Spec_Vol_3_W912PL-12-R-0018.pdf

FINAL RFP SUBMITTAL

SOLICITATION NO: W912PL-12-R-0018

P2 PROJECT NO: 352304

SPECIFICATIONS FILE NO: 1858

CADD NO: MB11YL58

VOLUME 3 OF 17

SPECIFICATIONS

FOR

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF

WATER TREATMENT AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

FORT IRWIN, CALIFORNIA

(SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY)

“BUILDING STRONG”

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, LOS ANGELES

911 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90017

Sacramento District

FY12 WATER TREATMENT AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM SPECIFICATION NO.: 1858

FT. IRWIN, CA

Table of Contents Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

VOLUME 1 OF 17

BIDDING REQUIREMENTS

STANDARD FORM 1442 – SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD

BIDDING SCHEDULE

EXPLANATION OF BID ITEMS

ATTACHMENT 1 TO EXPLANATION OF BID ITEMS: GE PROPOSAL, TERMS, AND

CONDITIONS

00 00 10 CERTIFICATE OF CORPORATE PRINCIPAL

00 01 00 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEREORS

00 01 10 PERFORMANCE/TECHNICAL-PRICE TRADE-OFF BEST VALUE

00 01 20 PERFORMANCE-PRICE TRADE-OFF BEST VALUE

00 06 00 REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

00 07 00 CONTRACT CLAUSES

00 08 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

00 08 50 WAGE RATES

SPECIFICATIONS

DIVISION 01 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 00 00 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

PROJECT SIGNS

01 10 10 GENERAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

01 10 13 PLANT EQUIPMENT TESTING, FACILITY STARTUP AND COMMISSIONING

01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

ENGINEERING FORM 4025R

SUBMITTAL REGISTER

01 33 16 DESIGN AFTER AWARD, GENERAL

01 42 00 REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS

01 45 00.00 QUALITY CONTROL

01 45 00.10 QUALITY CONTROOL SYSTEM (QCS)

01 78 00 CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS

DIVISION 31 - EARTHWORK

31 31 16 SOIL TREATMENT FOR SUBTERRANEAN TERMITE CONTROL

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND SUPPORTING FACILITIES

APPENDIX B - BICYCLE LAKE/IRWIN BASIN TRANSMISSION LINE

APPENDIX C - REPLACEMENT OF EXPIRED WATER PIPE – BID OPTION 1

APPENDIX D - WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION IMPROVEMENTS – BID OPTION 2

APPENDIX E - UPGRADES FOR IMPROVED FIRE FLOW – PHASE 1 – BID OPTION 3

APPENDIX F - CONNECT IRWIN WELLS – BID OPTION 4 AND 5

APPENDIX G - NEW WELL, LANGFORD LAKE – BID OPTION 6

APPENDIX H - REPAIR/REPLACE JPL-3 STORAGE TANK

APPENDIX I - REHABILITATE WATER STORAGE TANKS

Table of Contents Page 2

VOLUME 2 OF 17

APPENDICES

Appendix J - Environmental Assessment/Initial Study Appendix K - Fort Irwin Installation Design Guide

VOLUME 3 OF 17

APPENDICES

Appendix L - Comprehensive Energy & Water Masterplan, Fort Irwin, 27 April

Appendix M - Weather Data for Mechanical Design Appendix N - Well Data Appendix O - Southern California Edison (SCE) Savings By Design and Standard

Electrical Details Appendix P - COMM Standards, Army Networthiness Appendix Q - Geotechnical Reports and Survey

VOLUME 4 OF 17

Appendix Q - Geotechnical Reports and Survey: FIO (CONTINUED) Appendix R - Bench and Pilot Testing Investigations: FOR INFORMATION ONLY:

Fort Irwin Water Treatment Process Selection Based on Pilot Testing Results, CH2MHILL, February 2007, and Additional Bench Test Studies

VOLUME 5 OF 17

Appendix S - Ft. Irwin Water Supply Permit, Water Supply Engineering Report by CDHS (now CDPH), 2004, and Compliance Order No. 05-13-12CO-001 To US Army Fort Irwin For Arsenic And Fluoride MCL Exceedance (System No. 3610705)

Appendix T - FOR INFORMATION ONLY: Design Principles of Electrodialysis Reversal and Basis of Design of the Fort Irwin' Water Treatment Plant Technical Engineering Report CIP Project W4

Appendix U - FOR INFORMATION ONLY: DRAFT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM: Domestic (DO) Water System Hydraulic Model Update, Evaluation, and Required Improvements, dated September 30, 2011 by CH2M Hill

Appendix V - FOR INFORMATION ONLY: Engineer’s Report for Corrosion Engineering Evaluation of the 1.0 MG Welded Steel Water Storage Tank, Harper & Assoc. Engineering, Inc., December 2007: JPL-1 Report, JPL-2 Report, and JPL-3 Report

Appendix W - FOR INFORMATION ONLY: Fort Irwin CIP Project WI Investigation for the Combination of the DO and RO Water Systems, FIO:

Technical Memorandum: Fort Irwin – Bicycle Basin Pipe Spool Examination, and FIO: Draft Water System Master Plan Fort Irwin CIP Project W21

Table of Contents Page 3

VOLUMES 6 - 15 OF 17

APPENDIX

Appendix X - FOR INFORMATION ONLY: Fort Irwin Water Treatment Plant Capital

Improvement Plan – Project W4: Volumes 1 – 10

VOLUME 16 OF 17

APPENDIX

Appendix Y - Ft. Campbell/Ft. Irwin Water and Wastewater Design and

Construction Standards, April 2010, CH2M HILL Constructors, Inc.

