Loading...
Item J1BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: June 10, 2015 Bulk Item: Yes No X Division: Engineering & Public Works Department: Wastewater Staff Contact Person/Phone #:Wilson (453-8797)_ AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval expansion of Cudjoe Regional Wastewater system to include 42 properties on No Name Key and 57 properties on Middle and Big Torch Keys plus 35 additional properties whose cost of service is comparable. Additional funds coming from infrastructure Sales tax and property assessments. ITEM BACKGROUND: FKAA recommends inclusion of an additional 99 properties located on No Name Key, Middle Torch Key and Big Torch Key. They have developed a plan that brings the average cost per connection for these properties to under $30,000 on No Name Key and under $25,000 for Big & Middle Torch. FKAA has reviewed the remaining properties not included in the CRWS to identify which can be included for costs similar to NNK & Torches. In the past, the cost breakpoint used for central service vs. on -site systems has been $22,500. Inclusion of these properties will reduce the number of on -site systems to approximately 70. Centralized treatment also offers better treatment than can be achieved in on -site systems. The net additional cost for these expansions will be $2.2 million if only the NNK & Torch Keys are included. The added net cost to include 35 properties on USL, Summerland, and BPK North is $0.6 million for a total is all expansions are approved of $2.8 million. The highest average unit cost is for NNK at $30k/property. This is the continuation of agenda item C-33 from the May 2015 BOCC meeting with the addition of 35 properties. CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommend approval. BPK& Torches/ incl 35 add' l EDUs TOTAL COST: $2.2 million / $2.8 million INDIRECT COST: Staff BUDGETED: Yes No X DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE: COST TO COUNTY: up to $2.8 million SOURCE OF FUNDS: Assessments, Fund 304 REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No X AMOUNT PER MONTH Year APPROVED BY: County Atty CR OMB/Purchasing Risk Management DOCUMENTATION: Included X Not Required _ DISPOSITION: Revised 7/09 AGENDA ITEM # MONROE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS & ENGINEERING DIVISION DATE: 25 May 2015 TO: BOCC CC: Administrator FROM: Kevin G. Wilson SUBJECT: Expansion of CRWS to NNK, Big & Middle Torch Keys and 35 Properties on BPK North, Upper Sugarloaf, and Summerland (Nile Rd.) Recommended Action: Approval of FKAA proposed expansions. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The costs of inclusion of these properties are all under $30,000/EDU 2. The cost of on -site systems is higher than originally estimated 3. On site systems are proving impractical on small lots 4. The additional properties on USL & BPK North were originally rejected based on the old breakpoint of $22,500. Background In Early May 2015, FKAA proposed to include 99 additional properties on No Name Key (42 EDUs) and Big Torch & Middle Torch Keys (57 EDUs). The proposal was based on the fact that these properties were planned to be served with on -site systems which are proving more expensive and less technically feasible. In many cases the on -site systems were not feasible because they require more ground space than is available on many individual lots. At County request, FKAA reviewed the remaining properties for which on -site systems were planned to identify any for which the costs of inclusion in CRWS central system were comparable with the NNK & Big/Middle Torch properties. FKAA identified two "additive/outreach" areas on Big Pine Key encompassing 23 EDUs that had previously been rejected for inclusion. The costs for these two areas were above the previous cutoff but below $25,000/EDU. Three additional outreach areas on Upper Sugarloaf were identified with per EDU costs below $28,000 were identified. FKAA also identified 8 additional properties on Summerland