Stan Howerton, Public Works Director, P.O. Box 151, Tonopah, Nevada 89049
775-482-6643
VII. PROJECT ADMINISTRGTION
A. Provide the names and phone numbers of the following people. (There may be more
than one person responsible in each category. If the specific individual is not known,
give a job title):
1. The person to whom all questions regarding the application should be directed:
Susan Dudley, Grant Administrator, 775-482-6945
2. The person directly responsible for on-site supervision of the project, such as a project
manager or superintendent:
Stan Howerton, Director of Public Works, Tonopah Public Utilities, 775-482-6643
3. The person responsible for maintaining the project files:
Susan Dudley, Grant Administrator, 775-482-6945
4. The person responsible for the financial management of the project, including
preparation, review and approval of draw requests:
Susan Dudley, Grant Administrator, 775-48 1-6945
B. Provide the names or job titles of the persons not listed above who will be responsible
For carrying out the project activities. Describe the responsibilities of each.
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. Describe changes and other factors, if any, in the target area or communities that have
had a significant impact on your community development efforts. Examples could include
layoffs due to mine closures or a large new employer moving to your community.
Tonopah, as a mining camp, began in 1900 with the discovery of rich silver ore. By 1902,
development had occurred to the point where water was piped from out of town to supply the
businesses. By 1907, a substantial water system was in place, and the town was one of the first
locations in Nevada to utilize water meters on the services.
Details are sketchy, however the sewer system also was first constructed around 1907. The
majority of the old collection system utilizes vitrified clay pipe. The pipeline locations tend to
run with terrain rather than following streets, and thus many of the lines are now in awkward
locations. In addition, many of these earliest rnains are inadequate in size, most being 4" and 6"
in diameter. Current codes require 8" mains as a minimum diameter,
The mining declined in the late 1 9 2 0 ' ~and
~ the town was relatively quiet until World War 11.
When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, it was believed that the Pacific Coast would possibly
fall next to Japan, and the next line of defense would be the Sierra Nevada Mountains. With this
in mind, the Army Air Corps constructed a series of air bases in the Nevada, including a base at
19
Tonopah, located in Ralston Valley about 10 miles east of Tonopah. While the base was active,
Tonopah boomed again, with the associated improvements in the water and sewer systems.
After the war, the air base was closed and turned over to the County. The town again declined
until nuclear testing promoted another expansion in the late 1960's. During this period, new
tanks, subdivisions, and other improvements were made to the water and sewer systems. The
sewer system expansions dwing this era are notable because asbestos cement (AC) and
Orangeburg pipe were used on the pipelines. The AC pipe is still generally sound; the
Orangeburg pipe is in poor condition. Orangeburg pipe consists of a fiber-reinforced tar
impregnated pipe, which tends to look like tar impregnated cardboard. This pipe generally
begins to fail after about 20 years, and requires replacement to ensure system integrity.
In the late 1970's, the town again experienced a spurt of growth, propelled by mining ventures
and the proposed MX missile system, part of which was to be located at the Tonopah Airport.
Around 1980, the Sierra Vista subdivision was constructed, which includes two sewage lift
stations. This system uses PVC and AC pipe, with minimum main sizes of 8", and meets current
code for sewer pipe installation.
The sewage treatment facility originally consisted of discharge directly to the wash where the
current facility exists, followed by construction of a lagoon system. In 1980, the lagoon system
was abandoned, and a new facility constructed using an Imhoff Tank for treatment followed by
rapid infiltration for effluent disposal. In approximately 1982, a second Imhoff Tank was added..
In 1989, 3 new infiltration ponds were added and four of the existing ponds were enlarged to
their present size. In 1998, a new influent bar screen and flume was installed. The flume was
equipped with an ultrasonic flow meter, and a new sampler provided to take flow-compensated
samples.
B. Project area profile
1. Describe the geographic area and population to be served by the proposed project.
Include information concerning the particular characteristics and conditions of the target
area and population which are relevant to the proposed pr~ject.If appropriate, attach a
map or photographs which more fully explain the project.
The population of Tonopah since has regularly experienced cycles of moderate growth, coupled
with moderate declines, while maintaining a fairly consistent core population with mild longterm growth. The 2000 U.S. Census lists the current population of Tonopah at 2,627 persons,
which is lower than the 1996 interim census population listing of 3,100, but higher than the 1980
population of 1,952 persons. The project will benefit all residents and commercial businesses in
the Town of Tonopah.
The current growth projections are portrayed as relatively flat. There are several developments
on the horizon that could influence growth in Tonopah, most noticeably the use of the Test Site
as a national nuclear repository. Although the repository is located some distance from Tonopah,
possible transportation routes run through Tonopah, including possibly a railroad line extension.