VOLUME 17 OF 17

APPENDIX

Appendix Z - FOR INFORMATION ONLY: Fort Irwin, Bicycle Lake Water Main and

Water Line Connections – Project W11: Drawings and Specifications

End of Project Table of Contents

APPENDIX L

COMPREHENSIVE ENERGY & WATER MASTERPLAN,

FORT IRWIN, 27 APRIL 2010

Comprehensive Energy & Water Masterplan

Fort Irwin

100% Final Submittal 27 April 2010 United States Army Corps of Engineers Contract No:

W912DY-06-D-0007 T.O. 0012

Prepared by:

Avila Government Services, Inc. and AECOM

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

UNITED STATES ARMY GARRISON

FORT IRIWN AND THE NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER, CALIFORNIA

Letter from the Commander

This Comprehensive Energy and Water Master Plan (CEWMP) is an essential guide for managing our Installation’s utility infrastructure and master planning: providing strategies for energy and water efficiency, identifying alternative energy solutions, and ensuring energy and water security.

The CEWMP incorporates holistic and sustainable planning principles to promote environmental stewardship while reducing costs. This Plan is an invaluable resource for those of us tasked with maintaining our infrastructure, reducing the impact of energy and water consumption, and meeting current regulations.

Fort Irwin and the National Training Center are fully committed to this Plan and its ideology. It is vital to the success of our Installation that the CEWMP be maintained and implemented as we strive to achieve our vision, goals, and objectives, while seeking the support of leadership in the command chain. We are committed to using this Plan as a management tool when making decisions that impact the future of the Installation and its energy and water systems.

By working together to follow the CEWMP action plan, our Installation can exceed the Federal mandates for energy and water conservation, and enhance the quality of life at Fort Irwin

COL Jim Chevallier, Commander United States Army Garrison Fort Irwin, California 27 April 2010

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ..................................................................... i

1 Introduction ....................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Purpose and Background .......................................................................... 1‐1

1.1.1 Energy‐Related Mandates ........................................................................ 1‐2

1.1.2 Water‐Related Mandates .......................................................................... 1‐3

1.1.3 State Mandates ........................................................................................... 1‐4

1.2 Scope ............................................................................................................ 1‐5

1.3 Methodology ............................................................................................... 1‐5

1.4 1.4 Document Usage .................................................................................. 1‐7

1.4.1 Installation .................................................................................................. 1‐7

1.4.2 IMCOM ....................................................................................................... 1‐7

1.4.3 U.S. Department of Defense / Congressional Level .............................. 1‐7

1.5 Setting .......................................................................................................... 1‐8

1.5.1 Regional ...................................................................................................... 1‐9

1.5.2 Climate ...................................................................................................... 1‐10

1.5.3 Installation ................................................................................................ 1‐12

2 Mission + Vision ................................................................ 2-1

2.1 Mission ......................................................................................................... 2‐1

2.2 Energy and Water Vision .......................................................................... 2‐2

2.2.1 Strengths‐Weakness‐Opportunities‐Threats .......................................... 2‐2

2.2.2 Trend Analysis ........................................................................................... 2‐5

2.2.3 Energy and Water Vision Finalization .................................................... 2‐6

2.2.4 Implementing the Vision .......................................................................... 2‐6 ii· Fort Irwin · Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan

3 Energy + Water Profiles ................................................... 3-1

3.1 Energy Systems .......................................................................................... 3‐1

3.1.1 Electrical System ....................................................................................... 3‐3

3.1.2 Thermal Energy System ........................................................................... 3‐9

3.2 Water System ............................................................................................ 3‐13

3.2.1 Domestic Water System ......................................................................... 3‐13

3.2.2 Irrigation Water System ......................................................................... 3‐19

4 Action Plans + Future Focus ............................................ 4-1

4.1 Energy .......................................................................................................... 4‐2

4.1.1 Action Plans ............................................................................................... 4‐6

4.1.2 Future Focus ............................................................................................ 4‐12

4.2 Water .......................................................................................................... 4‐14

4.2.1 Action Plans ............................................................................................. 4‐20

Future Focus ......................................................................................................... 4‐23

5 Project Prioritization List .................................................. 5-1

5.1 Risk‐Benefit Scoring ................................................................................... 5‐1

5.1.1 Benefit Assessment Questions ................................................................. 5‐1

5.1.2 Risk Assessment Questions ..................................................................... 5‐2

5.2 Energy Projects ........................................................................................... 5‐3

5.3 Water Projects ............................................................................................. 5‐4

6 Appendices ........................................................................ 6-1

6.1 Acknowledgements ................................................................................... 6‐2

6.2 Points of Contact ........................................................................................ 6‐3

6.3 Methodology............................................................................................... 6‐4

6.3.1 Team Composition .................................................................................... 6‐4

6.3.2 Process ........................................................................................................ 6‐5

6.3.3 Product Development .............................................................................. 6‐6

6.4 References & Data Sources ....................................................................... 6‐7

6.4.1 Government Furnished Information ...................................................... 6‐7

6.4.2 Workshop Agenda + Meeting Notes ...................................................... 6‐8

6.4.3 Interview Notes ....................................................................................... 6‐53

6.4.4 Risk / Benefit Analysis .......................................................................... 6‐101

6.5 Glossary (Acronyms + Abbreviations) ................................................ 6‐137

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Energy Policy Act 2005 .................................................................................. 1‐2