Keys' Niles Road that it estimates can be included for under $24,000/EDU. FKAA recommends including these additional 35 properties because the estimated EDU costs are below the costs for NNK. Approval of the original proposed expansion to NNK, and Big & Middle Torch Keys will cost $2.69 million of which $0.45 million will come from individual property assessments and $2.24 million will come from infrastructure sales tax revenues. If the additional 35 properties on BPK North, USL, and Summerland are included the additional required funding from infrastructure sales tax is $0.6 million. These costs are detailed in the below table. May / June Proposed Expansion Areas / Costs Area FKAA Cost EDUs Assessments @ $4,500/EDU NNK $1,260,000 42 $189,000 B & M Torch $1,425,000 57 $256,500 BPK North $484,700 23 $103,500 Upper Sugarloaf $90,341 4 $18,000 Summerland (Niles) $186,1921 8 $36,000 Total $3,446,2331 134 $603,000 Notes net County cost for NNK, Big & Middle Torch $2,239,500 net County costfor 35 add'I on BPK North; Summerland & UL $603,733 Original Proposed Expansion on NNK & Big / Middle Torch Keys 20 MAY 2015 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: May 20, 2015 Bulk Item: Yes X No Division: Engineering & Public Works Department: Wastewater Staff Contact Person/Phone #:Wilson (453-8797)_ AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval for expansion of the Cudjoe Regional Wastewater system to include 42 properties on No Name Key and 57 properties on Middle and Big Torch Keys. ITEM BACKGROUND: FKAA recommends inclusion of an additional 99 properties located on No Name Key, Middle Torch Key and Big Torch Key. They have developed a plan that brings the average cost per connection for these properties to under $30,000 on No Name Key and under $25,000 for Big & Middle Torch. In the past, the cost breakpoint used for central service vs. on -site systems has been $22,500. Inclusion of additional properties reduces the number of on -site systems to less than 100. Design and construction of on -site systems has proven more challenging than anticipated and cost of inclusion in the central system has proven less expensive than anticipated. Centralized treatment also offers better treatment than can be achieved in on -site systems. CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommend approval — see attached memo. TOTAL COST: $2.28 million INDIRECT COST: Staff Time BUDGETED: Yes No X DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE: COST TO COUNTY: $2.28 millionSOURCE OF FUNDS: Assessments, Fund 304 REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No X AMOUNT PER MONTH Year APPROVED BY: County Atty DOCUMENTATION: Included DISPOSITION: Revised 7/09 OMB/Purchasing Risk Management X Not Required_ AGENDA ITEM # Date: May 5, 2015 To: Kevin Wilson, Monroe County From: Tom Walker, FKAA Subject: Extension of Cudjoe Wastewater Service Area No Name, Middle Torch and Big Torch Keys The original consideration for providing service to outlying areas required an estimated construction cost of less than or equal to $22,500 per connection. This cost threshold was based solely on cost considerations which assumed an on -site treatment system coot:„be built for approximately $22,500 and that central sewers were less than this cost per connection Since these initial rules of engagement with handling outlying areas weroat in place, many properties have been brought into the regional service area, based on competitive priei'g;.and locations of these properties which led to a reduction of more than 100 on -site systems to be bu�.nd maintained. Also, during this time, FKAA: • Evaluated remaining properties outside the central=ever area to determine potential engineering and construction considerations to tie into the central area • Have conducted the design and permitting of several on -site systems for properties outside the central sewer area Thi: effort has exposed several challenges to installing compliant on -site treatment properties with