Castle Valley council approves NRCS funding agreement after detailed Q&A on costs, scope and timeline

Castle Valley’s town council voted Jan. 15 to approve entering into a funding agreement with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service to pursue grant and cost-share funding for flood repairs, including armor work around the main Castle Creek culvert and selected low-water crossings.

Council members and residents spent more than an hour questioning NRCS staff and the town’s consultant about what the grant would pay for, how reimbursements work, what the town must cover and the program’s timeline. The council’s discussion focused on the Castle Creek culvert at Castle Valley Drive, proposed armoring at Shafer Lane crossings and other sites identified in the project Damage Survey Report.

Nicole (NRCS staff) told the council that the sponsor does not have to advance the entire project cost at once, and that NRCS will reimburse the sponsor for eligible charges: “you don't have to pay that all at once. It can be paid in segments after services are rendered ... and then we will reimburse 75% of that back to you.” Kyle Wheeler (Natural Resources Conservation Service) elaborated that invoices and reimbursement requests can be submitted in segments during the project: “we don't do the full project and then get reimbursement.”

NRCS staff and the town’s consultant, Scoop Flannery of Jones DeMille, walked the council through how reimbursements are documented. The sponsor submits an itemized payment package (forms and receipts) and NRCS pays its share against actual eligible expenditures. NRCS staff clarified two buckets of funding: technical assistance (engineering, surveying and contract administration) may be covered up to 100% (NRCS noted a formula tied to total construction cost and cited a 9.75% figure for contract administration/management in the packet), while construction costs are eligible for cost‑share up to 75% depending on item eligibility.

Several items the council raised are ineligible or must be carefully budgeted. NRCS staff said they will not pay for certain transportation facility elements or for the driving surface of low-water crossings. On the box culvert planned at the Castle Creek crossing, Kyle Wheeler said NRCS would likely not pay for engineering and construction of the culvert itself: “it's likely that you'll need engineering for the box culvert, but that we will only cover the engineering required for the armoring.” The council repeatedly asked whether the armoring work would require the town to finance the culvert installation and staff answered that the sponsor is responsible for ineligible components and for permits and rights-of-way.

On scope and phasing, NRCS staff stressed the town can narrow the scope and is not required to spend the full budgeted amount in the statement of work: the town may choose to proceed with only the highest-priority sites. NRCS staff recommended keeping the awarded funds in place rather than reducing the requested amount before signing, because funds are limited and can be returned if the town later decides not to use them. Council members voiced caution about committing to large cost shares they may not be able to finance; one council member said the town’s capital road balance is limited and that signing a contract for the full estimated amount would feel like a commitment they might not be able to meet.

Timing and deadlines were a persistent concern. NRCS staff said the awarded work has an approximate 220‑day completion window tied to the program schedule (the meeting record included a target date cited by NRCS staff of July 11). NRCS staff also said reimbursements typically are processed quickly once submitted—often within about 10–12 business days—but acknowledged occasional delays. The council asked whether procurement, contractor selection and payment timing could fit within the 220 days; NRCS and the consultant recommended narrowing priorities early and obtaining preliminary cost estimates before investing in full design.

NRCS staff explained how in‑kind contributions and cost‑shareable administrative tasks are handled: some administrative and contract‑management tasks can count as in‑kind match, but permits, land-rights work and certain sponsor responsibilities are not eligible. NRCS staff said these match items are typically defined in the statement of work and agreed in writing before construction.

The council received several technical clarifications: revegetation of disturbed areas is typically part of construction specifications and NRCS staff said seeding/restoration is usually included when feasible; procurement documents and contractor procurement assistance can be part of technical assistance but sponsors retain final selection authority and must follow their own procurement rules; and NRCS monitoring of percent-complete and line‑item invoices is used in reimbursement packages.

After the question-and-answer period, the council voted to approve moving forward with the NRCS agreement and to schedule follow-up meetings with NRCS staff and the town consultant to refine the priority list and obtain preliminary cost estimates. Council members asked NRCS and the consultant to do a field visit and provide more specific, segmented cost estimates for each priority location before the council commits to construction contracts.

What happens next: the town will continue coordination with NRCS staff (Nicole and Kyle) and with Jones DeMille (Scoop Flannery) to refine scope, cost estimates and a procurement plan. Council members signaled they want to prioritize the Castle Creek culvert armoring and a limited set of crossings that secure egress from the community, while avoiding large upfront engineering costs for work the council may later decline.

The council vote to approve pursuing the NRCS funding agreement was recorded during the Jan. 15 meeting; council members instructed staff to set separate meetings and a field visit with NRCS and the consultant to develop prioritized, costed options for council review.