Table 2: Energy Independence and Security Act 2007 ............................................. 1‐2

Table 3: Executive Order #13423 (energy) ................................................................. 1‐2

Table 4: National Defense Authorization Act 2007 .................................................. 1‐3

Table 5: Executive Orders #13423 and #13514 (water) ............................................. 1‐3

Table 6: California Assembly Bill 1881 ....................................................................... 1‐4

Table 7: Average Monthly Temperatures ................................................................ 1‐10

Table 8: Energy Consumption by Source ................................................................... 3‐1

Table 9: Historical Energy Consumption per Unit Building GFA ......................... 3‐4

Table 10: Absolute Thermal Energy Consumption .................................................. 3‐10

Table 11: Average Rainfall (Fort Irwin Basin) ........................................................... 3‐15

Table 12: Outdoor Water Use Reduction Strategy 1 /

Table 13: Outdoor Water Use Reduction Strategy 2 ................................ 3‐21

Table 14: Energy Mandate Progress to Date ................................................................ 4‐2

Table 15: Project List and Assessment Summary (energy) ........................................ 4‐3

Table 16: Federal Mandate Matrix (energy) ................................................................ 4‐4

Table 17: Executive Order #13423 ............................................................................... 4‐14

Table 18: Executive Order #13514 ............................................................................... 4‐14

Table 19: Project List and Assessment Summary (water) ........................................ 4‐17

Table 20: Federal Mandate Matrix (water) ................................................................ 4‐18

Table 21: Proposed Project Prioritization (energy) ..................................................... 5‐3

Table 22: Proposed Project Prioritization (water) ....................................................... 5‐4 iv· Fort Irwin · Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan

This page left intentionally blank.

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · v

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Overall Objectives .......................................................................................... 1‐5

Figure 2: CEWMP Process Diagram ............................................................................. 1‐6

Figure 3: Regional Context Map ................................................................................... 1‐8

Figure 4: IMCOM Regions ............................................................................................. 1‐9

Figure 5: Fort Irwin Post Map ..................................................................................... 1‐11

Figure 6: Fort Irwin Demographic, Land Use + Facility Highlights ...................... 1‐13

Figure 7: SWOT Methodology ...................................................................................... 2‐2

Figure 8: Energy SWOT Analysis ................................................................................. 2‐3

Figure 9: Water SWOT Analysis ................................................................................... 2‐4

Figure 10: Historical Energy Consumption per Unit Building GFA ......................... 3‐2

Figure 11: Historical Electricy Consumption ................................................................ 3‐4

Figure 12: Historical LPG Consumption ..................................................................... 3‐11

Figure 13: Fort Irwin Water System Supply Well Map.............................................. 3‐14

Figure 14: Average Monthly Precipitation (Fort Irwin Basin) .................................. 3‐16

Figure 15: Average Annual Precipitation (Fort Irwin) .............................................. 3‐16

Figure 16: Annual Water Use ........................................................................................ 3‐17

Figure 17: Annual Water Use Intensity ........................................................................ 3‐18

Figure 18: Domestic Water Consumption Intensity ................................................... 4‐15

Figure 19: Water Reduction Mandate .......................................................................... 4‐16

Figure 20: Project Scorecard (example) .......................................................................... 5‐2 vi· Fort Irwin · Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan

This page left intentionally blank.

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · vii

Executive Summary

The Comprehensive Energy and Water Master Plan (CEWMP) serves as a comprehensive roadmap for how the National Training Center and Fort Irwin (Fort

Irwin) will meet and/or exceed the current Federal mandates for energy and water use. The Plan provides strategic project guidance through awareness, measurement, efficiency, and control of supply and distribution, while establishing environmental stewardship. Overall, the CEWMP establishes a long‐range vision for the Installation and the shorter‐term actions needed to attain its related goals. The complete CEWMP provides greater detail on the Federal mandate requirements and proposed solutions for Fort Irwin.

VISION + GOALS

Energy + Water Vision Statement The consultant team worked with Fort Irwin’s key stakeholders to develop the following vision statement, based on the Installation’s goals for energy and water:

The National Training Center and Fort Irwin seek to become a self sustaining

Installation that meets its mission while:

Exceeding energy and water Federal mandates

Showcasing new technologies and best practices in conservation and generation

Integrating environmental stewardship

Enhancing quality of life

Goals of CEWMP The CEWMP outlines sustainable methods for meeting the following Federal mandates for energy and water conservation (within the specified timeframes):

Energy Policy Act of 2005

Fort Irwin is located on 763,000-acres of high / remote Mojave Desert, equidistant between Los Angeles and Las Vegas.

The main gate is almost 40 miles northeast of Interstate 40 and the closest city, Barstow (24,000 residents and $37K median income).

The extreme, mountainous climate averages 4” of rainfall and temperature ranges between 27–112°F.

The average daytime population on the 14,000-acre cantonment is 23,000 (5,000 active duty soldiers, 7,500 family members, 5,600 civilians, and 4,000–6,000 rotational personnel).

There are 1,800 military housing units (barracks) and 2,500 family housing units (many single-family).

viii· Fort Irwin · Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan

Executive Orders 13423 and 13514

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) 2007

BASELINE CONDITION AND DIRECTION

Energy and water use trends at Fort Irwin were assessed and compared to the various Federal mandate requirements, in order to understand the Installation’s baseline situation and whether they are on track to meet the targets within the specified timelines.