If that were to happen, it would not be unexpected for Tonopah to experience some growth in
connection with the new repository developments.
Tonopah7slocal economy is also affected by the Tonopah Test Range, which is a semisecret air
base located east of Tonopah. Work at the test range varies depending upon world situation, as
well as other factors. Recently, the base has been renovated, and it appears to be on an upswing.
This could significantly increase local employment as well as bringing additional people to the
area.
A third factor that can contribute significantly to Tonopah's business climate is the price of
precious metals. Currently there is a major exploration taking place at the Midway mine site,
located 15 miles northeast of Tonopah. If gold prices continue to remain high, it is possible that
this could develop into a major mine. This in turn would bring more jobs to the Tonopah area,
which is the nearest residential site to the potential mine. In the mean time, the amount of
exploration work has increased dramatically, which brings in increased occupancy to the motels,
and increased flows to the wastewater treatment facility. Based on the above, although the nearterm growth potential would seem to be slight, there is a very real possibility that Tonopah could
experience a "mini-boom" that would bring significant growth to the town. For this reason, we
recommend that the new facility be designed to handle at least the historical peak average flows
of approximately 600,000 gallons per day, but be designed to allow "turn-down" to lower flows
without losing efficiency.
The median family household income of $37,401 represents 82.2% of the Nevada state nonmetropolitan rural median household income of $45,491. It should also be noted that the
community has continued to experience a slight decline since 2000, and the actual income
currently is probably less than the 2000 census numbers.
ANNUAL PARTICIPATION STATEMENT/CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
The Annual Participation Statement for 2004 and Citizen Participation documentation:
x
Has been previously filed with CDBG. Date of Filiny
Annual Participation filed 1/8/04 and Citizen Participation 2/6/04
Is enclosed
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS STATEMENT
X-
Has been previously filed with CDBG, Date of F i l i n - t
Is Enclosed
SUB-RECIPIENT QUESTIONNAIRE
x
Is Enclosed
Attach Notices from Citizen Participation process as Attachment 1.
Other Citizen Participation documentation has been previously provided.
Applicant/Recipient
DiselosurelUpdate Report
U.S. Department o f Housing
and Urban Development
Office o f Ethics
OMB Approved No 2525-0101
(Directions: See Public Reporting Statement and Privacy Act Statement and detailed instructions on page 4.)
Part I. Applicant/Recipient Information
Indicate whether this is an Initial Report [ ] or an Updated report [ ]
1. ApplicantiRecipient Name, Address, and Phone (include area code)
Social Security Number or
Employee I.D. Number 88-6000011
NYE COUNTY, P.O. BOX 153, TONOPAH, NEVADA 89049 (775) 482-8143
2. Project to be Assisted (ProjectiActivity name andlor number, location by Street, City, and Zip Code)
Tonopah Wastewater Collection, Treatment and Effluent Disposal Rehabilitation Project, 102 Burro Avenu
Tonopah, Nevada 89049
3. Assistance RequestedIReceived
4. HUD Program
5. Amount RequestedIReceived
$250,000
Part II. Threshold Determinations - Applicants Only
1 . Are you requesttng HUD asslstance for a spectfic project or actlvtty, as prov~dedby 24 CFR Part 12, Subpart C,
and have you recewed, or can you reasonably expect to recelve, and aggregate amount of all forms of covered
asslstance from HUD, States, and unlts of general local government, In excess of $200,000 durtng the Federal
fiscal year (October through September 30) In whlch the appl~catlonIS submitted?
YES[X]
If YES, you must complete the remamder of thls report
If NO, you must s ~ g nthe certlficatton below and answer the next questlon
I hereby cert~fythat thls lnforrnat~onIS true
(S~gnature)
Date
NO[]
2. Is this application for a specific housing project that involves other government assistance?
If YES, you must complete the remainder of this report.
If NO, you must sign this certification.
I hereby cert~fythat this ~nforrnat~on
IS true.
(S~gnature)
Date
If your answers to both questlon are No, you do not need to complete Parts 111, IV, or V, but you must slgn the certlficatton at the end of
the report.
Type of Assistance
Commtss~onon Econom~cDevelopment
USDA Rural Development
USDA Rural Development
Water Resource Development Act 1999 (Public Law 106-53)
CDBG
10 780
10 780
Section 595
Amount of RequestedIProvided
Grant
Loan
Grant
Grant
Is there other government assrstance that IS reportable In this Pari and i n Part V, but that rs reported only in Part V?
