1.0 OVERVIEW OF STUDY 1-1

2.0 SYSTEM OVERIVEW 2-1

3.0 WELLS 3-1

4.0 SYSTEM DEMAND & FIRE FLOW 4-1

5.0 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 5-1

6.0 OVERVIEW OF FIRE FIGHTING OPERATIONS 6-1

7.0 DESCRIPTION OF FIRE INCIDENT OF JANUARY 1999 7-1

8.0 FIRE FLOW TESTING 8-1

9.0 OPTIONS FOR INCREASING FIRE FLOW 9-1

10.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10-1

FIGURE 9-1 PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS

FIGURE 10-1 SCHEMATIC OF PROPOSED FIRE FIGHTING SYSTEM

ON NAVY WALK

TABLE 3-1 WELL DATA

TABLE 4-1 1998 MONTHLY DATA

TABLE 5-1 HEADLOSS IN TRANSITE PIPE

TABLE 8-1 LIST OF FIRE FLOW TESTS

APPENDIX I FIRE FLOW TEST RESULTS & ISO REPORT

The Inc. Village of Saltaire has retained the service of Holzmacher, McLendon & Murrell, P.C. (H2M) to conduct an evaluation of the Village’s water system to determine it’s capability of meeting a fire demand. The Village has decided to undertake this study because of its concern that the existing water system may not have the ability to provide adequate fire flow. The Village also requested that recommendations be made to modify the existing water system to increase fire flow capacity. Specific concerns of the Village also includes ensuring that the water system provides adequate fire flow to sections of the Village presently without water main, including Beach Walk and Pilot Walk.

This report includes an overview of the Village of Saltaire water system, results of fire flow testing, and recommendations for system improvements aimed at improving fire flow capabilities.

The Inc. Village of Saltaire receives its water supply from a Village maintained and operated public water supply system. The water system consists of two (2) active potable water supply wells and one (1) 15,000 gallon hydropneumatic storage tank. Potable water is transmitted from the two wells to approximately 400 service connections through approximately 48,000 linear feet of water main. The water system provides water to each of the residential and commercial buildings within the Village, as well as provides fire protection through a network of hydrants.

The Village water system has a 6″ interconnection to the adjacent Fair Harbor Water District to the east. The Fair Harbor Water District is a municipal water supplier administered by the Town of Islip and operated by the personnel of the Brentwood Water District. The Fair Harbor system operates and maintains system pressure between 40-60 psi, which is similar to the Saltaire system. Though the Fair Harbor system is seasonal, the central transmission line that connects with Saltaire remains in operation all year. The community immediately to the west is Kismet. The water system for Kismet is operated by the Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA). No interconnections to this system currently exists. There is a gap of approximately 1,000 feet between the Kismet and Saltaire water mains.

The Inc. Village of Saltaire maintains two public water supply wells that provide a combined pumping capacity of approximately 900 gallons per minute (gpm). A summary of well data is shown on Table No. 3-1.

Well No. 1, located on Richards Walk, was originally drilled in 1964 to a depth of 428 feet deep. The well is constructed with a 6″ diameter Everdur screen and has a deep well turbine pump with a rated capacity of 400 gpm at 225 feet of head. Actual pump flows were measured on October 5, 1999. The results indicate that Well No. 1 pumps approximately 570 gpm at low pressures (@ 35 psi) and approximately 450 gpm at higher pressure (@60 psi). A backup generator is present that allows the well to continue to run in the event of power loss.

Well No. 2, located at Broadway and West Bay was originally drilled in 1984 to a depth of 450 feet below grade. The well is constructed with an 8″ diameter stainless steel screen and has a submersible pump with a capacity of 500 gpm at 180 feet of head. Actual pump flows were measured on October 5, 1999. The results indicated that Well No. 2 pumps approximately 700 gpm at low pressure (@ 35 psi) and throttles down to approximately 440 gpm at higher pressure (@ 78 psi). No back-up power is available for Well No. 2.

Well No. 2 is a true artesian well. Well measurements were taken by Saltaire Village personnel January 2000. At ground elevation, static pressure was 3 psi, and flow through the existing 2" PVC line was 60 gpm. When flowing through a ½" hose bib, flow was reduced to 4.3 gpm. It should be noted that the static pressure at the well should fluctuate tidally, due to the changing surface level of the salt water overlaying the pumped aquifer.