Energy Fort Irwin’s current energy use, trends, and progress towards compliance have been derived from Army Energy and Water Reporting System (AEWRS) data, and are shown below.

Progress towards Energy Compliance

As shown in Figure A, Fort Irwin is currently consuming over 70% more energy per unit building gross square footage than the current (FY10) Federal energy reduction targets. In order to comply with the FY15 energy reduction target, Fort Irwin has to reduce its energy consumption intensity by 52% (57.2 MBtu/kSF) in the next six years. In terms of renewable energy targets, Fort Irwin must establish an electrical supply from renewable sources for 5% (~17,000 MBtu) of its power demand by FY10 and 7.5% (~25,600 MBtu) by FY13.

FIGURE A: HISTORICAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION PER UNIT BUILDING GFA

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · ix

Table A summarizes the progress that Fort Irwin has made to date toward meeting the energy reduction and renewable source targets set by these Federal mandates.

REQUIREMENT BASELINE TARGET

FY08

CONSUMPTION

CHANGE

CHANGE

REQUIRED TO

MEET TARGET

Reduction of energy‐consumption intensity (MBtu/kSF) by 3% annually and 30% by FY15

(EO 13423, EISA 2007)

76.6 (FY03)

62.4 (FY10)

52.9 (FY15)

108.6 +43%

(FY03‐08)

‐51.9% (FY15)

Renewable supply of electricity not less than 3% of demand in FY07‐09, 5% in FY10–12, and 7.5% in FY13 and beyond (EPAct 2005)

5% (FY10)

7.5% (FY13)

~0% 0

+5% (FY10)

+7.5% (FY13)

50% of renewable electrical energy (EPAct 2005 target) from sources established after 1 Jan 1999

(EO 13423)

2.5% (FY10)

3.75%

(FY13)

~0% 0

+2.5% (FY10)

+3.75% (FY13)

Energy Trends

The following energy trends were developed both during and following the Fort

Irwin Visioning session, based on interviews, site surveys, and analysis:

Energy use intensity increased year to year from FY03–09, despite a requirement to reduce energy use intensity by 15% during this same period.

This increase may be leveling off due to recent energy conservation efforts.

Fort Irwin’s Department of Public Works (DPW) personnel are working to reduce consumption and embrace more sustainable practices and renewable energy resources, despite budgetary and staffing constraints.

The proposed Enhanced Use Lease (EUL) solar photovoltaic (PV) farm (20 mega watts (MW) PV field adjacent to the main entrance) could significantly offset proportional energy intensity and help Fort Irwin meet the requirements for renewable energy production.

ESPCs are good ways to cost effectively reduce energy consumption, but must be monitored and validated to recognize projected energy savings.

Temporary and modular buildings are ‘energy hogs,’ increasingly inefficient over time. A number of the barracks buildings are also high energy users, with ongoing operations and maintenance issues.

Large numbers of rotational soldiers pass through Fort Irwin and decrease the effectiveness of energy education and outreach programs.

TABLE A: ENERGY MANDATE PROGRESS TO DATE

x· Fort Irwin · Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan

Water The current water use, progress towards compliance, and water trends for Fort Irwin are presented below.

Progress towards Water Compliance

Since 2002, Fort Irwin has used an average of 860M gallons of water annually. The domestic water use for purposes of this study (less the 45% used for privatized housing) is approximately 450M gallons. Water use fluctuates in part due to the large numbers of personnel that visit the Installation on training rotations. Meter readings for some months within this study period were not provided. Additional water data is needed to more accurately define the required volume and intensity of water conservation measures to meet the Federal mandates. Figure B shows a trend analysis of the water use intensity at Fort Irwin from 2001 to 2009, and how it relates to the required 2% per year reduction from 2007 to 2020.

Figure C provides a trend analysis of the required water use reduction rather than an extensive quantitative analysis, since the definition of building area included in these water use intensity calculations is still somewhat vague as it pertains to Army base

Installations and the visiting troops that rotate through on an annual basis.

FIGURE B: DOMESTIC WATER USE INTENSITY

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · xi

Tables B and C summarizes the progress that Fort Irwin has made to date toward meeting the water reduction targets set by the Federal mandates.

FIGURE C: WATER USE AND REDUCTION MANDATE

TABLE B: WATER PROGRESS TO DATE (EXECUTIVE ORDER #13423)

TABLE C: WATER PROGRESS TO DATE (EXECUTIVE ORDER #13514)

xii· Fort Irwin · Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan

Water Trends:

The following water trends were developed both during and following the Fort

Irwin Visioning session, based on interviews, site surveys, and analysis:

Domestic water use has been fairly consistent over the past 8 years, with an overall average annual water use of 860M gallons per year. However, if the privatized housing water demand is removed (as with the analysis shown in C

3), then the average annual water demand for the military Installation is closer to 450M gallons per year.

Domestic water use intensity has fluctuated with the removal and addition of buildings; however, the average intensity from 2004 to 2009 was approximately 120 gallons/square foot (SF).

According to the Ground Water Hydrology report prepared by the United

States Geological Survey (USGS) in 1997, the underground water supply is not being replenished as fast as it is being used, resulting in a reduction of available water. The report estimates that the water table under Fort Irwin has seen a 30 foot decline between 1941 and 1995 from the zone of influence under the well fields, but that the aquifer water table will slow or stabilize its decline if water pumping is reduced and effluent recharge is maintained.1 Note: It is recommended that Fort Irwin prepare a detailed report and analysis of the current water use and changes in groundwater since the USGS report was completed in 1997.