limited spe Currently, the Cudjoe Regi-final Wastewater System (CRWS) is not designed to include service to No Name Key (NNK), Middle Tover Big brt- Keys becaU a of estimated costs to be considerably higher than $22,1 pegnneetion In the case of NNK, earlier timates were shown to be more than $50,000 per conneron. Howevd, based on the most rece) can be connected to the centra[:system for less than $25,000 on Ml d.dle and Big Tore l ets. igiineering evaluations and bid prices, these areas 0,000 per connection on NNK and less than FKAA recommends that Monroe County add these three islands (42 EDUs on NNK & 57 EDUs on Big & Middle Torch) into the CRWS. Our recommendation is based on several considerations: 1. CRWS provides a much higher level of wastewater treatment and system reliability than any on - site system. 2. The DOH -approved on -site systems take a considerably large space (on the order of 400-600 square feet) considering installation on many small, existing properties. 3. With the conversion of many LPS areas to gravity areas, the price point for central sewers has increased well above the $22,500 per connection in the conversion areas. 4. Property owners would much rather have central sewer services than an on -site system. Given the approval to proceed, FKAA can have these properties available for central service by October, 2016. ' z 0 0) co �// 70 i f N co ..... W15L co 70 co w r i X ri W Cl low— �u J Proposed Expansion Properties on Big Pine Key North r O M C ul 3 W aCul L C CL U w p f Ln M C LL u O. 0) w 3 ul ++ u - U Ca s L CL 0 ul w U, U, ul LL p a 3 Z w H a z 'n Q w M J oc r-I N Q N 2 M CC a W w Ln 0 N O _ � lG O O 01 01 00 v O w Leff N 000 G M lO O M � � W LU N N ri LM r�•I iA r-I O iA iA iA iA iA iA r Ln 0 0 V Z O O O O N O uY � W N w w N O 00 M 00 Ilf 00 N M m LM y 0 M LM -* w O r-I 00 Lr Lr W X v v a i/f iA iA iA iA N ri v C > O 0 0 0 ul lG I� ri ri I� LLlf rm V-1 nj N LV c O � s N W 4a m to � y � W Z LM W 00 AA L L h nz nz nz a nz a •� � r LL L L L s L s ulQ a s a a a L : •u Q a a o 3 _ f � LLI W a > > _ '> 3 oc > > 3 oc 0 0 0 -0 � s c%f Q cn of cn m Z O cn (� {5.,7 y o: > O- � o Z Z o o cn E w o_ Z a �" +� oc +� J +� +� a a +� +� � Q o L L a W c H u 0) c7 c7 m w p � a � � � � � � O 0 ai L a 0a oca � aa m maa � coca U Pi 0 ro NYSE n n pIyy ^p dI CCL o G S w n a a LU �t 2 w LU 0 CO LU w r N a U i LU? F Y 1 W !' Z... 0. n ❑_ 2 w d' a Qu CL W h to q oCL Im J ill ui 9 F 79 I � cr`a 3n E .od 11/�fl� rr f/ LL� g E �� i WIN ,,,h Q v m o 'O a m to 0 0 Q ] Y O N U I N 0 O C Q Cn w Sr O R m u � o 0 � ���uuuu IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII uu ii P rl 4. 1 goo ui ° ' yiV�'Nr1E�tll u Q Q o m c C U 0 O y I I r YYY � f I � U e ^ r, i f b I i r �1 .r f i i 1 , K t Proposed Expansion Properties on Upper Sugarloaf v I 0 v c O a c v c v a v VI m x� v V) ro v v 0 Ln r-i z m o 0 f o1oo � m o rn L 00 00 ro rl Q NLU N cr-I y/} \ N y/? y/? y/? y/? Q NLu M O O O 00 NnQ cIt 00Z 00 It � 00 w N l0 Ol M `� l"0 O W Z � t c _0 W OO z x c w D v v 0 > O -0 E 2E > E = o Q O O a v V a m a c-I M M c-I N l0 c-I N c-I VI N M cI (9 N N I i N N LU C _ � (9 N C 1 o on o a, E � E w w a, ° J Q } m O oC uuolltmr y '(G ul uuuulluuu ' �� I�r,ri ! rya � N 1; uuuumluuuuu uu I r//��„xu r' � "0 „r�,,,�, rl� ris f„t✓ i,��( a lei �HHir r %%/r u ' r r —"'^�'" + /IJ,✓ rr� /%�c, ' J� ✓r�ef��j% ' H/ (dJ�r�1,.. l//ajy. ; ��I� r... loll„' lr: I ��. n ��,; ,,,,�' /✓s-h i uar "lild�� r �I I Blue & Yellow dotted Dull ` II III °61 r1� /phi areas were not included �� 1 � in January 2013 but are proposed for inclusion in �I u 2015s u I I rl PIII!I'VIIII II uul�l ,lip j I ul r /��, ��%'���/,��� � f /�r�r� /, ✓ lei,„� ��% r .,',,,," i���,,/, -ram J ���� � '%/",�i///�f � r ,f✓� „ /,,, r ,.�, 1 ,�..— � I�.. rWb,, 4';' %r VMS A ullll 11 Jd I s� ,.,., l i',, s, � f i�ji /iir�//✓r//r/„'���i�t�, ;;,�/�rrf"r � ��/�i�'=;,,'r,; ///// p� �„ ,,, �� ���✓�ri% ',,, /i ri r �'��r �r x r ri i �rr�l�f9",r ' �'li, r ,/� ,, r r<,�r/ �I Vi j✓/l r%r�,C, fii% �'.', � �i I�f�,M.ri/ ,,,< /r,,. /l� 1✓ / iY / r �,n, ��,�y,,,,,,,,, ..