The two wells operate in an alternating "lead:lag" sequence. Sequencing of the two wells is controlled by a pressure switch connected to the hydropneumatic tank. The first well is called to start when system pressure drops to 35 psi. If the demand cannot be met by the "lead" pump, the "lag" pump is called to start when system pressure continues to drop to 30 psi. A low pressure alarm is present that is also set for 30 psi. The "lead" pump alternates between the No. 1 well and No. 2 well after each on-off cycle.

During the Summer, or high demand months, the wells operate as described above. During the Winter, or low demand months, only one well is required. Since Well No. 1 is preferred for water quality reasons, the Village personnel modified the controls so that Well No. 1 is powered up regardless of which lead well is called for. In this Winter scenario, no lag well is in operation should system pressure drop to 30 psi.

Well No. 1 discharges directly into a 15,000 gallon hydropneumatic tank. The tank serves to maintain system pressure, provide storage and minimize the on-off cycling of the well pump. Well No. 2 pumps directly into the distribution system. Controls for the cycling of Well No. 2 are located in the Well No. 1 pump house.

Prior to distribution, water from both wells is treated with the following:

1. Calcium hypochlorite – For disinfection.

Table 4-1 summarizes the Saltaire water system average and maximum daily demands for 1998. As would be expected, system demand shows a seasonal pattern, with highest average demands occurring in the Summer months. The highest average daily demand in August was 158,000 gallons or 110 gpm. The maximum day demand was 425,000 gpd, or 295 gpm.

As described above, Well Nos. 1 and 2 are rated for 400 gpm and 500 gpm, respectively. The observed flow from the wells was higher than this, approximately 500 gpm and 550 gpm at 45 psi. Given these values, Well Nos. 1 and 2 individually can meet the average, maximum and peak demands.

The Insurance Services Organization (ISO) is an independent agency that provides "guidance" on estimating required fire flow for specific building types based on building construction, occupancy, adjacent exposed buildings and distances between buildings. The ISO also conducts periodic evaluations of Fire Departments and water supply system to establish a rating system for insurance purposes. The ISO visited the Village of Saltaire in 1974, 1983 and 1989 to review the water system and Fire Department fire fighting capabilities. The report from the 1989 ISO visit is presented in the Appendix.

Based on the ISO 1989 inspection, the ISO established four (4) required fireflows for the Village of Saltaire. The highest fire flow was 3,000 gpm at Broadway, in the area of the Village Hall and Saltaire Market. A second area of high fire flow was 1750 gpm, at the Yacht Club on Bay Promenade. A 1000 gpm fire flow was required on Broadway in the St. Andrews area, and in the Village Public Works site on Beacon. The remainder of the system was classified as residential, and given a fire flow of 750 gpm.

Since the 1974 inspection, Well No. 2 was constructed and placed into service. Given the combined output of Well Nos. 1 and 2 is between 900 to 1,050 gpm, the Saltaire water system is theoretically capable of meeting the residential 750 gpm, and marginally capable of meeting the 1000 gpm ISO fire flow requirements. However, the system is not capable of producing the recommended 3,000 gpm or 1750 gpm requirements.

Storage in the Saltaire system is limited to a single 15,000 gallon hydropneumatic tank. It is estimated that the maximum useable storage in the tank is only 40 percent of overall volume, or 6,000 gallons. Given this, the storage tank will provide a maximum of 8 minutes at a 750 gpm fire flow. Typically, water systems are designed to provide the recommended fire flow for a minimum of 2 hours.

The Saltaire water distribution system consists of approximately 48,000 feet (9 miles) of water main (approximately 29,000 feet of 4″ diameter and 18,000 feet of 6″ diameter). The system design is primarily a 6″ loop with 4″ laterals. Almost all of the distribution pipe was installed in the 1960’s and consists of transite pipe (an asbestos cement composite). Several section of 6" PVC were recently installed on Bay Promenade.