This report estimates that the water table under Fort Irwin has seen a

30 foot decline between 1941 and 1995 from the zone of influence under the well fields.

According to a previous water study completed in 1989, the underground water levels were estimated to be “critically deep” at some point between

2011 and 2020.

S-W-O-T Analysis Also during the Visioning Workshop, the consultant team worked with Fort Irwin to complete a Strengths‐Weaknesses‐Opportunities‐Threats (SWOT) analysis for the

Installation’s energy and water situation. For the CEWMP, strengths and weaknesses are partially defined as existing conditions, while opportunities and threats are defined as future conditions.

The following two pages highlight the SWOT components for energy (Figure D) and water (Figure E) in two separate graphics. These discussions and determinations helped focus the development of energy and water projects that would capitalize on

Fort Irwin’s opportunities and minimize the occurrence of the potential threats.

1 Groundwater Hydrology and Water Quality Report for the Fort Irwin Basin, Fort Irwin National

Training Center, California, 1997, page 1, Introduction.

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · xiii

FIGURE D: ENERGY SWOT ANALYSIS

xiv· Fort Irwin · Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan

FIGURE E: WATER SWOT ANALYSIS

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · xv

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The consultant team worked with Fort Irwin’s key stakeholders throughout the

CEWMP process to identify 22 energy and 13 water projects that provide a positive net benefit to meeting the Federal mandates when taking benefits, effectiveness, and risks into consideration. Several projects have cross‐over benefits for both energy and water, such as green procurement. Based on available data, best practice experience, and further analysis, these projects were categorized as short‐, mid‐, or long‐term efforts (see Tables D and E). The projects deemed feasible and essential for the short‐ term at Fort Irwin (next 0–2 years) are presented below; a complete listing and more‐ detailed discussion of all of the proposed projects may be found in Chapter 4, including the 7 energy and 8 water projects already underway at Fort Irwin.

Energy Projects (short term) The following energy projects (discrete action‐oriented projects and policy related efforts), highlighted from the complete project list shown on page xviii, are recommended for implementation at Fort Irwin within the next two years and will contribute significantly to meeting the Federal energy mandates:

(A) Comprehensive electricity metering

EPAct 2005 requires that all buildings are individually metered for electricity by FY12. Meter data is also an essential tool for DPW to prioritize efficiency projects and reduce energy consumption installation wide.

(F) Delamping program

Substantial energy savings could be achieved for little or no cost (without impeding indoor environmental quality) through the de‐lamping of fixtures that currently have lighting levels and power densities in excess of current code recommendations.

(N) Energy equipment inventory

An energy equipment inventory should be developed in order to understand the efficiency and age of the Installation’s HVAC and other systems. This information is critical for determining which equipment is most in need of upgrade or replacement, and for overall strategic energy planning.

(P) Green procurement

Initiating a green procurement policy would ensure that best‐of‐market materials are selected when equipment needs to be replaced / upgraded, creating tangible energy reductions over time. Consideration should also be given for implementing and expanding a set of minimum equipment performance standards as defined in the Savings by Design incentive program.

xvi· Fort Irwin · Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan

(Q) IT / computer use strategy

Changing the current IT policy so that computers are NOT left on overnight could save significant amounts of energy, with zero capital cost. Software updates could instead occur in the morning when the computer is switched on with little staff interruption.

(S) Year‐long “operation blackout” (energy policy / cop)

As Fort Irwin’s ʺOperation Battle Blackoutʺ was a success, with significant energy savings achieved over the course of the program, the program should be extended to a year‐round program to garner further energy savings at a minimal up‐front cost to the Installation.

(T) Enforcement AND groundtruthing

Hotline call‐in / email in abuse / overuse / spot checking by staff

In order to facilitate energy use “policing” that reports and therefore minimizes energy wastage, an energy hotline or email address should be established where energy abuse could be anonymously reported.

(U) Sustainability education program (and training)

An installation‐wide energy awareness program should be developed to influence and change the behaviors of residents and workers regarding energy and water use.

Water Projects (short term) As with energy, the following water projects (discrete action‐oriented projects and policy related efforts), highlighted from the complete project list shown on page xix, are recommended for implementation at Fort Irwin within the next two years to make significant progress in meeting the Federal water mandates:

(E) Auto shut off irrigation valves (installation)

Master valves and flow sensor capable irrigation controllers will enable any leaks or breaks to be detected and isolated to reduce water loss.

(F) Reworked chlorination injection and water mixing for existing water storage tanks

The location of the water supply in the water holding tanks should be modified to promote better mixing, reduce the need for flushing additional water, and to maintain safe bacteria levels in the water distribution system.

(H) Water restrictions mandate enforcement

Water use and development guidelines should be established, in order to define best water use practices, such as irrigation and planting materials.

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · xvii

(J) Green procurement

Like energy, Fort Irwin should create an equipment standards policy to ensure the quality and efficiency of new / upgraded infrastructure components, fixtures, etc. for water.

(K) Water conservation education program

An education program should be developed that provides literature and information on the importance of efficient water use; this effort can coordinate with energy.

(L) Sustainability education program (and training)

The overall knowledge and awareness of sustainable practices is a key element in creating a major shift in the way water is used by all personnel and their families on the Installation, especially for staff and management.

(M) Organized friendly competition

Once all of the facilities are metered, competitions (and associated rewards systems) should be established between departments to challenge staff to reduce their water use intensity.

