Spec_Vol_5_1_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 5 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 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)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DOMESTIC WATER SUPPL Y PERMIT

Issued To

United States Department of the Army, NTC & Fort Irwin, Fort Irwin, California

Fort Irwin Water System Public Water System No. 3610705

By

The California Department of Health Services, Division of Drinking Water & Environmental Management Branch

PERMIT NUMBER: 03-13-04(P)-001 DATE: January 15. 2001

WHEREAS:

1. The United States Department of Army (hereafter US Army) submitted an application dated May 22, 2003, to the California Department of Health Services to operate a public water system. The application was submitted in accordance with California Health and Safety Code, Section 116525.

2. This public water system is known as the Fort Irwin Water System whose headquarters is located at Fort Irwin, California 92310 in San Bernardino

County.

3. The legal owner of the Fort Irwin Water System is the US Army, who is therefore responsible for compliance with all statutory and regulatory drinking water requirements and the conditions set forth in this permit.

4. The public water system for which the permit application has been submitted is described briefly below (a more detailed description of the permitted system will be provided in the Permit Report which will be sent under a separate cover):

The Fort Irwin water system is owned by the United States Army, National Training Center, Fort Irwin. Fort Irwin encompasses approximately 1,000 square miles and is located approximately 35 miles northeast of the community

-1-

..,-"'"~c""" ~ of Barstow, California. The U. S. National Guard used Fort Irwin as a training area and the U. S. Army selected Fort Irwin as home for the Army's National Training Center (NTC) in 1981. Fort Irwin NTC facility has an average equivalent population of 15,000 people including roughly 4,780 military personnel, 3,618 civilian personnel, and a monthly average of 4,700 rotational forces training during 28-day rotations. There are 2,100 housing units on the post that accommodate approximately 5,000 family members of military personnel. The monthly rotations bring in 3,500 -7,000 soldiers from Army installations across the country for 4-week rotations throughout the year.

Fort Irwin operates a community water system serving the cantonment area and Army family housing area, which consists of groundwater sources, a Reverse Osmosis water treatment facility, nine storage facilities, and two separate distribution systems. The two distribution systems are designated as the "potable water" supply system and the "domestic water" distribution system.

Fort Irwin also operates a small-unregulated system at Bicycle Lake Army Airfield (BLAAF) for non-potable use.

Fort Irwin draws its water supplies from underground aquifers. There are five defined ground water basins present within the Fort Irwin NTC and vicinity.

These are: Irwin basin, Langford Lake basin, Bicycle Lake basin, Coyote basin and Dry Gulch basin. The sources of water supply for Fort Irwin water system are Irwin basin, Langford Lake basin, and Bicycle Lake basin.

The Fort Irwin water supply system uses groundwater obtained from 10 active vertical wells. There are three wells (1-3, 1-5, & 1-7) in the Irwin basin, three wells (L-1, L-2, & L-3) in the Langford Lake basin and four wells (B-1, B-4, B-5 & B-6) in the Bicycle Lake basin. Two wells, well B-2 in the Bicycle Lake Basin and well 1-2A in the Irwin Basin, are inactive wells and are to be destroyed.

There is one well (B-9), which supplies non-potable water to Bicycle Lake Army Airfield.

Water quality on Fort Irwin varies from basin to basin. Water from all basins contains elevated fluoride levels. The groundwater wells produce water with fluoride levels ranging from 2 to 14 milligrams per liter (mg/i). The maximum contaminant level (MCL) for fluoride is 2 mg/i. Arsenic has also been detected in all of the groundwater wells. The groundwater wells produce water with arsenic levels ranging from 2 to 40.1 micrograms per liter (ug/l) and proper treatment will be needed to comply with the new arsenic standard by 2006 in the water delivered to the domestic system. With the exception of the high fluoride concentration, the bacteriological and chemical quality of the water produced by the Fort Irwin wells meets all current State Drinking Water Standards.

Fort Irwin utilizes two separate water supply systems. The potable water system uses a separate piping system and supplies drinking water to residents

-2-and commercial facilities. Potable water (used for drinking and cooking) is treated in a reverse osmosis treatment plant to comply with the fluoride MCL.

The domestic water contains fluoride above the MCL and is used for dishwashing, laundry, cleaning, bathing, toilet flushing, fire fighting, lawn and garden watering, and commercial or industrial uses not requiring potable water.

The dual water supply systems consist of independent piping networks supplying water to users. The domestic water distribution system contains approximately 62 miles of piping, ranging from 1 to 16 inches in diameter and the potable water (reverse osmosis treated water) distribution system contains approximately 28 miles of piping, ranging in size from 0.75 to 8 inches in diameter.

All groundwater produced by Fort Irwin is disinfected with sodium hypochlorite.

Raw water is chlorinated with a 12.5% sodium hypochlorite solution via salt electrolysis at the Langford Lake and Bicycle Lake basin booster stations and at the wellheads of the Irwin basin wells. Source water from the wells supplies the domestic system and a portion of the flow is diverted for additional treatment at the Reverse Osmosis (RO) treatment plant. The primary purpose of the RO system is to reduce naturally occurring fluoride concentrations in the raw water. The effluent from the Reverse Osmosis Treatment Plant is the only source of potable water that complies with the fluoride standard. The RO plant utilizes carbon for de-chlorination, sand filtration, prior to the reverse osmosis for defluoridation, post-treatment to adjust pH, and disinfection. The pretreatment is designed to protect the RO membranes.

The Fort Irwin NTC has five aboveground tanks and one underground reseNoir for the domestic water system. In addition, there is one storage tank at the Bicycle Lake basin booster pump station and one storage tank at the Langford Lake booster pump station. There are three above ground tanks for the potable water system (RO treated water).

5. The seNice area of the Fort Irwin Water System is shown on the seNice area map attached to the Permit Report.

And WHEREAS:

1. The US Army has submitted all of the required information relating to the current operation of the Fort Irwin water system.

2. The California Department of Health SeNices has evaluated all of the information submitted by the United States Department of the Army.

Information for this permit was obtained from the documents submitted by the US Army with the permit application, a review of files and records of the San Bernardino District office of the Drinking Water Field Operations Branch.

-3-

3. The California Department of Health SeNices has the authority to issue domestic water supply permits pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 116540.

THEREFORE:

The California Department of Health Services has determined the following:

1. The Fort Irwin Water System meets the criteria for and is hereby classified as a community water system.

2. The design and operation of the existing Fort Irwin Water System does not comply with the Water Works Standards and all applicable regulations. The use of a dual plumbed system to deliver water to a community system for all domestic uses, including drinking, is not accepted design for a public water system.