NO[x
I
If there IS no other government asslstance, you must ccrtrfy that thls ~ n f o m a t ~ o1sntrue
YES [
1
I hereby certify that this information is true. (Signature)
Date
'. Interested Parties
Alphabetical list of all person with a
reportable financial interest in the project of
activity (for individuals give the last name
first)
Social Security Number
of Employee ID
Number
Type of
Participation in
ProjectiActivity
Financial interest
in Project'Activil
($ and %)
If there are no person with a reportable financial interest, you must certify that this information is true.
I hereby certifv that this information is true.
Part V. Report on Expected Sources and Uses of Funds
Sources
Tonopah Wastewater Collection
Commiss~onon Economic Development
Treatment Effluent Disposal
Tonopah Wastewater Collection
Treatment Effluent Disposal
USDA Rural Development
Tonopah Wastewater Collection
Treatment Effluent Disposal
USDA Rural Development
Tonopah Wastewater Collection
Treatment Effluent Disposal
Water Resource Development Act 1999 (Public Law 106-53)
If there are no sources of funds, you must certtfy that thls tnformatlon IS true.
1 hereby certlfy that thls tnfonnatton 1s true (Signature)
Date
Use
If there are no uses of funds, you must certify that thts ~nfomatton1s true
I hereby certtfv that thls lnformatlon 1s true (Slenature)
Certlficatlon
Date
Warmng If you knowngly make a false statement on t h ~ sform, qou may be subject to civ~lor cnmtnal penalties under sectton 1001 of Tttle 18 of the
Umted States Code In add~tton,any person who knowngly and matenail> \ tolates any requtred dmlosure of ~nfomatton,~ncludmgtntemattonal nondtsclosure Is subject to cwrl or e r ~ m ~ npenalty
al
not to exceed 310,000 for each vtolatton
I certlfy that this tnformatmn 1s true and complete
I
I
Signature
I
SUBRECIPIENT QUESTIONAIRE
SUBRECIPIENT NAME:
NYE COUNTY, NEVADA
SUBRECIPIENT ADDRESS:
9
PROJECT NAME: TONOPAH WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT AND EFFLUENT
DISPOSAL PROJECT
NUMBER:
CDBG CONTACT PERSON:
TITLE:
HARRIET EALEY
BUDGET ANALYST
PHONE NUMBER:
775-482-8 143
YEARS IN CURRENT POSITION:
1 YEAR
FISCAL CONTACT PERSON:
TITLE: 0
PHONE NUMBER:
YEARS IN CURRENT POSITION:
1 YEAR
AUDIT CONTACT PERSON (if different than fiscal contact person):
TITLE:
PHONE NUMBER:
YEARS IN CURRENT POSITION:
SUBRECIPIENT FISCAL YEAR END:
JULY - JUNE
Do you expect to receive $500,000 or more total in direct and indirect (for example, through state agencies)
federal financial assistance during any fiscal year of the project period? YES
Have you received federal financial assistance from CED before? YES
If "yes7', li st dates of most recent project.
TONOPAH DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION, 200 1
PAHRUMP SENOR CENTER PLAN, 2002
TONOPAH WASTE WATER PER, 2002
TONOPAH DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION PHASE 3, 2003
NO TO ABUSE, 2003
TONOPAH STOREFRONT RENOVATION, 2003
If "no", have you received federal financial assistance from any source, directly or indirectly in the current
or most recent fiscal year?
If "yes", li st dates and sources on the next page.
FUNDING AGENCY
DATE
NOTE: ATTACH COPIES OF ORGANIZATION-WIDE FINANCIAL AND COMPLIANCE
REPORTS COVERING THE MOST RECENT YEAR IF NOT PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TO CED.
ATTACHMENTS
Number
Page and Item
Reference
Description
Citizen Participation Documentation
Resolution of Tonopah Town Board Blighted AredMap
2/14/02 Letter Bureau Water Pollution Control
2/14/03 Letter Bureau Water Pollution Control
Documentation regarding WRDA -USACE
Letter of Conditions - USDA-RP)
ATTACHMENT 1
AGENDA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Tonopah Convention Center
Tonopah, Nevada
December 3,2003
6:00 p.m.
Community College of So. Nevada
Pahrump, Nevada
December 4,2003
4:00 p.m.
INTRODUCTIONS
OVERVIEW OF CDBG PROGRAM
REVIEW OF PAST PERFORMANCE
STATUS OF EXISTING GRANTS
FUNDING AVAILABILITY
ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATIONS
A. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
B. FEDERAL LABOR STANDARDS
C. LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURCHASING ACT
D. DOCUMENTATION OF BENEFITS
E. SINGLE AUDIT ACT
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NEEDS STATEMENT
DEVELOPMENT OF PROPOSALS
PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS
TIMETABLE
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION 98-01
DESIGNATING THE MAIN STREET SIDEWALKS
TOWN OF TONOPAH
BLIGHTED AREA
WHEREAS, the Tonopah Town Board is the governing board of the
unincorporated Town of Tonopah (tlTownli)responsible for providing a
safe environment for its citizens and aid in the elimination of slums or
blight as those conditions exist within the town boundaries of Tonopah.