Project Prioritization Proposed projects have been prioritized based on a series of discussion and factors

(shown in Tables D and E): three feasibility questions, and a Federal Mandate Matrix that indicates which mandates each project is assumed to meet or address if implemented, critical discussion and input from the installation, and benefit‐risk scores gleaned from the project attractiveness scorecards (see Chapter 5 and

Appendix E3).

In some cases, the highest project rankings (prioritization) do not align with the higher benefit‐risk scores, because other factors weighed heavier or because a certain project was seen essential to ensuring other subsequent projects were feasible.

Projects that did not rank highest overall, but were evaluated as having a high probability of meeting the Federal mandate timelines and/or having a high potential magnitude of project‐related energy and water reductions should also be considered as valuable within the CEWMP framework.

Moving forward, Fort Irwin will need to conduct additional auditing, research, cost assessments, and funding strategies to make each project a reality. These energy and water project prioritization matrices are also intended as tools for the Army and

IMCOM to gain an understanding of the energy and water situation at Fort Irwin and detect trends across installations that may inform future urgent actions.

xviii· Fort Irwin · Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan

TABLE D: PROPOSED PROJECT PRIORITIZATION (ENERGY)

Comprehensive Energy & Water Master Plan · Fort Irwin · xix

TABLE E: PROPOSED PROJECT PRIORITIZATION (WATER)

CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction · Fort Irwin · 1-1

1 Introduction

The Comprehensive Energy and Water Master Plan (CEWMP) for the National

Training Center and Fort Irwin (Fort Irwin) outlines sustainable methods for reducing energy and water consumption to levels mandated by the Federal government within the required timeframes. It establishes a long‐range vision for the Installation, the goals upon which that vision is based, and the direction and potential actions needed to attain them.

1.1 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND

The CEWMP is directed by U.S. Army Installation Management Command

(IMCOM) and is designed to clarify the various provisions associated with the

Federal mandates, and assist Installations in achieving them, including:

Energy Policy Act of 2005

Executive Orders 13423 and 13514 (potable water consumption intensity reduction of 2% per year to 2016 and 2020 respectively)

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) 2007

The CEWMP also intends to address the recommendations provided by the following:

Army Energy and Water Campaign Plan (AEWCP) 2007

American National Standards Institute 2000 / Management System for

Energy 2005 (ANSI / MSE)

Overall, the CEWMP serves as a comprehensive roadmap for how Fort Irwin will meet and/or exceed the various provisions and mandates listed above, in part through awareness, measurement, efficiency, and control of supply and distribution, while establishing environmental stewardship as a fundamental principle.

1-2· Fort Irwin · CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1.1 Energy-Related Mandates

Requirements for energy supply at Federal agencies are addressed in different forms by Energy Policy Act (EPAct) 2005, Executive Order (EO) 13423, and Energy

Independence and Security Act (EISA) 2007. The requirements of each of these mandates are outlined in Tables 1–4 below:

TABLE 1: ENERGY POLICY ACT 2005

TABLE 3: EXECUTIVE ORDER #13423 (ENERGY)

TABLE 2: ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY ACT 2007

CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction · Fort Irwin · 1-3

1.1.2 Water-Related Mandates

As a Federal facility, Fort Irwin must comply with the recent Federal mandates

(Executive Orders) pertaining to water use reduction:

Executive Order #13423 (16% overall water consumption intensity reduction from 2007 baseline to 2015)

Executive Order #13514 (20% water consumption intensity reduction from 2010 baseline to 2020 and 20% water use reduction for agricultural, industrial, and irrigation water use)

As outlined in Table 5 below, Executive Order #13423 requires that overall water consumption intensity is reduced by 2% per year until Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 from a baseline year of FY07, for a total reduction of 16%. The Executive Order also requires that water reuse strategies be identified and promoted within the Installation.

Executive Order #13514 amends Executive Order #13423 by extending the annual water consumption intensity reduction period to FY20 and separating potable water use from other types of water use. These changes result in requirements to reduce potable water consumption intensity by 2% annually or 26% by the end of FY20 from baseline FY07 and to reduce industrial, landscaping, and agriculture water use by 2% annually or 20% by the end of FY20 from baseline FY10. This Executive

Order also requires that water reuse strategies be identified and promoted within the Installation.

TABLE 5: EXECUTIVE ORDERS #13423 AND #13514 (WATER)

TABLE 4: NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT 2007

1-4· Fort Irwin · CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1.3 State Mandates

For California‐based installations, such as Fort Irwin, the CEWMP also considers current State mandates. California Assembly Bill 1881, which took effect on 1 January

2010, requires water conservation on all new landscaping through efficient irrigation design and appropriate plant material selection. A summary of the key requirements for this Bill are listed in Table 6 to follow.

REQUIREMENT HOW THIS RELATES TO FORT IRWIN

This Bill is known as the Water Model Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) and became effective on 1 January 2010. This plan has specific details and provisions for planting and irrigation plans on new construction and rehabilitated landscapes with areas greater than 2,500 SF.