3. The US Army has adequate technical, managerial, and financial capacity to reliably operate the water system. The US Army is operating a dual water system, which delivers non-potable water to the majority of the system outlets.

The US Army is required in provision No. 15 below to correct this deficiency and shall not expand seNice to new facilities seNed by this system until the needed water supply system improvements have been completed.

4. Provided the following conditions are complied with, the Fort Irwin Water System should be capable of providing water to consumers that is pure, wholesome, and potable and in compliance with statutory and regulatory drinking water requirements at all times.

THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY IS HEREBY

ISSUED THIS DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY PERMIT TO OPERATE THE

FORT IRWIN WATER SYSTEM.

The Fort Irwin Water System shall comply with the following permit conditions:

1. The only sources approved for domestic water supply is the water produced by Fort Irwin Water System Well Nos. 1-3, 1-5, & 1-7 in the Irwin basin, L-1, L-2, & L-3 in Langford Lake basin and B-1, B-4, B-5 & B-6 in Bicycle Lake Basin. No other source of supply shall be used without prior approval of this Department.

-4-

Summary of Fort Irwin Groundwater Sources

Groundwater PS Status Production CommE~nts Sources Codes Rate m --- Bicycle Lake Basin

Bicycle Lake Basin 3610705-010 Active 720 Moderate fluoride Well B1 Bicycle Lake Basin 3610705-011 Inactive --0 es yed I Well B2 Bicycle Lake Basin 3610705-012 Active 680 Moderate fluoride Well B4 Bicycle Lake Basin 3610705-013 Active 700 Mo era e uorl e Well B5 Bicycle Lake Basin 3610705-015 Active 900 Mo era e uorl e Well B6 Langford Lake Bas.in

Langford Basin 3610705-001 Active 750 High fluoride Well No.L-1 Langford Basin 3610705-002 Active 660 Ig uorl e Well No. L-2 Langford Basin 3610705-003 Active 580 Ig uorl e Well No. L-3 Irwin Basin

Irwin Basin Well 3610705-004 Inactive --To be destroyed No. 1-2A Irwin Basin Well 3610705-005 Active 380 High fluoride No.I-3 Irwin Basin Well 3610705-007 Active 320 No.5 Irwin Basin Well 3610705-009 Active 800 Ig uorl e No.7

2. The only approved treatment system is the existing Reverse Osmosis (RO) treatment system which reduces naturally occurring fluoride concentrations in the raw water produced from the wells, and disinfection with sodium hypochlorite solution of all water produced by the system wells. The RO treated water is the only source of potable water that currently complies with the fluoride standard.

3. The existing reverse osmosis treatment plant shall continue to be operated as described in the standard operating procedure manual submitted with the permit application.

-5-

4. No treatment facilities other than reverse osmosis treatment system and disinfection facilities specified in the Provisions No.2 shall be used by the Fort Irwin water system without permit approval from the Department.

5. The US Army shall provide a quarterly public notification of the high fluoride levels in the domestic system to all domestic system customers in accordance with existing California Safe Drinking Water Act public notification regulations.

6. The following table summarizes the monitoring requirements for the reverse osmosis treatment system.

Monitoring Requirements for Reverse Osmosis Treatment System

R.O. treatment Coliform Weekly Approved Lab Plant Influent Fluoride Weekly Approved Lab

Temperature Weekly Approved Lab TDS Weekly Approved Lab

Corrosivity Weekly Approved Lab

R.O. treatment Coliform Weekly Approved Lab Plant Effluent Fluoride Weekly Approved Lab (after blending Temperature Weekly Approved Lab with domestic TDS Weekly Approved Lab water) Corrosivity Weekly Approved Lab Chlorine Weekly Approved Lab

7. No changes, additions, or modifications shall be made to the sources or treatment mentioned above in conditions (1) and (2) unless an amended water supply permit has first been obtained from the Department.

8. All water supplied by the Fort Irwin potable water system for drinking purposes shall meet all Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) established by the State Department of Health Services.

9. All water supplied by the Fort Irwin water system for domestic use purposes shall also meet all Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) established by the State Department of Health Services with the exception of fluoride.

10. All personnel who operate the treatment facilities shall be certified in accordance with Title 22, Section 63765, California Code of Regulations (CCRs). The Reverse Osmosis treatment facilities shall be operated by shift operators possessing a grade T1 operator certificate or higher and have 24 hour per day supervision by a chief operator possessing a grade T2 or higher operator certificate.

-6-

...4

11. The water distribution facilities shall be operated by shift operators possessing a Grade D3 operator certificate or higher, and have 24-hour per day supervision by a chief operator possessing a Grade D4 operator certificate.

12. All source water quality monitoring results for wells shall be electronically reported by the laboratory via Electronic Data Transfer using the following primary station codes:

Source Name PS Code Langford Lake Basin

Lan ford Basin Well No.L-1 3610705-001 Lan ford Basin Well No. L-2 3610705-002 Lan ford Basin Well No. L-3 3610705-003 Irwin Basin

Irwin Basin Well No. 1-3 3610705-005 Irwin Basin Well No. 1-5 3610705-007 Irwin Basin Well No. 1-7 3610705-009 BIcycle Bic cle Lake Basin Well B1 3610705-010 Bic cle Lake Basin Well B4 3610705-012 Bic cle Lake Basin Well B5 3610705-013 Bic cle Lake Basin Well B6 3610705-015

13. All treated water quality monitoring results for the Reverse Osmosis treatment plant shall be electronically reported by the laboratory via Electronic Data Transfer using the following primary station codes:

R.O. trea men an n uen -100 R.O. treatment Plant Effluent 3610705-101

14. The United States Department of the Army shall protect its sources from any encroachment by sanitary hazards.

15. Fort Irwin utilizes two separate water supply systems. The potable water system supplies drinking water to residents and commercial facilities.

Potable water (used for drinking and cooking) is treated in a reverse osmosis treatment plant to comply with the fluoride MCL. The domestic water system supplies water, which contains fluoride above the MCL and is used for dishwashing, laundry, cleaning, bathing, toilet flushing, fire fighting, lawn and garden watering, and commercial or industrial uses not requiring potable water. The United States Department of the A.rmy will submit by July 31, 2004, a plan and time schedule for the improvements

-7-

~ 'c needed to eliminate the use of the dual system and provide water to all of the domestic system outlets that is in compliance with all Drinking Water Standards.