A primary concern with the distribution system is its ability to provide adequate fire flow to all locations, given the predominance of 4″ diameter main. Table No. 5-1 lists the theoretical headloss (pressure loss) for every 100 feet of transite pipe for various flow rates. The values indicate that at flow rate of greater than 500 gpm, a 4″ diameter main would be too restrictive. Therefore, in order to obtain the recommended 750 gpm fire flow from a single hydrant, a 6″ main is necessary.

A number of fire flow tests were conducted in locations served by 4″ and 6″ mains to determine the available fire flow and to analyze system constraints. Results from these tests are described in Section 8.0.

The Inc. Village of Saltaire is served by a Volunteer Fire Department. The Department has two (2) pumping trucks available for fire flow. The trucks, an older International Harvester (IH) and newer GMC, are both rated with a pumper capacity of 750 gpm fire flow. The IH has single 4½″ intake connection and three (3) 2½″ discharge connections. Each of the three connections is theoretically capable of discharging 250 gpm. The GMC has two (2) 4½″ and two (2) 2½″ intake connections and four (4) 2½″ discharge lines.

In operation, the IH is usually situated within 50 feet of the supply hydrant with attack lines run off the truck. The GMC is usually run with a longer suction line (up to 600 feet) and situated in front of the working fire. In both trucks, discharge flow is controlled by regulating discharge pressure and varying nozzle size. Minimum suction pressure to both truck pumps is 10 psi. It should be noted that the New York State Department of Health and Suffolk County Department of Health Services’ minimum water pressure is 20 psi.

The pumpers on the trucks are calibrated once per year through the Suffolk County Fire Academy and service tested regularly in-house. Annual service tests are done using a 20 ft. draft suction line and dual 3″ discharge lines. Tests performed in June 1995 on the IH truck indicated discharge flows of 909 gpm, 699 gpm and 438 gpm from 1¾″, 1½″ and 1¼″ nozzles, respectively. In all of these tests, discharge pressure was 150 psi for the 1¾″ nozzle, 200 psi for the 1½″ nozzle and 250 psi for the 1¼″ nozzle.

Results from the service testing indicate both trucks have the ability to pump greater than their rated 750 gpm, by varying discharge pressure and nozzle size. Additionally, the pumps are required to provide 20 feet of suction lift in the service test. Under pressurized suction (i.e., connection to hydrant), greater flows would likely result. These findings are important to note given the limits of the available flow, as described in Sections 8.0 and 10.0. The concern is that the pumps may actually try to pump more water than is available, thereby, causing a suction problem.

Each truck is also equipped with hard suction piping to allow water to be drawn directly from the bay, if necessary. Truck pumps are capable of providing a maximum 33 feet of suction for this purpose. Service tests indicate the trucks can provide up to 900 gpm in this "drafting" mode.

On January 3, 1999, a fire occurred on Navy Walk, south of Lighthouse Promenade. The fire destroyed one home and caused damage to two others. The following details on this incident were obtained from the Village of Saltaire personnel.

Fire flow testing is conducted on water distribution systems to determine the rate of flow available for fire fighting purposes. According to the National Fire Code, for required fire flow exceeding 1500 gpm, the water supply system shall be capable of delivering the fire flow for at least 2 hours at 20 psi. For all other required fire flows, the National Fire Code states the water system shall be capable of delivering the fire flow for at least 1 hour at 20 psi.

The ISO conducted limited hydrant testing in 1974, and again in 1989. In 1974, two (2) hydrants, located on Bay & Neptune and Bay & Pilot failed to produce required fire flows. The hydrant on Bay & Neptune failed to produce the required 2250 gpm flow. The hydrant on Bay & Pilot failed to produce the required 750 gpm fire flow. Since this time, Well No. 2 has been constructed and placed into service. Results from the 1989 ISO testing indicated that all hydrants tested within the Village met the required fire flows except those located on Broadway at the Saltaire Market, and on Bay Promenade at the Yacht Club. Results from the 1989 ISO hydrant testing are presented in the Appendix.

A number of fire flow scenarios were run on October 5, 1999 by H2M and Saltaire Village personnel. An overview of the results are presented in this section. A list of the fire flow tests run appears on Table 8-1. Data from these tests are presented in the Appendix.

