local permits that may be required.

-2-

If you have any questions regarding this determination, please contact Mr. Thomas Johnson at (307) 772-2300 and reference file No. 200240288.

Copy Furnished:

Jason Linford, P.E. Sunrise Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 609 Afton; Wyoming 83110

Sincerely,

Matthew A. Bilodeau Program Manager Wyoming Regulatory Office

United States Department of Agriculture

Sunrise Engineering, Inc. Jason 1. Linford, P.E. Project Engineer P.O. Box 609 Afton, WY 83110

Dear Mr. Linford:

Forest Service

Caribou-Targhee National Forest

File Code: 2720

Palisades Ranger District 3659 E. Ririe Highway Idaho Falls, ID 83401

(208-542-5800) phone (208-542-5826) fax

Date: November 19, 2002

Your request for consideration of a special use application has been received. There is some misunderstanding as to who is submitting the application. As I read your letter it appears that the North Alpine Service & Improvement District should submit the application. Sunrise Engineering apparently has been retained by the Alpine District to do the engineering and preenvironmental review work. In any case, we will accept a fonnal application. The application should be submitted by the entity that will be issued the special use permit. I have enclosed a draft "Guide to 3rd Party NEPA Contracting for Special Use Applicants". It outlines the requirements better than I could explain them. Please read the document and review it with the Alpine District before submitting the application. If you have questions please call Brent Porter at 208 523-1412. The more details in the application will aid in preparing the scope of work to be addressed in the NEP A document. If the applicant wants the Forest Service to accomplish the NEP A analysis they need to understand that it will likely take 2 years or more before we can process the review. Again I encourage you to contact Brent if you have questions.

Sincerely,

;Z~ ~ -~A/.L--' ~ I&fiJ1D D. DICKEMORE District Ranger

Caring for the Land and Serving People If!!.

Printed on Recycled Paper '-,

Jan 28 03 09:52a

IT nUed States Department of Agriculture

Digts W. Lewis

Forest Service

North Alpine Service & Improvement District #1 c/o Diggs Lewis, Director P.O. Box 3776 Alpine, WY 83128

Dear Mr. Lewis:

(307) 654-7645

Caribou-Targhee National Forest

File Code: 2720

Palisades Ranger District 3659 E. Ririe Highway Idaho Falls, ID 83401

(208) 523-1412 (208) 542-5826 fax

Date: J anuary 22~ 2003

Your application for the construction of a water tank and transmission line on the CaribouTarghee National Forest has been received. We have reviewed the application and find that it meets all the criteria required to be accepted. In order to continue with the project, we must no\v do the environmental analysis required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A). The Environmental Assessment (EA) that you provided with your application can be used in part~ but is not adequate in whole for our requirements. In our letter to Mr. Linford on November 19~ 2002, we stated that the analysis can be done by us or you can complete the analysis under review of the Forest Service. If the Forest completes the NEPA document it needs to be understood that it will likely take 2 years before it can be completed. Please advise us how you would like to proceed with the analysis.

The following is an outline of the steps that must be taken in order to complete a NEP A document. If you elect to do the analysis and docuulentation you will need to follow the same steps. All steps must be reviewed and approved by the Forest Service before they can be completed.

1. The project must be publicly disclosed to all persons and agencies that have expressed interest in this type project. This is done by sending a scoping letter to ali names listed on the District mailing list. The scoping document gives the public 30 days to respond and must describe the project in enough detail to give the public a clear understanding what is being proposed.

2. The response to the seoping letter must be analyzed along with agencies concerns to identify the issues for the project. All issues are identified in the environmental document, but only those that cannot be mitigated fully are carried thought the analysis to determine effects.

3. Each issue identified must be addressed in the analysis by a qualified specialist in the field of concern.

4. From the issues that are carried through the analysis, a reasonable range of alternatives are developed that might change the outcome of the effects of the project.