16.The Fort Irwin water system shall not expand service to any new facility without first completing the improvements called for in provision 15 above and securing written approval from the Department.

This permit shall remain in effect unless and until it is amended, revised, reissued, or declared to be invalid by the California Department of Health Services. This permit is non-transferable. Should the Fort Irwin water system undergo a change of ownership, the new owner must apply for and receive a new domestic water supply permit.

Any change in the source of water for the water system, any modification of the method of treatment, or any addition of storage reservoirs shall not be made unless an application for such change is submitted to the California Department of Health Services.

This permit shall be effective as of the date shown below.

FOR THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEAL TH SER'IICES

a~ Is- -o1C)t} 3 ({;~~' {/ Ric ard L. Haberman, P. E.

Supervising Sanitary Engineer Drinking Water Field Operations Southern California Branch

-8-

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

FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 1

D R A F T T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M

Domestic (DO) Water System Hydraulic Model Update, Evaluation, and Required Improvements

PREPARED FOR:

U.S. Army National Training Center, Fort Irwin, California, Directorate of Public Works, Contract No. DACA87-02-D-0037

PREPARED BY: Jennifer Henke/SEA

REVIEWED BY: Olver Obagi/FIR

APPROVED BY: Scott Boettcher/SFO

DATE: September 30, 2011

PROJECT NUMBER: 411625.PS.HY.01

This report on the findings of the 2011 update to the domestic (DO) water system hydraulic model at Fort Irwin fulfills the scope of work requirements for DID 0009 Periodic Studies of Contract No. DACA87-02-D-0037.

Introduction This report presents an evaluation of the Domestic (DO) Water System through the use of an updated hydraulic model. This evaluation reviewed the 5-year growth plan, assessed recommended system improvements, and identified new system improvements, as necessary to meet projected growth and to maintain sufficient pressure and supply requirements of the DO Water System.

This report contains discussion on the following topics:

• Water Demand Development

• System Evaluation, including Hydraulic Model Update and Calibration

• System Upgrade Recommendations

A general layout of the DO water system is shown in Figure 1. Booster pump stations pump the water from the Bicycle Lake well field and the Langford Lake well field while the supply from the Irwin Basin is pumped directly into the DO water system.

Hydraulic analyses of networked water distribution systems are most efficiently performed with the aid of hydraulic computer models, which consist of a personal computer and specialized software that performs the numerical analysis. The hydraulic computer model assists with measuring system performance, analyzing operational improvements, and developing a systematic method of determining the size and timing required for new facilities. The model can be used to analyze existing water systems, future water systems, or even specific improvements to the existing water system. By analyzing numerous planning scenarios relatively quickly and easily, the model provides answers to many “what if” questions. The computer program analyzes all of the information in the system data file and l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?l?

l?l?

l?

l?

kjkj kj

JPL-1

JPL-2

JPL-3

B AVE

5TH ST

NORTH LOOP RD BARSTOW

R

D

I A

VE

3RD ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

INNER LOOP RD

GOLDSTONE RD

G AVE

F AVE

1ST ST

WESTBROOK AVE

SANITARY FILL RD

C AVE

RHINELAND DR

2ND ST

D AVE

4TH ST

FORT IRWIN RD

NORMANDY D

R

ANZIO

S

T

SALERNO DR

LANGFORD LAKE RD

E AVE

SO

UT

H

DE

PO

T

LO

O

P

REMAGEN S

T

8TH ST

7TH ST

9TH ST

CHINOOK LN

5TH STREET

ALVORD DR

NAVAJO ST

ST MIHIEL ST

MEUSE ARGONNE ST

YORKTOWN ST

ELSENBORN RIDGE ST

SHILOH ST

BADGER LN

VA

NCE A

LL

EY

BIG

H

O R

N

LN

APENNIN

ES S

T

BU

R

R O

L N

APACHE DR

LO ST

CHOCTAW LN

C O

TT

O

N

TA

IL

L

N

TUNIS

IA S

T

BLACKHAWK DR

MATES RD

BURMA ST

TIEFORT DR

VERA CRUZ

NANCY ST

SU

M

TE

R

PLEIKU ST

ST VITH ST

ANTIETAM

ST

CAMBRAI ST

COW

PENS S

T

RED PASS D

R

OWLSHEAD CT

CORREGIDOR

BUENA VISTA

PORK CHOP HILL ST

C R

AC

K

E R

JA

C

K L

N

SODA MTN DR

WHIP TAIL ST

BASTO

GNE S

T

TIC

ONDEROGA D

R

S D

EP

O

T

LO

O P

DESERT KING DR

SANTIAGO ST

BLU

E BELL C

T

LANE MTN LOOP

MONMOUTH ST

PO VALLEY

SUPERIOR VALLEY CT

DRINK W

ATER ST

SILURIAN

HILLS DR

DENNING SPRING DR

R H

IN

EL

A N

D D

R

GARLIC SPRINGS WAY

SI

C

IL

Y

D R

FREDRICKSBURG ST

C O

YO

TE

C O

VE

MONTERY ST

AVAW

ATZ ST

G E

TT

Y

S

BU

R G

S T

IR

O

N M

TN

C

T A

PP

O

M

AT

TO

X

S T

PR

O

SP

E

C T

C T

7TH ST

GOLDSTONE RD

IN

NER LO

OP R

D

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

ANTIETAM ST

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

5T H

S T

G AVE

1ST ST

E AVE

PORK C

HOP H

ILL

S

T

NO

RTH LOO

P RD

3RD ST

RHIN

ELAND D

R

LANGFORD LAKE RD

2ND ST

2ND ST

LANGFORD LAKE RD

3RD ST

5TH ST

4TH ST

N O

R

TH

L O

O P

R D

ANZIO ST

SHILOH ST

1ST ST

BARSTOW

R

D

3RD ST

5TH ST

2ND ST

4TH ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

SOUTH LOOP RD

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

ANZIO ST

4TH ST

GOLDSTONE RD

GOLDSTONE RD

1S T S

T

2ND ST

BARSTOW

R

D

I-7

FIGURE 1

Domestic Water System Layout Fort Irwin 5-Year Review

0 500 1,000

Approximate scale in feet

LEGEND

Water Pipe

Diameter (in) l? PRV

# Well kj Tank

Pressure Zone

File Path:\\simba\proj\USArmyCorpsOfEnginee\411625_FtIrwin\gis\MapDocuments\Figure1_Water.mxd

From Bicycle

Lake

From Langford

Lake

DRAFT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

DOMESTIC (DO) WATER SYSTEM HYDRAULIC MODEL UPDATE, EVALUATION, AND REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 2

generates results in terms of pressures, flow rates, and operating status. The key to successfully using the computer model is correct interpretation of these results and understanding how the water distribution system is affected.