This test simulated the fire in January 1999. The hydrant on the 6″ main on Beacon Walk was tested. Actual flow from the hydrant was 630-650 gpm, indicating a hydrant flowing pressure of 15 psi. The calculated available flow at 20 psi system pressure was 1,203 gpm. Several observations during this test are noteworthy:

This test shows the effect of headloss on available flow. The hydrant on the 6″ main at the east end of Lighthouse Promenade was tested. The calculated available fire flow was only 782 gpm vs. 1,203 gpm in Test No. 1, at similar distribution system pressure.

This was the first test performed with both wells functioning (i.e., Summer mode). Results clearly indicate the effect of one vs. two wells on-line and also the effect of the 6″ main. The hydrant of the 6″ main at the eastern end of West Bay was tested. The calculated available flow was 890 gpm with one well and 1,856 gpm with two wells on. The actual flow was 750 vs. 970 gpm.

This test shows the effect of flowing from a dead end hydrant on a 4″ main. Though 36 psi was maintained in the adjacent 6″ looped main, pressure at the flowing hydrant was only 11 psi. Calculated available flow was 830 gpm and actual flow was 550 gpm. However, it is unlikely that a pumper truck could draw any more than the 550 gpm seen, given the pressure loss present. Since the pressure loss was local to the hydrant, it was not seen in the 6″ transmission main and the second (lag) well was never called for.

This test was conducted in the same area as Test No. 4, but evaluated one vs. two hydrants flowing. With only one hydrant flowing in the looped 6″ section of the system, actual flow was 850 gpm and calculated available flow was 1,240 gpm. The second hydrant was then opened at the end of Surf. The combined calculated available flow from the two hydrants was 1,171 gpm with one well operating and 1,333 gpm with two wells operating. Though the test was ended shortly after the second well kicked on, an increase in system pressure and available flow was immediately observed once the second well turned on.

This test looked at flowing two hydrants in the same area as Test Nos. 4 and 4a, with hydrants not adjacent to each other. With both hydrants flowing, actual combined flow was 1,140 gpm and calculated available flow was 1,600 gpm. Again, an increase in available flow and system pressure was seen when the second well turned on. Pressure in the system recovered within three minutes once the second well came on. Prior to this, pressure at the dead end hydrant was approximately 5 psi, a situation that would present backflow conditions.

This test looked at flowing one vs. two interior hydrants on a 4″ main. With only one hydrant flowing on Atlantic, actual flow was 530 gpm and calculated available flow was 598 gpm. It should be noted that no pressure drop was seen at this flow rate. When one hydrant was flowed on Marine, the actual flow was 650 gpm, and calculated available flow was 856 gpm. The difference between Marine and Atlantic can likely be attributed to differences in the system pressure -- during the flow test on Marine, the system did not stabilize before the second hydrant was turned on.

With both hydrants flowing, the actual flow was 760 gpm and calculated available flow was 689 gpm. Results indicate that with both hydrants flowing, the residual system pressure was 14 psi. This is below the required system pressure of 20 psi. Also, it should be noted that although the system pressure dropped to 14 psi at the Bay and Atlantic location, the second well did not turn on. Apparently, the headloss associated with flowing the two hydrants on the 4″ main did not drop pressure at Well No. 1 enough to call for the lag well. This finding illustrates the importance of adding a local pressure sensor/transmitter in the Well No. 2 pump house.

Also, as would be expected, the second flowing hydrant "steals" available water from the first hydrant. The actual flow from the hydrant on Atlantic dropped from 530 gpm to 380 gpm when the Marine hydrant was opened.

Looked at flowing two hydrants in the interior of the distribution system; one on a 4″ and one on a 6″ main. The 4″ hydrant was able to produce an actual 530 gpm fire flow and a theoretical 547 gpm with one well running. When the second well came on, the available fire flow increased to 880 gpm before the second hydrant was turned on. Flow from the hydrant on the 6″ main was 650 gpm with only one well running.

When both hydrants were running and both wells were on, the available combined fire flow was 1,306 gpm and system pressure had stabilized.

Looked at flowing the hydrants in front of the Town Hall. The hydrant is connected to a 4″ main. Calculated available flow with one well running is 741 gpm.