�i �ru�v,a✓s.l i('i('r�t;r���(��d� � ,,,r„�(rld�„r,�0,t,� Ir, ,,(�„ «., c„ FloridaKeys i' Prepared by: FLORIDA KEYS, Aqueduct Authority 1100 Kennedy Drive (CENTRAL CUDJiOE RELIC Key west,Florida 33040 Joshua W. Peeie IUiPP R i Telephone(305)z -2454 Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority rwn+w a mm ± IIIIIIIIIIIII i I I'" uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumuuuuuu!!IIIIIIIIIIIII � m Q � � m — Q � � o m o O O U N q III � Ul •L N (6 (6 Q 0 Ld O N 'O Q n z — Q N R _ _ tI L I d I h 4 � � IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJ I Yy I I � I.. Iu IIII' � ,III i IVII ' OOOOOOOOuu I f J NI I IIIIIII� I I r /�/�J�/9lr li� �///ri//1/jr✓�� I��� l // // //r//a/ JI/ � T � rl r� ���//�y ,r,l+ f,<` /�i/<./. �%%i/�Ili//i//✓�/�/�/%/�j/�/ii�>r/io/f j�i%/ , iii !�i �+ , i I 4 , Proposed Expansion Properties on Summerland (Niles Road) v I 0 v c O a c v c v a v VI m x� v V) ro v v 0 Ln r-i z m o 0 f o1oo � m o rn L 00 00 ro rl Q NLU N cr-I y/} \ N y/? y/? y/? y/? Q NLu M O O O 00 NnQ cIt 00Z 00 It � 00 w N l0 Ol M `� l"0 O W Z � t c _0 W OO z x c w D v v 0 > O -0 E 2E > E = o Q O O a v V a m a c-I M M c-I N l0 c-I N c-I VI N M cI (9 N N I i N N LU C _ � (9 N C 1 o on o a, E � E w w a, ° J Q } m O oC uuolltmr y '(G ul uuuulluuu ' �� I�r,ri ! rya � N 1; uuuumluuuuu uu I r//��„xu r' � "0 „r�,,,�, rl� ris f„t✓ i,��( a lei �HHir r %%/r u ' r r —"'^�'" + /IJ,✓ rr� /%�c, ' J� ✓r�ef��j% ' H/ (dJ�r�1,.. l//ajy. ; ��I� r... loll„' lr: I ��. n ��,; ,,,,�' /✓s-h i uar "lild�� r �I I Blue & Yellow dotted Dull ` II III °61 r1� /phi areas were not included �� 1 � in January 2013 but are proposed for inclusion in �I u 2015s u I I rl PIII!I'VIIII II uul�l ,lip j I ul r /��, ��%'���/,��� � f /�r�r� /, ✓ lei,„� ��% r .,',,,," i���,,/, -ram J ���� � '%/",�i///�f � r ,f✓� „ /,,, r ,.�, 1 ,�..— � I�.. rWb,, 4';' %r VMS A ullll 11 Jd I s� ,.,., l i',, s, � f i�ji /iir�//✓r//r/„'���i�t�, ;;,�/�rrf"r � ��/�i�'=;,,'r,; ///// p� �„ ,,, �� ���✓�ri% ',,, /i ri r �'��r �r x r ri i �rr�l�f9",r ' �'li, r ,/� ,, r r<,�r/ �I Vi j✓/l r%r�,C, fii% �'.', � �i I�f�,M.ri/ ,,,< /r,,. /l� 1✓ / iY / r �,n, ��,�y,,,,,,,,, ..�i �ru�v,a✓s.l i('i('r�t;r���(��d� � ,,,r„�(rld�„r,�0,t,� Ir, ,,(�„ «., c„ FloridaKeys i' Prepared by: FLORIDA KEYS, Aqueduct Authority 1100 Kennedy Drive (CENTRAL CUDJiOE RELIC Key west,Florida 33040 Joshua W. Peeie IUiPP R i Telephone(305)z -2454 Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority rwn+w a mm ± IIIIIIIIIIIII i I I'" uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumuuuuuu!!IIIIIIIIIIIII � m Q � � m — Q � � o m o O O U N q III � Ul •L N (6 (6 Q 0 Ld O N 'O Q n z — Q N R _ _ tI L I d I h 4 � � IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJ I Yy I I � I.. Iu IIII' � ,III i IVII ' OOOOOOOOuu I f J NI I IIIIIII� I I r /�/�J�/9lr li� �///ri//1/jr✓�� I��� l // // //r//a/ JI/ � T � rl r� ���//�y ,r,l+ f,<` /�i/<./. �%%i/�Ili//i//✓�/�/�/%/�j/�/ii�>r/io/f j�i%/ , iii !�i �+ , i I 4 , V) v o Ln z r' 0 N aJ D C � 7 W � N cro OM c U O O ro ~ ro DO xx fa O LU c -a i Q a a) p x � W N aJ E o O a Vf w Q D o a W a r/ MINE O O i� -O O CO Q Q U y C Q a > u (n R z ~ Q N O , r1 1 � 1 � r 1 arc r r r r //ii II >y f ,CL 0 IIIIII ii i�uV ��IIII ii.�'mI i "N"l�p�l,l 4�11'�h m muuuu utllll W _ n a) c o i N 2 u m 0 -0 o N O_ CL fl'N y -co: , L C �I O U w � m m � o n o P I , }/ r . I, yk .a r �u 1 /Ot, -11�rl RIM r / /ii%/li%///i/gyp%i%% / Ur � i i %l,✓ r N i Record Box 430932 Big Pine Key, FL 33043 June 10, 2015 Board of County Commissioners, 'Monroe County, FL Re: June 10, 2015 BOCC Agenda item J1 Greetings: This is written as a concerned resident of the Cudjoe Regional Wastewater System (CRWS) service area. The June 10t' BOCC meeting Agenda item "J1" proposes to extend an already overextended sewer system to collect wastewater from homes that in some cases have no commercial electricity and no FKAA water. That is Irresponsible at best and here is why: A. The treatment plant on Cudjoe Key does