Water Production and Demand Development Historical and recent water production was evaluated to develop the water demands of the DO water system for existing conditions. A summary of the historical water production by month is shown graphically in Figure 2, Figure 3, and in Table 1. The water production information shown in Figure 2 provides supply for each water supply source (Bicycle Lake, Langford Lake, and Irwin Basin) and as a total of these sources. Units of production are in million gallons (MG) per month. Comparing Year 2010 and Year 2011, the summer water production for 2011 has been slightly less than 2010. In addition, there has been less production from the Langford Lake well field and Irwin Basin thus far in 2011 when compared to the 2010 production, but increased production from the Bicycle Lake well field.

The reduction in production from Irwin Basin can be attributed to positive total coliform results from the well sampling program. Fecal coliform results for the Irwin well were negative. To compensate for the reduction in production from Irwin Basin, the Bicycle Lake wells were operated more since they have a higher capacity than the Langford Lake wells.

FIGURE 2

Historical Water Production Summary by Source

Pr od uc ti on (M

G

Month

Bicycle Lake Langford Lake Irwin Basin Monthly Total

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 3

The water production information shown in Figure 3 shows the average daily water production and the maximum daily production for each month. The average daily production for 2010 is also shown in Figure 3. The units of the production information shown in Figure 3 is million gallons per day (mgd). Using the average daily production of

2.26 mgd shown for 2010, and the maximum daily production value of 4.45 mgd shown during September 2010, the ratio of the maximum daily production to the average daily production (MDD/ADD) was 1.97 for 2010. This calculated factor is close to the MDD/ADD factor of 2.2 that has been applied in previous studies and is based on additional historical information. It should also be noted that the water production information includes water supplied both for the DO water system and for the RO water system. The estimated portion of the supply that is allocated to the RO system for average day demand (ADD) conditions is 140 gpm. This total for the RO system is the total supply to the RO system that accounts for both the treated water (permeate) and reject water from the RO system.

FIGURE 3

Monthly Water Production Summary

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

Pr od uc ti on

M G

D

Month

Max Daily Production Average Daily Production 2010 Average

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 4

TABLE 1

Historical Water Production Summary for January 2010 – July 2011

Bicycle Lake (MG)

Langford Lake (MG)

Irwin Basin

(MG)

Monthly Total (MG)

Maximum Daily

Supply

(MGD)

Average Daily

Supply

(MGD)

January 10.58 16.33 21.86 48.78 2.66 1.57

February 0.47 19.48 27.54 47.49 2.27 1.53

March 16.27 22.52 23.69 62.48 2.76 2.02

April 19.02 22.62 21.74 63.38 3.48 2.04

May 29.99 31.92 15.70 77.61 3.08 2.50

June 44.13 31.70 9.51 85.34 3.54 2.75

July 23.96 37.17 31.51 92.65 3.73 2.99

August 37.98 37.40 20.49 95.87 4.31 3.09

September 53.37 34.68 0.90 88.95 4.45 2.87

October 44.60 24.22 1.73 70.56 3.55 2.28

November 34.47 13.16 - 47.63 2.20 1.54

December 40.24 1.87 0.34 42.45 2.59 1.37

2010 Total 355.09 293.07 175.02 823.19 4.451 2.26

January 40.86 0.93 0.06 41.85 1.98 1.35

February 30.60 10.74 - 41.35 2.08 1.33

March 31.62 27.39 - 59.01 3.01 1.90

April 46.50 9.79 4.30 60.60 3.28 1.95

May 45.30 14.06 14.84 74.20 3.63 2.39

June 53.93 19.54 0.37 73.83 4.02 2.38

July 42.68 19.19 17.72 79.59 4.12 2.57 1MDD/ADD ratio for 2010 calculated to be 1.97. (4.45/2.26)

Water demands associated with the 5-year growth plan were developed to evaluate the impact of the new facilities on the water system and to identify deficiencies associated with providing water supply to these facilities. Figure 4 shows the facilities that are planned within the 5-year growth plan, and Table 2 summarizes the water demand associated with these facilities.

kjkj kj l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?l?

l?l?

l?

l?

JPL-1

JPL-2

JPL-3

RCI Housing-Cracker Jack Flats II (2013)

Future NTC Staff Complex (2018)

Water Treatment Plant (2012)

Maintenance 699 (2014)

New Replacement Hospital (2015)

Parking (2018) Team Building (2018)

Administrative Complex (2013)

Warehouse (2012)

Education/Distance/Library (2013)