WHEREAS, the Tonopah Town Board at regular board meetings
since 1995, have discussed and implemented procedures dealing with
public safety, public nuisances and downtown renovation.
WHEREAS, the Tonopah Town Board has set a Community Planning
Workshop for May 30, 1998 to address the needs of the community to
promote tourism and improve the local downtown business district.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved that the Main Street
Sidewalks identified in Exhibit "A", and said exhibit is made a part of
this resolution, be declared a "blighted area" as the sidewalks are unfit
and unsafe due t o defective design and character of physical
construction, as defined by NRS 279.388.
DATED this 13th day of May, 1998.
Fox, Chairman
ABSENT
Sherry Page, Clerk
ABSENT
Cindy Kaminski, Member
ATTEST:
.
'
'
4
,
,
?
Sandra L. Pettis, ~ e p u t yClerk
ATTACHMENT 3
STATE OF NEVADA
R. MICHAEL TIlRNIPSEf%'ADimfw
KENW C. CL'INN
~;nwrnor
Water PulJwbbn Contrni
Fac.rim~lrbb7. bh84
Mintnu Peguiauon nrtd
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVKTIOM AND NATURnL NESOURCES
Rccl~rnrc~an
Fucs~rdle664-5259
D I V I S l O N OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
333 W. Nye lane. Room 138
Carson City. Nevada 89706
February 14,2002
Mr. Stan Howerton, Utility Supervisor
Tonopjtm Publtc Utilities
P.O. Box 151
Tonopah, Nevada 89049
RE:
Requirement to Upgrade thc Treatment Facility
Dear Mr. Howenon:
As listed in your ground water discharge permit, the Division of Environmental Protection is
requiring that this utility submit a facility pian for upgrading the treatment system to a secondary
treatment facility, This will require the construction of a treatment system that is capable of
meeting an effluent BOD5 of 30 mg/l and an effluent TSS of 30 rn@
The achievement of secondary treatment will reduce the potential for nuisance odors, vector
attraction, and provlde for reduced environmental degradation. Additionally, this treatment level
will provide for multiple disposal options (Wetlands, Reuse, etc.) wh~cfiare not cunently
available to the city. (Please nore that if effluent reuse is desired, effluent disinfection may be
required).
The permit requires rhat a facility plan be submitted for this upgrade/modificatjon by August 6,
2003 If there are any questions on this requirement, please contact our oCfice a1 (775) 6874670 exr. 3050.
Sincerely,
Y ~ o n a t h a C.
n Palm., PbD., PE.
Permits Branch Sopervisor
CC.
Penmt File- NEV00026
Permit No. NEV00026
Page 5 of 14
.
LA. 13
If during the loading period for an RIB, ponded effluent remains in that RIB .fromthe pre 1s
effluent loading cycle, the Division shall be notified within ten (10) days in writing of the
proposed remedial action by the permittee to establish effective percolation in the affected : ~ S J .
I.A.14.
Color photographs for each of the ten (10) RIBS, labeled with basin number and date, shall be
ng the third quarter of each calendar year.
I.A. 1 5 . ~ d u 1 ofe Comp
"TI,
The permittee shall implement and comply with the provisions of the schedule of compliance
after approval by the Administrator, including in said implementation and compliance, any
additions or modifications, which the Administrator may make in approving the schedule of
compliance.
a. The permittee shall achieve compliance with the effluent limitations upon issuance of this
permit.
@
e permittee shall prepare and submit to this office a Facility Plan for the City of Tonopah's
astewater collection, treatment, and disposal operations. The Facility Plan should
investigate improvements to the existing Imhoff Tanks to improve their removal efficiency for
BOD+j/TSS and propose a timeline for their eventual replacement with a system, which
produces effluent to meet secondary treatment standards (wastewater settling and biological
oxidation). The Facility Plan is also to include a s e c t i s on groundwater monitoring indicating
whether :he existing spring sampling location is representathe of groundweier quality beneath
the site or whether groundwater monitoring well(s) would provide a more representative
sampling location(s). The Facility Plan is to be submitted to the Division within two (two) years
of the issuance date of this permit.
..-.
4-
c.
1.B'
The permittee shall submit an updated Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Manual within
ninety (90) days of the issuance date of this permit. The location of the spring sampling point
and sample procedures shall be included in the O&M Manual.
MONITOMNG AND REPORTING
I.B. 1 . Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature
of the monitored discharge. Analysis shall be'performed by a State of Nevada certified laboratory.