5. The affected environment is described in enough detail to give the public a clear understanding of the area and its resource, including both social and natural effects.

p. 1

Caring for the Land and Serving People ~

Primed on Recydc-j Paoer Q

Jan 28 03 09:52a Diggs LJ. Lewis (307) 654-7645

6. Each issue is compared to each alternative and a discloser of effects is given for each. This includes direct and indirect effects of the action under each alternative as well as what cumulative effects might occur as a result of future and past projects in the area.

7. The analysis is complied into a document that can be reviewed by the public. This is called a pre-decisional environmental assessment. This document is mailed to each person who responded to the initial scoping document. The public is given 30 days to review and mail comments concerning the document.

S. The comments received from the pre-decisional document is complied and individually answered.

9. A Decision Notice is prepared and signed by the Forest Service Line Officer declaring what the decisions are and how the public can appeal the decision if they choose. This document is mailed along with the responses to the pre-decisional EA to each person who commented on the pre-decisional EA. A notice explaining the decision document is also published in the Idaho Falls newspaper. This decision may be appealed by anyone who has commented on the document. All appeals will delay implementation of the project until the appeal can be resolved.

After the decision is final, the Forest must receive from the applicant a completed design of the project for approval. After approval the project may proceed based on direction contained in the Environmental Assessment.

As you can see this can be a long and technical process. The person responsible for the analysis and documentation must maintain close communication with the Forest Service throughout ihe process since the Forest is ultimately responsible for the EA. The Forest Service follows the same process, but must schedule time with other projects which may have higher priority or which may have been in the process longer. Please consider this information and get back with us at your earliest opportunity to let us know how you would like to proceed with the project. The Forest Service contact for this project is Brent Porter. He may be reached at 208-523-1412 or 208-542-5816.