B AVE

5TH ST

NORTH LOOP RD BARSTOW

R

D

I A

VE

3RD ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

INNER LOOP RD

GOLDSTONE RD

G AVE

F AVE

1ST ST

WESTBROOK AVE

SANITARY FILL RD

C AVE

RHINELAND DR

2ND ST

D AVE

4TH ST

FORT IRWIN RD

NORMANDY D

R

ANZIO

S

T

SALERNO DR

LANGFORD LAKE RD

E AVE

SO

UT

H

DE

PO

T

LO

O

P

REMAGEN S

T

8TH ST

7TH ST

9TH ST

CHINOOK LN

5TH STREET

ALVORD DR

NAVAJO ST

ST MIHIEL ST

MEUSE ARGONNE ST

YORKTOWN ST

ELSENBORN RIDGE ST

SHILOH ST

BADGER LN

VA

NCE A

LL

EY

BIG

H

O R

N

LN

APENNIN

ES S

T

APACHE DR

LO ST

CHOCTAW LN

C O

TT

O

N

TA

IL

L

N

TUNIS

IA S

T

BLACKHAWK DR

MATES RD

BURMA ST

TIEFORT DR

VERA CRUZ

NANCY ST

SU

M

TE

R

PLEIKU ST

ST VITH ST

ANTIETAM

ST

CAMBRAI ST

COW

PENS S

T

RED PASS D

R

OWLSHEAD CT

CORREGIDOR

BUENA VISTA

PORK CHOP HILL ST

C R

AC

K

E R

JA

C

K L

N

SODA MTN DR

WHIP TAIL ST

BASTO

GNE S

T

TIC

ONDEROGA D

R

S D

EP

O

T

LO

O P

DESERT KING DR

SANTIAGO ST

BLU

E BELL C

T

LANE MTN LOOP

MONMOUTH ST

PO VALLEY

SUPERIOR VALLEY CT

DRINK W

ATER ST

SILURIAN

HILLS DR

DENNING SPRING DR

R H

IN

EL

A N

D D

R

GARLIC SPRINGS WAY

SI

C

IL

Y

D R

FREDRICKSBURG ST

C O

YO

TE

C O

VE

MONTERY ST

AVAW

ATZ ST

G E

TT

Y

S

BU

R G

S T

IR

O

N M

TN

C

T A

PP

O

M

AT

TO

X

S T

BOBCAT CT

PR

O

SP

E

C T

C T

5T H

S T

GOLDSTONE RD

ANTIETAM ST

3RD ST

1ST ST

RHIN

ELAND D

R

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

NO

RTH LOO

P RD

LANGFORD LAKE RD

7TH ST

PORK C

HOP H

ILL

S

T

N O

R

TH

L O

O P

R D

5TH ST

E AVE

2ND ST

2ND ST

LANGFORD LAKE RD

3RD ST

5TH ST

4TH ST

GOLDSTONE RD

ANZIO ST

SHILOH ST

1ST ST

BARSTOW

R

D

3RD ST

4TH ST

4TH ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

ANZIO ST

IN

NER LO

OP R

D

GOLDSTONE RD

1S T S

T

BARSTOW

R

D

I-7

FIGURE 4

Facilities in 5-Year Growth Plan Fort Irwin 5-Year Review

0 500 1,000

Approximate scale in feet

LEGEND

Planned Facilities Water Pipe

Diameter (in) l? PRV

# Well kj Tank

Pressure Zone

File Path:\\simba\proj\USArmyCorpsOfEnginee\411625_FtIrwin\gis\MapDocuments\Figure4_Water.mxd

From Bicycle

Lake

From

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 5

TABLE 2

Summary of Planned Facilities in the 5-Year Growth Plan and Associated Water Demand

Proposed Army Facility Anticipated

Opening Estimated Population Estimated Demand

(ADD) (gpd)

Education/Distance/Library 2012 18 2,160

Team Bldg 2016 60 7,200

Parking 2016 0 -

Future NTC Staff Complex 2016 300 36,000

Maintenance 699 2014 15 1,800

Lighthouse for the Blind 2012 10 1,200

Administrative Complex 2013 600 72,000

RCI Housing-Cracker Jack Flats II 2014 750 90,000

New Replacement Hospital 2015 100 12,000

TOTAL 1,861 222.360

Source: David Weatherman, DPW Master Planning, September 2011 Meeting

Using operations records and typical water distribution parameters, water demand alternatives were developed for a series of water demand conditions for both existing and for the 5-year growth plan conditions. These demand alternatives include:

• Average Daily Demand (ADD)

• Maximum Daily Demand (MDD)

• Peak Hour Demand (PHD)

• Fire Flow (MDD plus required fire flow)

Table 3 summarizes the water demand parameters applied to generate each of the demand scenarios identified above, and Table 4 presents the summary of the water demand allocated to the DO water system for each demand alternative.

TABLE 3

Water Demand Parameters

Parameter Value

MDD/ADD Ratio 2.2

PHD/MDD Ratio 1.3

Fire Flow Demand MDD + Required Fire Flow

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 6

TABLE 4

Summary of DO System Allocated Demand for Demand Alternatives

Demand Condition ADD (mgd) MDD (mgd) PHD (mgd)

Existing (2011)

Total 2.26 4.96 6.45

RO System 0.20 0.44 0.57

DO System 2.06 4.52 5.88

5-year Growth Plan

Total 2.48 5.45 7.09

RO System1 0.22 0.48 0.63

DO System 2.26 4.97 6.46 1RO System Demand pro-rated as percent of new facilities.

System Evaluation This section documents the update of the hydraulic model and calibration as well as the hydraulic analysis and evaluation results for the Fort Irwin DO water system. The hydraulic analysis used the calibrated computer model to evaluate the existing (2011) and 5-year growth plan water systems. The analysis and evaluation accomplished the following tasks:

• Summarized the criteria established for the hydraulic analysis

• Performed simulations for various demand alternatives and planning years

• Analyzed the modeling results to identify deficiencies

• Analyzed previous and additional proposed improvements, as needed, to investigate alternatives to mitigate these deficiencies

• Developed a list of recommended improvements that provide a means to correct the deficiencies

Hydraulic Model Development The hydraulic model of the DO water system was updated to reflect the existing (2011) system and to incorporate the facilities identified in the 5-year Growth Plan.

Existing System Since the last evaluation of the Fort Irwin DO system, several system improvements were constructed as areas of Fort Irwin were redeveloped. In addition, information in the Fort Irwin GIS has continually been updated as information on facilities and pipeline alignments are refined and updated. The facilities in the DO water system model were updated to reflect the information in the current (2011) version of the US Army GIS database. The existing demand allocation among each of the pressure zones was not revised as part of this study but was scaled to update the total system demand to the current (2011) level of water usage in the DO system at Fort Irwin.

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 7

Five Year Growth Plan Using the facilities identified in Figure 4 and Table 2 as part of the 5-year growth plan, the DO water system was extended as needed to serve these facilities. Water demand associated with these facilities was also added to the DO water system model at the closest water model node to the facility.

Hydraulic Model Calibration The DO water system model was calibrated by performing a series field hydrant flow tests and comparing the model predicted static pressures and model predicted residual pressures to the pressures that were measured in the field. Table 5 summarizes the calibration targets for comparison of the static and residual pressures.

TABLE 5

Calibration Targets

Calibration Level

Data Accuracy Modeling Results and Level of Confidence

High +5 percent for entire system.

Useful model tool for planning and design. Water system facilities can be sized to a high level of refinement if planning or design criteria are valid.

Medium +10 percent for major system sub-areas.

Estimated information for remaining system.

Useful model tool for planning and design. Planning essentially equivalent to high level of calibration. Some design applications will need to consider a "safety factor" based on calibration level and design criteria used.

Low +25 percent for a portion of a system. Estimated information for a major source or booster.

Usefulness of dynamic simulation will be limited for important facilities. Design applications are not impaired for steady-state modeling.

Seven pressure data loggers were used to conduct eleven field tests and were deployed throughout the Fort Irwin system from August 31, 2011 to September 2, 2011. The location of each of the field tests is shown in Figure 5.