Results &om this lab must accompany the Discharge Monitoring Report.
I.B.2. Reporting
a. Annual Report
The fourth quarter report shall contain a plot, of date (x-axis) versus concentration (y-axis) for
each quarterly analyzed constituent. The plot shall include data &om the preceding five years, if
available. Any data point &om the current year that is greater than the limits in Parts LA. 1. and
I.A.2. must be explained by a narrative.
STATE OF NEVADA
KENXY C. CUINN
Wutc Management
Corrective Actions
TDD 6874618
Federal Facilities
Administration
Faaimilo 687-5956
Air Quality
Water Quality PImning
Water Pollution Control
Faaimiie tiRi41iPt
Mning Regulation and
Reciamation
FctccimiIe 6s-5259
DEPARTNEXT OF COYSERI'XTION AND NATURAL RESOCRCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
333 \V. Nye Lane, Room 138
Carson City,Nevada 89706
August 2,2001
Mr. Raymond Kruth, P.E.
ECO:LOGIC, LLC
6490 S ~ u t McCamm
h
Blvd., Suite 1
Reno, NV 89509
Re:
Response to Comments for Public Notice of NEV00026
Dear Mr. h t h :
The Bureau of Water Pollution Control (BWPC) is providing the following
response to your July 27,2001 comments submitted on behalf of Tonopah Public Utilities
mu).
Ifem #I - 30-Dnv ~verageFlow:
BWPC will change the 30-day average flow limit to be 0.95 MGD, as requested in your
Ietter.
Iten1 #2 - Imhof O~eration:
The permit limitations of 20% BODs and 50% TSS removal for the lmhoff Tanks were
established based on accepted design criteria for primary treatment tanks. According to
the literature (Metcalf & Eddy, 1991), a properly designed and operated primary
sedimentation tank can remove 2540% of the BODs and 50-70% of the TSS. The
current TPU O&M Manual states that 90% or more settleable solids removal can be
achieved in an Imhoff Tank. Therefore, BWPC does not consider the existing permit
limitations for BOD, and TSS removal to be unrealistic. In response to your comments
concerning lysimeters for the percolation beds, B W C contends that the direct land
application of poorly settled, undigested wastewater solids is not protective of human
health and the envhment, e.g., pathogen, odor, vector and groundwater contamination
concerns. Therefore, our oftice is unabte to relax the existing permit limits for BODs and
mnoval. The permittee is responsible for addressing any design issues and/or
operational procedures with the Imhoff Tanks to meet permit limits. It should be noted
that BWPC requires a minimum of secondary treatment for similarly sized groundwater
dischargers in the State of Nevada. It is BWPC's intent to work with TPU once the
squested Facility Plan is submitted for review and approval to provide Tonopah, NV
with a system more protective of human health and the environment.
BWPC notes from a review of the TPU O M Manual that dailv attention to the
. Tliese hsuseke
call for daily
floating solids fkom the tank surface and skimmings h m the gas vents to d o w for the
proper settling, liquefaction and gasification of soiids in the sludge compartment. The
last BWPC Compliance Inspection to TPU in 1998 observed that rising gas bubbles h m
the digestion compartment hindered the settling compartment h m operating effectively,
solids to the percolation beds.
thereby leading to carryover of poorly settle
on a regular basis, the operator
To address this issue, the O&M Manual rec
should clean the slot between the settling and digestion compartments. Also,
accumulations of sludge on the settling compartment walls
need to be wiped down into
.
.
the slotted compartment with a scraper tool. At a
BWPC reconunends that
TPU thoroughly clean out and inspect the West Imhoff Tank as it can activate the East
Tank, which is presently maintained dry as a spare. When cleaned and inspected, the
operator should find improved operation in the West Tank provided that the O&M
Manual procedures are followed closely on a daily basis. Since each tank's design
capacity is 0.5 MGD,the permittee should also consider operating both tanks in parallel
to allow for additional retention time and improved solids removal in the treatment
process.
Our ofice understands that Imhoff Tanks are maintenance intensive. To this end,
the Facility Plan should consider secondary treatment systems which have achieved
reliability in Nevada municipalities such as lined aeration pond systems or package
treatment plants. Until the Facility Plan is submitted and improvements are commenced,
it is the permittee's obligation to meet the existing permit requirements, which will not be
relaxed by this office. It is our contention, that a properly operated Imhoff Tank is the
minimum degree of treatment our office will allow in Tonopah, NV until the time when
scheduling and financial concerns allow for an upgrade to a secondary treatment system
in accord with other Nevada municipalities.
I appreciate your time in providing comments on behalf of TPU and hope that you
understand our office's position on protection of human health and the environment.