Minimize irrigation runoff This can be achieved through good design, Installation + management

Use of landscape water budgets Standardization of water use per land use and area

Appropriate plant use Use of native vegetation in appropriate locations to conserve water

Use of evapotranspiration (ET)* based controllers

These controllers use local and remote weather data to monitor and control the water supplied

Soil assessment and management The soil data is used by the ET controller to program the irrigation

Landscape maintenance plans The correct maintenance of landscaping can help to reduce the need for additional irrigation

Capture and reuse of stormwater The capture of stormwater is not applicable on site due to the limited amount available

Use of recycled water The use of reclaimed water or treated sewage effluent (TSE)** is already in place and will continue to reduce potable demand

Use of economic incentives Provide incentive like lower rates for less water use, and higher rates for more water use

Water use education The use of an education program is recommended to assist with efficient use of water on site

MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCES (MAWA)

ET adjustment factor of 0.7 New landscape and irrigation design + Installation requirements should be created and enforced

Minimum irrigation efficiency of 71% New landscape and irrigation design + Installation requirements should be created and enforced

No overhead irrigation on landscape islands less than 8 feet wide

New landscape and irrigation design + Installation requirements should be created and enforced

No overhead irrigation within 2 feet of any impervious surface

New landscape and irrigation design + Installation requirements should be created and enforced

*Evapotranspiration (ET) is a combination of evaporation and transpiration.

**Treated Sewage Effluent (TSE) is waste water that has been treated to a secondary / tertiary level (recycled) for further use, often in landscaping.

TABLE 6: CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY BILL 1881

CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction · Fort Irwin · 1-5

1.2 SCOPE

The CEWMP is an installation‐level assessment of on‐site energy and water management, and, as feasible, reflects the trends and profiles of energy and water use. As summarized in Figure 1, the overall objective of this effort is to provide a strategic‐level master plan that helps ensure the availability, affordability, security, and sustainability of an installation’s energy and water resources. In this, the CEWMP defines current energy and water profiles, reduction and modernization goals, and necessary and potential plans to meet those goals. This will include the optimization of existing energy and water systems, and future development.

Specifically, the CEWMP:

Assesses existing energy and water infrastructure

Focuses on building systems and infrastructure in order to address and improve sustainable goals

Fosters the ultimate goals of an enduring Army that is enabled by secure and sustainable operations, systems, and communities

Conveys a sustainability strategy for achieving compliance with the mandated energy and water reduction goals and promotes energy security through implementation

1.3 METHODOLOGY

Following discussions with the Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) Project Manager and the consultant team (experienced in this sort of complex and comprehensive effort), the CEWMP project process was devised, as outlined in Figure 2. By following this process methodology, the goals and intent of the CEWMP will be met for IMCOM, and the highest level of energy and water conservation support will be provided to each individual installation.

To the extent feasible, a similar 100‐working day process (as illustrated in Figure 2) will be executed for each installation to ensure the consistency needed for the USACE to determine high‐level trends and priorities. The process diagram highlights the key components of the comprehensive work scope (tasks, deliverables, milestones, and review periods), identifies participants and responsible parties, and indicates approximate timing durations and overall schedule.

FIGURE 1: OVERALL OBJECTIVES

1-6· Fort Irwin · CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction

1.4

FIGURE 2: CEWMP PROCESS DIAGRAM

CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction · Fort Irwin · 1-7

1.4 DOCUMENT USAGE

The CEWMP is anticipated to be used by the following major groups in the manners summarized below:

1.4.1 Installation

Guide project prioritization over the short‐ and long‐term

Advocate for behavioral changes on the installation (both personal and divisional)

Inform 1391 applications and other funding pursuits

1.4.2 IMCOM

Outline the energy and water situation (and current status in regards to

Federal mandates) for the individual installation

Allow cross‐installation comparisons

Identify trends and priorities across installations that could warrant larger top‐down funding

1.4.3 U.S. Department of Defense / Congressional Level

Provides clear / succinct information on individual Army Installations to specific congressional districts

Provides summary information on larger installation trends in regards to

Federal energy and water mandates

Illustrates opportunities and threats for meeting / exceeding the mandates on a larger scale

1-8· Fort Irwin · CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction

1.5 SETTING

Fort Irwin contains approximately 763,000 acres and is located in San Bernardino

County, CA (one of the 15 most populous counties in the U.S.), in the high and remote Mojave Desert of southeastern California. Originally a core of the State’s agricultural evolution, the overall region has transitioned to include industrial, commercial, and significant housing development (suburban sprawl) in response to the ever rising prices of the Los Angeles area to the west. Figure 3 shows Fort Irwin within the larger Southern California context.

IMAGES © County of San Bernardino 2010, Google 2009, and Digital Globe 2010; via GoogleEarth™

FIGURE 3: REGIONAL CONTEXT MAP

CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction · Fort Irwin · 1-9

1.5.1 Regional

Fort Irwin and San Bernardino County are part of California’s Inland Empire

Metropolitan Area, situated midway between Las Vegas and Los Angeles via

Interstates 15, and State Highways 58 and 247. The closest city to Fort Irwin is

Barstow, roughly 37 miles to its southwest. Figure 4 shows how Fort Irwin’s location sits within IMCOM’s western region, and in comparison to other installations throughout the U.S.