not have sufficient capacity to treat the total of expected daily flows from existpermits. To add additional properties Is a violation of 62- 600.405 F.A.C. and increases the near certainty that the plant will be unable to adequately treat the Incoming wastewater. The DEP expressed in writing that they doubted that the plant was capable of adequately treating more than 0.84 mgd (million gallons per day) based on their experience and the sizing of the treatment tanks in Cudjoe. Current collection system permits total 1,301,537 average gallons per day or 1.3 mgd. Correcting for what appears to be an obvious engineer's blunder on the Summerland permit, the average daily flow currently. expected and permitted reduces to 1.07 mgd. See notes 1 and 2 for additional concerns about inadequate capacity- not only. of the plant but of the entire collection system. B. If a property does not have commercial power connected, it is highly unlikely that their alternative power system will be able to handle the very high starting current of an E-One grinder pump, or any grinder pump for that matter. Published misinformation, reportedly from FKAA, has supposedly addressed this concern by saying that a 120 volt pump will be used instead of the 240 volt pump typically used. What they did not say was that the power consumption and horsepower Is the same for both pumps. So a 120 volt pump must draw twice the current of a 240 volt pump to produce the same one horsepower (in a perfect world where losses are identical). That represents an intolerable load for most alternative energy sources. See (dote 4 for additional concerns. C. When one is getting all their water from a cistern, conservation is normally imperative. Consequently, wastewater generation is lower than might be expected elsewhere, and likewise the potential for nutrient loading is also reduced. FKAA uses an unreasonably high (punitive?) flat sewer rate for cistern properties (5,300 gals/mo or 174 gpd per FKAA Rules 48-107.007) since the water is not metered. In other words, they bill for water that Is not likely used and not likely treated. Hence, their eagerness to connect these properties to central sewer treatment. Is FKAA about public service and environmental protection or about maximizing profitJike Dow or Monsanto? The current edition of the Florida Water Resources Journal includes an engineering report from Hazen and Sawyer Engineering in Tampa where they accomplished AWT by simply adding a bio-filter to a conventional septic tank. There Is no need for expensive, energy intensive solutions. So far as the power situation is concerned, the solution is simple: put the grinder pump in the public right of way or in the preexisting road and utility easement where they should be. Let FKAA power them just as they power pumping equipment for every house on conventional gravity or vacuum sewer collection. If there Is no commercial power in the vicinity, their solution will be interesting. Let's see how many solar cells and batteries it takes to maintain sewer service through stormy weather. There are better ways to accomplish nutrient reduction. Notably, none of them require increasing the sales of E-One grinder pumps. I strongly recommend that you do not approve further over extension of the CRWS. Sincerely, John Prosser Notes: 1. The plant -was permitted at 0.84 mgd average daily flow based on a draft technical report. Two days after the permit application was submitted, the final technical report was issued by the consulting engineers that said to expect 1.06 mgd, but the DEP was riot informed by FKAA of the final numbers. This was before the addition of numerous "warm and cold spots" to the already overloaded plant and design changes that are likely to increase infiltration. 