Please feel fiee to contact me at (775) 687-4670, a t . 3050 should you have any questions
or concerns regarding this letter.
Sincerely,
o
,
P
A
L
Jonathan C. Palm, Ph.D., P.E.
Pennits Branch Supervisor
Bureau of Water Pollution Control
ATTACHMENT 4
STATE OF NEVADA
KENNY C. CUlNN
ALLEN BIACCl,Administrator
R. MICHAEL TURNIPSEED,Director
cov4mor
I
Warte Management
Corrective Actions
Federal Facilitiu
Administration
Facsimile 687-5856
Air Pollution Control
Air QualityPlanning
Water Pollution Control
Facsimile 687-4684
Water Quality P h i n g
Mining Regulation and
Reclamation
Facsimile 684-5259
Facsimile 6876396
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
333 W. Nye Lane, Room 138
Carson City, Nevada 89706
February 14,2003
David Kershaw, P.E.
EC0:LOGIC
6490 South McCarran Blvd., Suite 1
Reno, NV 89509
Re:
Town of Tonopah sewer treatment facility
Dear Mr. Kershaw:
The Town of Tonopah has been in violation of their discharge permit
(NEV00026) for many years. When their discharge permit was last renewed it had a
requirement in it (I.A.15.b) for the Town of Tonopah to submit a plan to replace the
existing lmhoff Tanks with a system that would meet secondary treatment standards.
The existing treatment facility, lmhoff Tanks and 10 rapid infiltration basins, has
not been able to meet the 20% BOD removal or the 50% total suspended solids
removal required by the Tonopah Public Utilities discharge permit. A modern treatment
system that would meet secondary treatment standards would be much more protective
of human health and the environment.
If there are any questions on this letter please give me a call at 687-9422.
Sincerely,
-+-
Bill Coughlin, PE
Technical Services Branch
Bureau of Water Pollution Control
RF~:~=~\/E-J
.. .. .<
FFR
I
r
i":m r.\GiC - ~ t , . ~ ~
ATTACHMENT 5
Section 595 PCA
Page 1 of 1
Susan Dudley
From:
Se-Yao.Hsu@splOl .usace.army.mil
Sent:
Tuesday, January 13,2004 10:19 AM
To:
[email protected],d
Subject: Section 595 PCA
Hi, Susan,
Per our conversation on the phone this morning attached is a model PCA for you to review. In the meantime,
please prepare a scope of work, project schedule and costs associated with it. Then we can set up a meeting to
go through the PCA checklist together. Thank you for your interests in participating the Rural Nevada Programs.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Se-Yao Hsu, Ph.D., P.E.
Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
(213)452-4Ol6, fax:(213)452-4213
[email protected]. mil
<<#19202 v6 Sec 595 - Model PCA Design Construction by the Non-Federal Sponsor.doc>>
-
-
TOWN OF TONOPAH, NIEVADA
TONOPAH WASTEWATER COLLECTION, TREATMENT AND
EFFLUENT DISPOSAL PROJECT.
SECTION 595
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Section 595 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999authorized the United States Corps of
Engineers to participate in environmental infrastructure projects in ma1 Nevada. The Energy and
Water Appropriations Act of 2004 included funds for such projects.
The Town of Tonopah is proposing a project under the authority of Section 595 to provide an
upgrade both collection and sewage treatment to provide for an effective sewage disposal process.
The project includes design and construction of a wastewater treatment system to enhance the
existing system at the Tonopah Public Utilities wastewater treatment plant and to construct
improvements to the collection system consisting of a series of collector sewers which will intercept
the existing lines and reduce the flows in the undersized lines.
The cost of the proposed project for the purpose of the Project Cooperation Agreement is currently
estimated at $2,285,689. Cost sharing for the project, as specified in the Project Cooperation
Agreement, is 75 percent Federal, 25 percent Non-Federal. Hence, the Town of Tonopah's financial
obligation for the project as the Non-Federal Sponsor is approximately $571,423.
The Town of Tonopah is capable of meeting cost sharing and other obligations as required under the
terms of the Project Cooperation Agreement.
The Town will fund its share of the project through a Loan from USDA-Rural Development, Grant
funds from the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) and a contribution of funds
from the Tonopah Public Utilities.
TOWN OF TONOPAH, NEVADA
TONOPAH WASTEWATER COLLECTION, TREATMENT AND EFFLUENT
DISPOSAL PROJECT.
SECTION 595
SCOPE OF WORK
JANUARY 28,2004
PURPOSE
This Scope of Work identifies and describes design and construction elements of the Tonopah
Wastewater Collection, Treatment and Effluent Disposal project being considered for
implementation under the authority of Section 595 of the Water Resource Development Act of
1999 (Public Law 106-53).
