DDW-2024-013400

J. Paul Wright <[e-mail]>
Hildale Maple St Booster Station (PF003) Plan Review Comments (File #16475,
System 27006)
J. Paul Wright <[e-mail]>Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 11:20 AM
To: Riley Vane <[e-mail]>
Cc: Jerry Postema <[e-mail]>, Nathan Fischer <[e-mail]>, Athena Cawley
<[e-mail]>, Cadence Hernandez <[e-mail]>
Riley,
I have provided review comments for this project below:
1) Cadence Hernandez with the DDW is the funding person in charge of this project. I was checking with her on timelines
for funding, but I wanted to get these comments to you. You will want to make sure you work with her to get the bid
package with all the correct information and sections and getting plan approval will depend on funding being finalized.
2 I noticed that the specifications didn't include any of the pipe material specifications nor anything with regard to
installation of the pipe, disinfection, pressure testing, etc. You mentioned something about APWA, but I don't have access
to those and I know that currently APWA standards don't completely meet all of the Division of Drinking Water rules. It
would be better if you included those sections in the technical specifications. I know you are waiting for funding, but I can't
complete my review without some of this information.
3) The specifications also didn't list anything about the pumps, sizing, pump make and model or equal for the pump
station.
4) Even with a pump skid being bid out, I need to make sure that all of the proper pressure gauges are included.
Specifically, the suction side requires a compound gauge (measuring positive and negative pressure) and the discharge
side needs to have a standard gauge. If you could point out to me where those are or if they are not, then they need to
be shown in the drawings.
5) Reading through the hydraulic report, I am concerned that the pump station may be undersized. Pump stations need
to have the ability to provide peak instantaneous or maximum flow demand, not just peak day, which it seems that is what
you have sized it for. I know the rule that your referenced said that, but the rule was changed in June 2024 and now says:
(1) Capacity and Minimum Distribution System Pressure. A pump used to provide
minimum distribution system pressure shall:
(a) have the capacity to meet the maximum demand of the specific portion of the
distribution system served; and
(b) be capable of providing the minimum pressures required by Section R309-105-9.
To get that maximum demand, you would typically use the information in R309-510-9 as shown below:
(2) Peak Instantaneous Demand for Indoor Water Use.
(a) Large or complex water systems may determine peak instantaneous demand using
hydraulic modeling. The hydraulic model must either apply an instantaneous peaking
factor to account for peak instantaneous demand or use actual peak instantaneous
water flow data.
(b) Alternatively, the peak instantaneous demand for a single pipeline shall be
calculated for indoor use using the following equation:
Q = 10.8 x N^0.64
10/10/24, 11:21 AM State of Utah Mail - Hildale Maple St Booster Station (PF003) Plan Review Comments (File #16475, System 27006)
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=f3bcb897f8&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-a:r-4428330923318799019&simpl=msg-a:r-442833092331879…1/4
where N equals the total number of ERC's, and Q equals the total flow (gpm) delivered
to the total connections served by that pipeline.
Using the single pipeline formula, you would then get Q=10.8X 122 ^ 0.64 = 233 gpm.
You can also use a peaking factor applied to the 151 gpm peak day demand, which ever works. So it seems that 200 gpm
currently might be a little low.
6) Because the Pump Facility rule did change recently, I have provided a link below of the new rule. You should review it
and make sure your design does meet all the requirements. Specifically, I want to make sure your design accounts for
things in R309-540-6 with regards to minimum intake pressures at your booster pump station location and low pressure
cutoff controls. (R039-540-6 (3))
https://adminrules.utah.gov/public/rule/R309-540/Current%20Rules
Let me know if you have any questions.
Paul
On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 11:36 PM Riley Vane <[e-mail]> wrote:
Thanks Paul. You’ll notice I’ve prepared the technical specs in the project manual along with most of the
general documents and APWA specs. DDW/SRF required documents (debarment, DBE, etc.) will
definitely be added once we see the letter of award and how the city wants to proceed.

@Jerry, can you confirm the name of the booster station?

Thanks again.

Riley Vane, PE
Project Manager
Jones & DeMille Engineering, Inc.
p: [phone] | m: [phone]
Shaping the Quality of Life.
From: J. Paul Wright <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 4:31 PM
To: Riley Vane <[e-mail]>
Cc: Jerry Postema <[e-mail]>; Nathan Fischer <[e-mail]>; Athena Cawley
<[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Hildale Booster Staon Plan Review

Riley,

It sounds like it was approved for funding on August 28. Please work with Michael Grange so you get to him what they
need from the funding side of things. A lot of that has to do with language in the contract documents. That may already
be included in the Project Manual that you included in the sharefile.

Also, I just wanted to make sure of the name of the booster station. The design report calls it the "Maple St Booster
Station". Just let me know if this is what the water system wants to call it.
10/10/24, 11:21 AM State of Utah Mail - Hildale Maple St Booster Station (PF003) Plan Review Comments (File #16475, System 27006)
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=f3bcb897f8&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-a:r-4428330923318799019&simpl=msg-a:r-442833092331879…2/4
J. Paul Wright <[e-mail]>

1:24 PM (1 hour ago)

to Riley, Cadence, Jerry, Nathan, Athena
Riley,

I am going to work on preparing the plan approval letter for this project so that once these are addressed, it will be ready to go out. I do have a couple of follow up questions after reviewing your revised submission.

1) The plans refer to APWA Plans 381 and 382 for soil trench backfill. I couldn't find those details in your submission. The specs, Section 33 05 20 did refer to 3/4" minus soil for the pipe zone, but I just couldn't find those details.
2) Sheet A-301 shows a downturned discharge from the booster station, outside the building. Where does that discharge too? It appears it discharges near the foundation, which you should avoid. Also, the downturn needs to have a #4 mesh screen called out on the end of the downturn.
Paul