2. The permits assumed daily water use for most residences at much lower than the 167 gpd for one EDU. In northern Little torch, the permit assumed only92 gpd for mobile homes. If the system is designed to handle less than 1 EDU per home, then why is every dwelling unit paying for a full EDU? If the character of a neighborhood changes to one of higher use and the system is designed around an unreasonably low use assumption, then where does the extra sewage go that was not accommodated in the original design? Also, the permits assumed that all of the inner islands use 40% of metered water for outside use such as irrigation and car washing, which Is ridiculous, and that overall about 30% of all CRWS water goes to irrigation which is equally ridiculous. 3. The technical -memorandum that calculated expected flow from each Island used commercial EDU values that are in some cases obviously incorrect. For example, one does not need to live here to know that 1 EDU for a bar and grill is unreasonable. That is especially true for a very busy bar and grill such as this particular one. 4. A capacitor start motor such as E-One's may be expected to draw 4 to 5 times normal running current at start-up. It may draw more If it was in the middle of chopping something up when it last stopped. (The locked -rotor" current draw of a 240 volt E-one grinder is 30.4 amps.) Pumping clean water against light resistance, the E-One draws about b amps running on 240 volts. Hence the requirement for a 30 amp 240 volt circuit. That Is a brutal. surge for an inverter that might be providing normal household current from a solar or wind charged battery bank. At 120 volts, the current draw and power surge. Is roughly doubled. Unlike with a conventional centrifugal -grinder pump where power consumption drops when unable to pump, the positive displacement E-One just tries harder- increasing both pressure and current draw. If resistance to pumping is excessive, the motor overheats and trips an internal thermal overload switch. The switch automatically resets. At 175 psi, the thermal overload switches off and on about every 30 seconds, and the repeated power surges may be expected to destroy a solid state power inverter. A grinder pump is simply not suitable for a typical alternative power supply. Where the property Is remote, the pump. has further to push the wastewater and more power is required. protecting the kegs Comments by Last Stand Board of County Commissioners Meeting Marathon, Florida June 10, 2015 Agenda Item J1 Last Stand applauds the BOCC and FKAA for considering the expansion of the Cudjoe Regional Wastewater system to include 42 properties on No Name Key and 57 properties on Middle and Big Torch Keys plus additional properties whose cost of service is comparable. Replacing the use of onsite systems with connections to a well designed centralized wastewater treatment plant will result in public health and environmental benefits and will certainly move us forward in achieving our goal of improving nearshore water quality in the Keys. Over the years, Last Stand has directed special attention to No Name Key. While some homes on No Name have hooked up to the conventional power grid recently, there are many others that have not. The water collection and power generation systems of these off -grid homes have been individually constructed, using a variety of designs and electrical components to provide water and electricity onsite. A committed group of homeowners on No Name Key fought many years to retain their right to power their homes using off -the -grid, environmentally -sound solar systems and to maintain the solar community character that had charmed them in the first place. We have learned that many of those homeowners, for whom maintenance of this off -the -grid lifestyle is a matter of great importance, have concerns that their off -the -grid power generating systems would not be compatible with the E/One grinder installations that are being used throughout the Cudjoe Regional system. We believe it's important that their special circumstances be taken into account early in the Cudjoe system expansion process. :/4� - Jgj kas,� sue, 4 PO Box 146, Key West, FL 33041-0146 www.last-stand.ore info@last-stand.ore