BACKGROUND AND HISTORY
The Water Development Act of 1999 authorized the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to
participate in environmental infrastructure projects in rural Nevada and Montana. In the
Energy and Water Appropriations Act of 2004, Congress included fbnds of $9,000,000 for
Rural Nevada, Section 595 projects. The accompanying congressional conference language
directed the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to give consideration to the Tonopah project.
1. Wastewater Treatment Facility
The Tonopah Wastewater Treatment Facility is one of the last primary-only level treatment
plants in Nevada. This means that the plant discharges only partly treated wastewater effluent
to the ground waters of the state. The Imhoff Tanks in use at the sewage plant are not
physically capable of producing effluent meeting the secondary treatment regulations. The
sewage treatment plant is incapable of meeting even the primary discharge regulations issued
by the State Bureau of Water Pollution Control (BWC). The BWPC, in their statements
accompanying the 2001 renewal of TPU7sNEV00026 permit, specifically mentioned Tonopah
Public Utilities7(TPU) historical inability to meet the removal requirements of the discharge
permit. Those comments, dated June 18, 2001, required the TPU to "improve their operation
and propose a timeline for their eventual replacement with a system, which produces effluent
to meet secondary treatment standards, (wastewater settling and biological oxidation.)" The
comments included TPU must submit a plan no later than August, 2003, identifying how they
were going to comply with the requirements of B W C in order to maintain the discharge
permit.
2. Collection Svstem
The existing Tonopah Wastewater Collection System contains many old and undersized
pipelines and is continually plagued by blockages that result in occasional sewage overflows in
Town which often run underneath existing buildings. All of these undersized lines need to be
replaced, but the cost would be unaffordable. In addition to the unsanitary aspects of this
Tonopah Wastewater Collection, Treatment and Effluent Ilrsposal Project
Page 1
situation that need correcting to maintain public health and safety, these blockages, when
unplugged, produce instantaneous burdens on the sewage treatment plant that disrupt the
treatment process and contribute to non-compliance of the plant effluent characteristics.
The combination sf am inadequate collection system and an inefficient sewage treatment
process underscores the need to upgrade both collection and sewage treatment to provide for an
effective sewage disposal process. Remediation of one system without the other will not
provide an effective solution to the Tonopah Public Utilities sewage process problems.
PROPOSED PROJECT
1. Wastewater Treatment Facilitv
The recommended wastewater treatment facility improvement is to construct a series of four
lined, aerated lagoons, following by small wetlands for polishing. This system will provide
reliable secondary treatment, and be adaptable to future more stringent discharge standards,
should those be applied. The estimated costs of these improvements are $1,034,098.
2. Collection System
The recommended improvements to the collection system consist of a series of collector
sewers which will intercept the existing lines and reduce the flows in the undersized lines.
Once these collector sewers are in place, more of the existing undersized pipelines can be
replaced and connected to the new lines, allowing abandonment of the poorly located existing
lines. The estimated costs of this improvement are $1,895,360.
In addition to the above costs there will be costs for engineering and administrative in the
amount of $578,943, Contingency in the amount of $439,419, Federal Review and
Coordination in the amount of $116,446, bringing the total amount of the project to
$4,064,266.
Section 595 allows reimbursementlcredit for reasonable costs of design work associated with
the project by the non-Federal sponsor before entering into a cost sharing agreement. At this
time, design of the proposed project, as identified above, will begin shortly. The design and
engineering costs for the improvements to the collection system and wastewater treatment
facility, preparation of the plans and specifications, preparation of bidding documents, and
working with all funders to obtain approval of same will be Phase I of the Engineering
Agreement. Additional Engineering costs for construction management, construction
adnninistration and resident inspections will be Phase I1 of the Engineering agreement. The
total amount of engineering costs are estimated to be in the amount of $512,655.
FEDERAL REVIEW AND COORDINATION
Project costs will include all Federal efforts to assist the County in completing this project and
verifying compliance with all applicable Federal laws and regulations. It is estimated that the
Tonopah WastewaferCollection, Treatment and Efluent Disposal Project
Page 2
Federal involvement for this project will be $116,446, which mount is 3% of the total
construction, contingency and engineering fees.
PROJECT COSTS AND COST SHARING (PHASE 1 and II)AND FEDERAL
COBrnrnATION
With the Section 595 authorization defining cost sharing as 75% Federal and 25% non-Federal
sponsor, the total project costs for the purposes of the Project Cooperation Agreement is
$2,285,689. The 25% Non-Federal Sponsor share being $571,423, as identified below.