On August 31, 2011, the seven pressure data loggers were deployed to seven locations in the DO water system. Starting in the morning of September 1, 2011, six hydrant flow tests were performed, and then five of the pressure data loggers were moved to five new locations, and five additional hydrant flow tests were performed. The pressure data loggers recorded data every 20 seconds and were left in place until September 2, 2011 to capture additional pressure data.

As noted above, the hydraulic model calibration was performed by comparing model predicted pressures to field measured pressures. Table 6 presents a summary of the pressure comparison for each calibration location. Since there were seven pressure data loggers for the duration of each test, this provided seven data points that could be calibrated against.

These additional pressure data logger locations also provide valuable information on the interconnectivity of the Fort Irwin pressure zones. The individual, discrete pressure information for the field and model pressures presented in Table 6 is for the pressure logger l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?l?

l?l?

l?

l?

JPL-1

JPL-2

JPL-3

3F

6F 7F

4F

5F

9F

8F

2F

10F 11F

12F

7R

3R

4R

5R

1R

8R6R

9R

2R

10R

11R

12R

B AV

E

5TH ST

NORTH LOOP RD BARSTOW

R

D

I A

VE

3RD ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

INNER LOOP RD

GOLDSTONE RD

G AVE

F AVE

1ST ST

WESTBROOK AVE

SANITARY FILL RD

C AVE

RHINELAND DR

2ND ST

D AVE

4TH ST

FORT IRWIN RD

NORMANDY D

R

ANZIO ST

SALERNO DR

LANGFORD LAKE RD

E AVE

SO

UT

H

DE

PO

T

LO

O

P

REMAGEN S

T

8TH ST

7TH ST

9TH ST

5TH STREET

ALVORD DR ST MIHIEL ST

MEUSE ARGONNE ST

YORKTOWN ST

SHILOH ST

BADGER LN

BIG

H

O R

N

LN

APENNIN

ES S

T

BU

R

R O

L N

APACHE DR

LO ST

CHOCTAW LN

C O

TT

O

N

TA

IL

L

N

TUNIS

IA S

T

BLACKHAWK DR

MATES RD

BURMA ST

TIEFORT DR

VERA CRUZ

SU

M

TE

R

PLEIKU ST

ST VITH ST

ANTIETAM

ST

CAMBRAI ST

COW

PENS S

T

RED PASS D

R

OWLSHEAD CT

PORK CHOP HILL ST

C R

AC

K

E R

JA

C

K L

N

WHIP TAIL ST

BASTO

GNE S

T

S D

EP

O

T

LO

O P

DESERT KING DR

SANTIAGO ST

BLU

E BELL C

T

LANE MTN LOOP

MONMOUTH ST

SUPERIOR VALLEY CT

SARATOGA

DRINK W

ATER ST

SILURIAN

HILLS DR

DENNING SPRING DR

R H

IN

EL

A N

D D

R

GARLIC SPRINGS WAY

SI

C

IL

Y

D R

MONTERY ST

AVAW

ATZ ST

G E

TT

Y

S

BU

R G

S T

IR

O

N M

TN

C

T A

PP

O

M

AT

TO

X

S T

LANGFORD LAKE RD

ANZIO ST

GOLDSTONE RD

5T H

S T

ANTIETAM ST

E AVE

N O

R

TH

L O

O P

R D

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

SHILOH ST

3RD ST

2ND ST

LANGFORD LAKE RD

GOLDSTONE RD

5TH ST

2ND ST

2ND ST

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

PORK C

HOP H

ILL

S

T

NO

RTH LOO

P RD

4TH ST

1ST ST

1ST ST

BARSTOW

R

D

5TH ST

2ND ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

SOUTH LOOP RD

1S T S

T

RHIN

ELAND D

R

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

4TH ST

IN

NER LO

OP R

D

GOLDSTONE RD

G AVE

7TH ST

BARSTOW

R

D

I-7

FIGURE 5

Calibration Field Test Locations Fort Irwin 5-Year Review

0 500 1,000

Approximate scale in feet

LEGEND

# Flow Hydrant

" Residual Hydrant

Water Pipe

Diameter (in) l? PRV

# Well kj Tank

Pressure Zone

File Path:\\simba\proj\USArmyCorpsOfEnginee\411625_FtIrwin\gis\MapDocuments\Figure5_Water.mxd

From Bicycle

Lake

From

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 8

adjacent to each hydrant test. The average and maximum static and pressure drop information is compiled from all seven pressure data logger locations.

TABLE 6

Calibration Summary

Test Location Number1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Individual Logger Information for Each Test

Field Pressure (psi)

Static 85 66 64 81 61 87 89 80 96 69 105

Residual 29 56 35 46 32 45 48 43 68 52 74

Model Pressure (psi)

Static 82 69 63 78 63 92 86 78 97 68 105

Residual 36 65 32 52 39 38 42 43 76 54 69

Pressure Comparison

Static Difference -3 2 -1 -3 3 5 -3 -2 1 -1 0

Static % Difference -3% 3% -1% -3% 4% 6% -3% -2% 1% -1% 0%

Field Pressure Drop 56 10 29 35 29 43 41 37 28 17 31

Model Pressure Drop 47 4 31 26 24 55 44 35 21 14 36

Residual Difference 7 8 -3 6 7 -7 -6 0 8 2 -6

Pressure Drop Difference 10 6 -2 9 5 -12 -4 1 6 3 -6

Compiled Data for All Data Loggers for Each Test

Average Static Percent Difference 5% 4% 4% 5% 4% 5% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

Maximum Static Percent Difference 9% 8% 6% 9% 7% 9% 3% 3% 4% 3% 5%

Average Pressure Drop Difference 7 3 2 7 2 4 2 2 6 5 8

Maximum Pressure Drop Difference 18 6 3 11 5 12 4 5 9 8 11 1Location 1 was only used as a pressure monitoring location (see Figure 4 for Location 1), no hydrant flow test was conducted.

As shown in Table 6, a medium to high level of calibration was achieved for the Fort Irwin DO water system and the hydraulic model can confidently be applied for planning level system analyses. No location exhibited a static pressure difference of greater than 10 percent under static conditions, and 86 percent (42 of 47) static pressures were within 4 psi. In addition, only 7 locations exhibited a pressure drop difference (field pressure drop compared to model pressure drop) of 10 psi or greater.

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 9

System Criteria The system performance criteria for system pressure and water velocity in pipelines applied to evaluate the performance of the Fort Irwin DO water system is summarized in Table 7.