1.5.1.1 Population

Today, the Inland Empire Metropolitan Area contains over 4 million (M) people, and is the 2nd largest metropolitan area in Southern California and 14th largest in the U.S.1

1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Empire_(California)

1July2008

Riverbank

Korea Yongsan

Europe Heidelberg

Combat Support Training Center & Camp Parks (West Coast Garrison)

= Region HQs

Lone Star AAP

Natick Soldiers Center

Fort Monmouth

Aberdeen Proving Ground

Kwajalein

Fort Drum

Picatinny Arsenal

Watervliet Ars

Ft. Hamilton

West Point

Fort Belvoir

Fort Lee

Fort EustisFort Monroe Ft. AP Hill

Radford AAP

Letterkenn y

AD

C arlisle B ar racks

Fort. Meade

Fort Myer

Tobyhanna Arm y D epot

Adelphi Lab C t r

White Sands Missile Testing Center

Fort Sill

Fort Bliss

Fort Hood

Fort Polk

Pine Bluff

McAlester AAP

Red River AD

Corpus Christi Army Depot

Fort Sam Houston

Presidio of Monterey

Fort Irwin

Yuma Proving Ground

Fort Huachuca

Sierra Army Depot Hawthorne

AD

Fort McPherson

Fort Gordon

Fort Stewart

Fort Jackson

Ft Buchanan, PR

Fort Benning

Fort Rucker

Mississippi AAP

Fort Bragg

MOT Sunny Point

Northeast

Fort Shafter

Schofield Barracks

Fort Richardson

Ft. Greely

Pacific Redstone Arsenal

Anniston AD

Fort Campbell

Fort Knox

Milan AAP

Blue Grass AD

Detroit Ars

Lima Plt

Fort Leonard Wood

Fort Riley Fort Leavenworth

Iowa AAP

Kansas AAP

Lake City AAP

Dugway Proving Ground Pueblo Depot

Fort Carson

Tooele AD Deseret Chem Depot

Rock Island Arsenal

USAG Miami

Scranton AAP

West

Zama

Fort Dix

Holston AAP

Newport Depot

Umatilla

Fort Detrick

IMCOM Regions

Lone Star

Crane

AAP

Fort Lewis

Concord

Fort McCoy

Southeast

National Capital

Region – District

FIGURE 4: IMCOM REGIONS

1-10· Fort Irwin · CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction

Barstow, the closest city to Fort Irwin, was incorporated in 1947, had a population of

23,943 in 2007, and a median income of $36,737 in 2006.2

1.5.2 Climate

Fort Irwin sits in the high Mojave Desert and averages 4” of rainfall per annum (one of the driest places in California, if not the U.S.). Except where landscaped and irrigated, the Installation may mostly be characterized as barren with significant rocky outcroppings. It sits in a low, flat valley of hard‐packed earth and is surrounded by mountains. The most notable natural flora is the Joshua tree, with more sporadic mesquite, creosote, and yucca; cactus is not common at Fort Irwin.

Temperature ranges may be extreme, with average lows from 27° Fahrenheit (F) during winter nights to 112°F during summer days. Table 7 includes the average monthly temperatures at Fort Irwin throughout the year.

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC AVG

Average Maximum

Temperature

62.8 69.9 81.7 90 96.6 105.7 111.5 108.5 98.1 85 76.8 57.5 87.0

Average Minimum

Temperature

27.3 37.5 48.3 55.8 65.2 72.3 80.2 78.7 67.5 54.6 44.3 32.7 55.4

Average Mean

Temperature 45 53.7 65 72.9 80.9 89 95.9 93.6 82.8 69.8 60.5 45.1 71.2

Extreme Maximum

Temperature (highest) 75 80 97 95 102 113 122 114 113 95 90 67 96.9

Extreme Minimum

Temperature (highest) 44 46 58 68 72 79 87 85 86 63 52 44 65.3

Extreme Average

Temperature (highest)

55.5 59.5 73.5 81.5 86.5 95 103.5 98.5 99 79 70.5 54 79.7

Extreme Maximum

Temperature (lowest) 46 63 61 84 78 84 107 98 76 73 65 48 73.6

Extreme Minimum

Temperature (lowest) 13 28 34 41 55 58 75 69 55 47 32 25 44.3

Extreme Average

Temperature (lowest) 30 46.5 47.5 65 68.5 71 92 86.5 66.5 60 49 38.5 60.1

SOURCE: http://climate.fizber.com/california‐city‐fort‐irwin‐climate.html

2 Husing, John (October 2007). "Inland Empire City Profile 2007" (PDF). Inland Empire Quarterly Economic Report (Redlands: Economics & Politics, Inc) 19 (4). http://www.johnhusing.com/QER%20Oct%202007%20web.pdf.

Retrieved 2007‐12‐01; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inland_Empire_(California)#cite_note‐QER1‐25

TABLE 7: AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURES

CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction · Fort Irwin · 1-11

FIGURE 5: FORT IRWIN POST MAP

1-12· Fort Irwin · CEWMP Chapter 1: Introduction

1.5.3 Installation

Fort Irwin and the National Training Center (NTC) provide a world class training center for the United States’ Military, known for its excellent desert training, vast recreational opportunities, and history. Its web site states, “Fort Irwin is the world’s premier training center for the world’s finest military.”3 Of its 763,000 acres, 14,000 are used for the main cantonment. Figure 5: Post Map shows Fort Irwin’s circulation and development to date.

After being selected in 1979, Fort Irwin became active as the NTC in 1980, mainly because it:

Contains over 1,000 square miles of maneuver and range space

Has an uncluttered electromagnetic spectrum and airspace restricted to military use

Is isolated from densely populated areas

Today, Fort Irwin and the NTC include the following major groups on post: the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment; 1st Squadron, 11th ACR

ʺIronhorseʺ; 2nd Squadron, 11TH ACR ʺEaglehorseʺ; C Det, 203rd Military

Intelligence; DENTAC; Det 6, 57th WG Det ʺRavens Air Warriorsʺ;

MEDDAC; NTC Support Battalion; Operations Group; Support Squadron, 11TH ACR; US Army Garrison; and USACIDC.

1.5.3.1 Population

Although somewhat in flux depending on…