Project Costs
Applicant CDBG
*Construction
Construction
Engineer
*Design
Construction
*Federal Review
Legal
Administrative
Bond Counsel
Interest Ex~ense
Project
Contingency
Total Project
Costs
1 RUS
Loan
$100,368 $372,343
$78.034
$69,600
$149,632 $84,623
1 $29,112 1
$1,288
$100,000
$5,000
$15.000
$20,000
$25,000
$250,000 $600,000
Tonopah Wastewater Collectron, Treatment and Efluent Disposal Project
Page 3
RUSGrant WRDA
Total
Construction Costs are more specifically set forth below:
-
TOWN OF TONOPAH WASTE WATER PROJECT M '04
Item
:onst
Description
Qty
Unit
s
Unit
Price
I
MoblDemob
Headworks
Earth Works
Base Roads
Pond Liner
Fencing
Aerator Equip
Piping
Outlet
Structure
Electrical
Treatment
Sub
1
MoblDemob
48" manholes
Service Lines
Rock
Excavation
Highway
Boring
AC Pavement
Gravel
Surface
Collection
Tonopah Wastewater Coliection, Treatment and Efluent Disposal Project
Pam 4
I
Total
Running
Totals
Compone
nt Totals
COST ALLOCATION
Section 595 authorizes Federal reimbursement for costs associated with design and
construction as well as providing credit and grants to the Non-Federal sponsor. Town of
Tonopah is proposing to fund its project on a 75% Federal, 25% non-Federal sponsor of project
cost sharing basis on an amount of $2,285,689. The non-Federal sponsor's share of the project
cost of the $2,285,689 is estimated to be $571,423. The non-Federal sponsor's share of the
project costs will be funded by USDA-Rural Development Loan, Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program Funds and funds fiom the Tonopah Public Utilities.
The non-Federal sponsor will also fund the Other Project Costs in the amount of $1,778,577,
which costs will not be part of the Project Cooperation Agreement. The amount of $1,778,577
will be funded with CDBG Grant Funding and "Federal Program Funds" fiom USDA-Rural
Development Grant.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Signature of the Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) is required prior to beginning
construction on the project to assure reimbursement on design and construction costs. The
PCA is scheduled to be signed in May, 2004. Constmction will follow immediately after
design, bidding, agency approval and after entering into Project Cooperation Agreement.
Tonapah WastewaterCollecfion, Treatment and Emenc Disposal Project
Page 5
ATTACHMENT 6
Rural Development
USDA
A Mission Area of the
United States Department of Agriculture
Rural Utilities Service
Rural Business-Cooperative Service
Nevada Rural Development State Office
1390 South Curry Street
Carson City, NV 89703
(775) 887-1222 FAX (775) 887-1287
TDD: (775) 885-0633
www.rurdev.usda.~ovlnv
Rural Housing Service
February 44,2004
LETTER OF CONDITIONS
Mike Truesdell, Chairman
Town of Tonopah
102 Burro Street
Tonopah, NV 89
Subject: Application of the Town of Tonopah for Financial Assistance for the Town of Tonopah
Public Utilities, Waste Water System Improvements
Dear Mr. Truesdell:
This letter establishes condhons that must be understood and agreed to by the applicant before further
consideration may be given to the application. The loan will be administered on behalf of the RURAL
UTILITIES SERVICE by the State Staff of USDA Rural Development. Any changes in project cost,
source of funds, scope of services, or any other significant change in the project or applicant must be
reported to and approved by RURAL DEWLOPMENT by written amendment to this letter. If
significant changes are made without obtaining such approval, Rural Development may discontinue
processing of the application.
This letter does not constitute loan andor grant approval, nor does it ensure that funds are or will be
available for the project. The docket may be completed on the basis of a loan in the amount of
$600,000.00 and a grant in the amount of $l,4OO,OOO.OO.
If Rural Development approves this financial assistance, the loan will be considered approved on the
date a signed copy of RD Form 1940-1, "Request for Obligation of Funds," is mailed to you. The rate
of interest at closing will be the lower of the rate in effect at the time of loan approval or the rate in
effect at the time of loan closing unless you choose otherwise. If you do not want the interest rate
changed to the rate at loan closing, you should submit a written request to Rural Development staff at
least 60 calendar days before loan closing. If the interest rate is to be that in effect at loan closing on a
loan involving multiple advances of RUS funds using temporary debt instruments, the interest rate
charged shall be that in effect on the date when the first temporary debt instrument is issued.
Please complete and return the attached RD Form 1942-46, "Letter of Intent to Meet Conditions," and
RD Form 1940-1, "Request for Obligation of Funds," within 15 days if further consideration is to be
given your application. The execution of these and all other documents required by Rural
Development must be authorized by appropriate resolutions of your governing body.