TABLE 7

Summary of Performance Criteria

Parameter Performance Criterion

Minimum Pressure

ADD 35 psi

MDD 35 psi

PHD 30 psi

Fire Flow 20 psi

Maximum Pressure (all conditions) 80 psi

Pipeline Water Velocity 8 fps

Sources: Minimum pressures and water velocity from System Characterization Report; Maximum Pressure from CH2M HILL, Fort Irwin Water and Wastewater Design and Construction Standards (2010).

Analysis Approach: Modeled Scenarios This hydraulic analysis examined the Fort Irwin DO water system for two planning periods:

• Existing system. The existing water system analyses assumed projected 2011 demands and facilities that were operational in 2011.

• Five-year Growth Plan. The 5-year planning horizon water system analyses assumed the 5-year demands (assumed from the new facilities planned for the 5-year horizon) and facilities needed to correct deficiencies for the Existing (2011) system and the 5-year growth plan.

Existing System Analysis Based on historical operational information provided by utility staff, the status (ON/OFF) of facilities in the Fort Irwin DO water system was developed for ADD, MDD, and PHD demand conditions. Facility status was also developed for the MDD plus fire flow analysis condition. This information is shown in Table 8.

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 10

TABLE 8

Existing System Operating Facility Status

Facility Name Analysis Condition

ADD MDD PHD Fire Flow

WTP Supply

Bicycle Lake Wells1 On On On On

Langford Lake Wells1 On On On On

Irwin Well1 Off On On On

Pump Stations

Bicycle Lake On On On On

Langford Lake On On On On

Tanks

JPL 12 3/4 Full 3/4 Full 3/4 Full 3/4 Full

JPL 2 3/4 Full 3/4 Full 3/4 Full 3/4 Full

JPL 3 3/4 Full 3/4 Full 3/4 Full 3/4 Full

Bicycle Lake 1/2 Full 1/2 Full 1/2 Full 1/2 Full

Langford Lake 1/2 Full 1/2 Full 1/2 Full 1/2 Full 1The operation of the Bicycle Lake and Langford Lake wells do not specifically affect the DO water system evaluation since they pump to the ground storage tank at their respective booster stations. However, the Irwin Well pumps directly to the water distribution system.

2The altitude valve at Tank JPL 1 is assumed to be closed since the JPL1 tank operating range is lower than the JPL 2 and JPL 3 tanks.

The results of the Existing System (2011) ADD, MDD, PHD, and fire flow analyses are summarized below, and a summary of the pressure ranges for the ADD, MDD, and PHD scenarios are summarized in Table 9. This table lists the lowest pressure and the highest pressure observed in each pressure zone for the demand conditions analyzed. The results indicate that there are no pressure deficiencies in the existing system. All pressure zones met the minimum pressure criteria for ADD, MDD, and PHD. All zones exhibited areas of high pressure under ADD, MDD, and PHD conditions.

Average Day Scenario Analysis To analyze the average day scenario for the existing system, simulations were performed using the computer model with ADD. The total ADD of 2.06 mgd (1,427 gpm) was distributed to demand nodes in the model (see Table 4). The modeling results were compared to the criteria identified in Table 7. Note that the storage should not be drawn down for this ADD scenario. No pressure and velocity deficiencies were identified for the existing system analysis ADD analysis. The system-wide pressures generated for the ADD analysis are shown graphically in Figure 6.

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?l?

l?l?

l?

l?

JPL-1

JPL-2

JPL-3

B AVE

5TH ST

NORTH LOOP RD BARSTOW

R

D

I A

VE

3RD ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

INNER LOOP RD

GOLDSTONE RD

G AVE

F AVE

1ST ST

WESTBROOK AVE

SANITARY FILL RD

C AVE

RHINELAND DR

2ND ST

D AVE

4TH ST

FORT IRWIN RD

NORMANDY D

R

ANZIO

S

T

SALERNO DR

LANGFORD LAKE RD

E AVE

SO

UT

H

DE

PO

T

LO

O

P

REMAGEN S

T

8TH ST

7TH ST

9TH ST

CHINOOK LN

5TH STREET

ALVORD DR

NAVAJO ST

ST MIHIEL ST

MEUSE ARGONNE ST

YORKTOWN ST

ELSENBORN RIDGE ST

SHILOH ST

BADGER LN

VA

NCE A

LL

EY

BIG

H

O R

N

LN

APENNIN

ES S

T

BU

R

R O

L N

APACHE DR

LO ST

CHOCTAW LN

C O

TT

O

N

TA

IL

L

N

TUNIS

IA S

T

BLACKHAWK DR

MATES RD

BURMA ST

TIEFORT DR

VERA CRUZ

NANCY ST

SU

M

TE

R

PLEIKU ST

ST VITH ST

ANTIETAM

ST

CAMBRAI ST

COW

PENS S

T

RED PASS D

R

OWLSHEAD CT

CORREGIDOR

BUENA VISTA

PORK CHOP HILL ST

C R

AC

K

E R

JA

C

K L

N

SODA MTN DR

WHIP TAIL ST

BASTO

GNE S

T

TIC

ONDEROGA D

R

S D

EP

O

T

LO

O P

DESERT KING DR

SANTIAGO ST

BLU

E BELL C

T

LANE MTN LOOP

MONMOUTH ST

PO VALLEY

SUPERIOR VALLEY CT

DRINK W

ATER ST

SILURIAN

HILLS DR

DENNING SPRING DR

R H

IN

EL

A N

D D

R

GARLIC SPRINGS WAY

SI

C

IL

Y

D R

FREDRICKSBURG ST

C O

YO

TE

C O

VE

MONTERY ST

AVAW

ATZ ST

G E

TT

Y

S

BU

R G

S T

IR

O

N M

TN

C

T A

PP

O

M

AT

TO

X

S T

PR

O

SP

E

C T

C T

7TH ST

GOLDSTONE RD

IN

NER LO

OP R

D

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

ANTIETAM ST

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

5T H

S T

G AVE

1ST ST

E AVE

PORK C

HOP H

ILL

S

T

NO

RTH LOO

P RD

3RD ST

RHIN

ELAND D

R

LANGFORD LAKE RD

2ND ST

2ND ST

LANGFORD LAKE RD

3RD ST

5TH ST

4TH ST

N O

R

TH

L O

O P

R D

ANZIO ST

SHILOH ST

1ST ST

BARSTOW

R

D

3RD ST

5TH ST

2ND ST

4TH ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

SOUTH LOOP RD

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

ANZIO ST

4TH ST

GOLDSTONE RD

GOLDSTONE RD

1S T S

T

2ND ST

BARSTOW

R

D

I-7

FIGURE 6

Existing (2011) ADD Pressure Fort Irwin 5-Year Review

0 500 1,000

Approximate scale in feet

LEGEND

Pressure (psi)