Sincerely,

Ii,~.~ ~ALD D. DICKEMORE District Ranger

p.2

APPENDIXE

North Alpine Improvement and Service District Property Owners

North Alpine - VVWDC Level II

NORTH ALPINE IMPROVEMENT AND SERVICE DISTRICT -- LOT OWNERS

Lot No. I First Name, Descri~tions I Last Name I Address I Ci~, State, Zi~ 1 Nick & Mary Ellen Lichter P.O. Box 3510 Alpine, WY 83128 2 Lyle & Nancy A. Hansen P.O. Box 3167 Alpine, WY 83128 3 Donald & Janice Hagan P.O. Box 10666 Alpine, WY 83128 4 Mr. & Mrs. Donald Metcalf Metcalf Trust Etna, WY 83118 5 Mac E. & Beverly Asher P.O. Box 3407 Alpine, WY.83128 6 Patricia Goe & Gary Ash P.O. Box 3842 Jackson, WY 83001 7 A. W. Partnership Mumford P.O. Box 3044 Alpine, WY 83128 8 Gerald W. Grater P.O. Box 660034 Archadic, CA 91066 9 Mr. and Mrs. Robert Badeau 2604 Circle Drive Spoughton, WI 53589 10 Mr. and Mrs. Robert Swiston P.O" Box 3242 Aij>ine, WY 83128 11 Mr. and Mrs. Diggs Lewis P.O. Box 3301 Alpine, WY 83128 12 Mr. and Mrs. Diggs Lewis P.O. Box 3301 Alpine, WY 83128 13 Mr. and Mrs. Allen Doty P.O. B9X 3203 Alpine, WY 83128 14 Mr. and Mrs. Michael Stone P.O. Box 3315 Alpine, WY 83128 15 Margaret Family Trust McNeal P.O. Box 10 Alpine, WY 83128 16 Mr. and Mrs. Jack Stone P.O. Box 1909 Jackson, WY 83001 17 Delores Best & Forrest Neuerburg P.O. Box 6782 Jackson, WY 83002 18 Mr. and Mrs. Harvey Cohen 6462-A Yank Court Arvada, CO 80004 19 Mr. and Mrs. Michael Stone P.O. Box 3315 Alpine, WY 83128 20 Mr. and Mrs. Steve Hershock P.O. Box 9134 Jackson, WY 83001 21 Karen Fett P.O. Box 3298 Alpine, WY 83128 22 Karen Fett P.O. Box 3298 Alpine, WY 83128 23 Amtfeldt Pedersen P.O. Box 12825 Jackson, WY 83002 24 Patricia Dean Johnston P.O. Box 3818 Alpine, WY 83128 25 Roman C. Kravetsky P.O. Box 9563 Jackson, WY 83002 26 Debbie Cooper P.O. Box 1722 Jackson, WY 83001 27 Sandra Howell Smith 3818 Courtyard Drive Atlanta, GA 30339 28 Thomas W. Feisthamel 4054 Rasmussen Rd. Park City, UT 84098 29 Mr. and Mrs. John Briggs P.O. Box 10195 Jackson, WY 83002 30 Bonnie Gaydos & Clarence Freyman 2436 Bollinger Mill Road Finksburg, MD 21048 31 Joseph C. Billittere 6130 Myrtle Long Beach, CA 90805 32 David C. Burgeson 14820 N. Briarwood Dr. Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 33 Mr. and Mrs. Stephen Gieck P.O. Box 2829 Jackson, WY 83001 34 Mr. and Mrs. David Bucholz 355 Pine Street Alpine, WY 83128 35 Mr. and Mrs. David Bucholz 355 Pine Street Alpine, WY 83128 36 E Mr. and Mrs. James Whalen 4300 Hufsmith Hill Jackson, WY 83001 36 W Mr. and Mrs. Donald Hawkes P.O. Box 2377 Jackson, WY 83001 37 Mr. and Mrs. Donald Hawkes P.O. Box 2377 Jackson, WY 83001 38 Mr. and Mrs. Donald Hawkes P.O. Box 2377 Jackson, WY 83001 39 Mr. and Mrs. Stephen Gieck P.O. Box 2829 Jackson, WY 83001 40 Mr. and Mrs. Stephen Gieck P.O. Box 2829 Jackson, WY 83001 41 Judy Legg 100 Longhorn Drive Jackson, WY 83001 42 Milton L. Wilson 3247 Old Castle Circle Idaho Falls, ID 83404 43 Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Migel 956 Grande Haven Drive Titusville, FL 32780-2323 44 Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Migel 956 Grande Haven Drive Titusville, FL 32780-2323 45 Nachelle Manning & Matthew Johnson P.O. Box 9238 Jackson, WY 83002 46 Mr. and Mrs. Dave Speaks 1641 Queen's Court Westlake, OH 44145 47 Teresa Musetti & Christopher Morasco P.O. Box 3752 Alpine, WY 83128

NORTH ALPINE IMPROVEMENT AND SERVICE DISTRICT -- LOT OWNERS

Lot No. First Name, Descriptions I Last Name I Address City State Zip , , 48 Randy Divan P.O. Box 2043 Jackson, WY 83001 49 Mr. and Mrs. Frank Kosa 1523 Marita Drive Boulder City, NV 89005 50 Charles. A. Fugazzi 15988 Teal Road Verona, KY 41092 51 William J. Flynn P.O. Box 9105 Jackson, WY 83002 52 Mr. and Mrs. Timothy Schoenhals P.O. Box 3306 Alpine, WY.83128 53 Mr. and Mrs. Timothy Schoenhals P.O. Box 3306 Alpine, WY 83128 54 Mr. and Mrs. Alan Haines P.O. Box 3206 Alpine, WY 83128 55 Mr. and Mrs. Alan Haines P.O. Box 3206 Alpine, WY 83128 56 Albert Werder 129 Baltic St. #6B Brooklyn, NY 11201 57 Mr. and Mrs. John Wigingtonn 110 Spinnaker Circle Madison, AL 35758-790 o 58 Mr. and Mrs. Gregory Seay P.O. Box 3462 Alpine, WY 83128

NA Mr. Jerry Woodland 1706 W. 23rd St. Loveland, CO 80538