< 20

20 - 30

30 - 40

40 - 60

60 - 80

80 - 100

> 100

Water Pipe

Diameter (in) l? PRV

# Well kj Tank

Pressure Zone

File Path:\\simba\proj\USArmyCorpsOfEnginee\411625_FtIrwin\gis\MapDocuments\Figure6_Water.mxd

From Bicycle

Lake

From

FORT IRWIN FIR_WATERMODEL_TM.DOCX 11

Maximum Day Scenario Analysis To analyze the existing system under MDD, simulations were performed using the computer model, demands for MDD, and controls for MDD. The total system-wide demand of 4.52 mgd (3,140 gpm) was distributed to demand nodes in the model as shown in Table 4 The simulation results were compared to the criteria identified in Table 7. Note that the storage should not be drawn down for this planning scenario. No pressure and velocity deficiencies were identified for the existing system analysis MDD analysis. The system-wide pressures generated for the MDD analysis are shown graphically in Figure 7.

Peak Hour Scenario Analysis The steady-state analysis for PHD in the existing system was run in the hydraulic model using demands for PHD of 5.88 mgd (4,082 gpm) from Table 4 and the operating assumptions shown in Table 8. Deficiencies were identified based on the hydraulic design criteria shown in Table 7. Note that for this demand alternative, it was considered acceptable for the tank levels to use operational storage. No pressure and velocity deficiencies were identified for the existing system analysis PHD analysis. The system-wide pressures generated for the PHD analysis are shown graphically in Figure 8.

TABLE 9

Existing System Pressure Range Results

Pressure Zone

ADD Pressure (psi) MDD Pressure (psi) PHD Pressure (psi)

Lowest Highest Lowest Highest Lowest Highest

2612 81 95 79 94 78 92

2615 50 109 50 105 49 104

2630 49 91 49 88 49 88

2632 43 126 42 122 41 120

2655 72 100 69 96 67 97

2657 51 109 50 105 50 103

2748 62 87 59 84 59 83

2778 50 112 47 108 45 106

Fire-flow Scenario Analysis The fire-flow analysis evaluated various fire-flow demands at specific locations while the system operates under MDD. The hydraulic model was used to analyze nodes in the hydraulic model and simulate a fire flow requirements specified for Fort Irwin.

The results of this detailed analysis are presented graphically in Figure 9. This figure identifies the available fire flow at each of the locations evaluated with the 20 psi minimum pressure in the distribution system. As seen in Figure 9, there are multiple locations where the available fire flow is limited. These locations are primarily on dead-end lines or areas that have a single supply with smaller (6-inch or 8-inch) diameter pipe and a high (greater than 2,000 gpm) fire flow is required.

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?

l?l?

l?l?

l?

l?

JPL-1

JPL-2

JPL-3

B AVE

5TH ST

NORTH LOOP RD BARSTOW

R

D

I A

VE

3RD ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

INNER LOOP RD

GOLDSTONE RD

G AVE

F AVE

1ST ST

WESTBROOK AVE

SANITARY FILL RD

C AVE

RHINELAND DR

2ND ST

D AVE

4TH ST

FORT IRWIN RD

NORMANDY D

R

ANZIO

S

T

SALERNO DR

LANGFORD LAKE RD

E AVE

SO

UT

H

DE

PO

T

LO

O

P

REMAGEN S

T

8TH ST

7TH ST

9TH ST

CHINOOK LN

5TH STREET

ALVORD DR

NAVAJO ST

ST MIHIEL ST

MEUSE ARGONNE ST

YORKTOWN ST

ELSENBORN RIDGE ST

SHILOH ST

BADGER LN

VA

NCE A

LL

EY

BIG

H

O R

N

LN

APENNIN

ES S

T

BU

R

R O

L N

APACHE DR

LO ST

CHOCTAW LN

C O

TT

O

N

TA

IL

L

N

TUNIS

IA S

T

BLACKHAWK DR

MATES RD

BURMA ST

TIEFORT DR

VERA CRUZ

NANCY ST

SU

M

TE

R

PLEIKU ST

ST VITH ST

ANTIETAM

ST

CAMBRAI ST

COW

PENS S

T

RED PASS D

R

OWLSHEAD CT

CORREGIDOR

BUENA VISTA

PORK CHOP HILL ST

C R

AC

K

E R

JA

C

K L

N

SODA MTN DR

WHIP TAIL ST

BASTO

GNE S

T

TIC

ONDEROGA D

R

S D

EP

O

T

LO

O P

DESERT KING DR

SANTIAGO ST

BLU

E BELL C

T

LANE MTN LOOP

MONMOUTH ST

PO VALLEY

SUPERIOR VALLEY CT

DRINK W

ATER ST

SILURIAN

HILLS DR

DENNING SPRING DR

R H

IN

EL

A N

D D

R

GARLIC SPRINGS WAY

SI

C

IL

Y

D R

FREDRICKSBURG ST

C O

YO

TE

C O

VE

MONTERY ST

AVAW

ATZ ST

G E

TT

Y

S

BU

R G

S T

IR

O

N M

TN

C

T A

PP

O

M

AT

TO

X

S T

PR

O

SP

E

C T

C T

7TH ST

GOLDSTONE RD

IN

NER LO

OP R

D

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

ANTIETAM ST

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

5T H

S T

G AVE

1ST ST

E AVE

PORK C

HOP H

ILL

S

T

NO

RTH LOO

P RD

3RD ST

RHIN

ELAND D

R

LANGFORD LAKE RD

2ND ST

2ND ST

LANGFORD LAKE RD

3RD ST

5TH ST

4TH ST

N O

R

TH

L O

O P

R D

ANZIO ST

SHILOH ST

1ST ST

BARSTOW

R

D

3RD ST

5TH ST

2ND ST

4TH ST

SOUTH LOOP RD

SOUTH LOOP RD

N O

R

TH

LO

O

P R D

ANZIO ST

4TH ST

GOLDSTONE RD

GOLDSTONE RD

1S T S

T

2ND ST

BARSTOW

R

D

I-7

FIGURE 7

Existing (2011) MDD Pressure Fort Irwin 5-Year Review

0 500 1,000

Approximate scale in feet

LEGEND

Pressure (psi)

< 20

20 - 30

30 - 40

40 - 60

60 - 80

80 - 100

> 100

Water Pipe

Diameter (in) l? PRV

# Well kj Tank

Pressure Zone

File…