The following conclusions can be drawn from the fire flow tests described above:

1. Due to the headloss seen in the 4″ main, localized low pressure can result on the dead end hydrants, yet not cause enough pressure loss in the 6″ loop to call for the lag well.

A number of communities on Fire Island rely on draft wells for fire flow. Typically, draft wells are 4″ in diameter, drilled to approximately 60 feet in depth, and fit with 30 feet of screen. Typical well construction is steel with 316 SS screen. Life expectancy of these wells is approximately 12 – 15 years, and annual purging is recommended. The top of the wells are teed and terminated with the appropriate fitting for the local Fire Department. Expected flows from these wells are 400-500 gpm. Cost per well is approximately $4,500.

By increasing the size of the drafting wells to 6″ or 8″ diameter, greater flow capacity can be achieved. A 6″ well would be expected to produce 700-800 gpm and cost approximately $7,000. An 8″ well would be expected to produce 800-1,000 gpm and cost approximately $10,000.

Given the 20-30 feet available suction lift in the pumper trucks and the shallow water table on the island, draft wells are a viable option for increasing fire flow to critical areas. However, the presence of wooden walks throughout the Village would limit the access of the drilling rig. Access to the Village would likely be limited to the concrete road on Lighthouse Way and the immediately adjacent area. Developing draft wells in more remote locations may require removal/reconstruction of the boardwalks for access. Given that the 6″ main runs the length of Lighthouse Promenade, drafting wells in these locations do not appear necessary.

As noted above, the ISO has classified two (2) commercial areas in the Village, and required higher fire flows for these areas. Saltaire Market (Village Hall) is rated for 3,000 gpm fire flow. The Yacht Club on Bay is rated for 1750 gpm. Due to the proximity of these areas to the Great South Bay, it should be possible to draft directly from the Bay for fire flow. The available suction lift on the pumper trucks should allow them to prime even in low tide, providing they were parked close to the water.

Previous calibration tests have indicated that both Saltaire Fire Department trucks are capable of 900 gpm flow when flowing through a 1¾″ nozzle. It is assumed that the pumper trucks from adjacent Villages (Kismet, Fair Harbor) are capable of similar flow. Thus, the production of 3000 gpm fire flow would be dependent on a minimum of three (3) pumpers drafting from the Bay. An additional hose could then be directly attached to an appropriate hydrant to make up the remainder of the required fire flow.

As mentioned above, the 6″ main on Lighthouse is connected to the 6″ main for the Fair Harbor system that is kept operable year-round. Presently, the Fair Harbor Water District services approximately 550 residential customers, and relies on two (2) wells: Well #1, which produces 275 gpm; and Well #2, which produces 175 gpm, and a 10,000 gallon hydropneumatic storage tank at Well #1. The system average day demand is approximately 100,000 gallons. During the Winter months, only Well #1 is in operation. Future plans for the Fair Harbor water system may include the introduction of a third well, estimated at 100 gpm production, and an additional 3000 gallons in hydropneumatic storage. The well and tank are located in the Dunewood region, but are currently out-of-service.

Saltaire Fire Department personnel should be instructed on the location and operation of the valves connecting the Saltaire and Fair Harbor systems. Valves connecting the two systems are normally closed. It is recommended that Saltaire conduct fireflow tests to determine the increase in available flow when the valves to the Fair Harbor system are open.

The highest fire flows and lowest headloss was seen along the 6″ diameter looped main. As noted above, the headloss associated with high flow rates in the 4″ mains will significantly impact available fire flow. For hydrants on the 4″ mains, the available fire flow will be directly related to the length of 4″ main between the 6″ looped main and the hydrant.

Given this, the critical residential areas in the system are the central island locations along Surf, Beach, Atlantic, Marine, Broadway, Neptune and Navy.

Installing a larger diameter main along Harbor Promenade would complete the loop, and greatly reduced the distance of 4″ main. An 8″ main along Harbor Promenade is advisable. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) recommends that pipe no less than 6″ in diameter be used for fire service and 6″ only when no leg is greater than 600 feet. The estimated cost for installation of approximately 2200 feet of 8″ main, including tie-in of the 4″ mains along Surf, Beach, Atlantic, Marine, Broadway, Neptune and Navy, tie-in of the 6″ mains on the West and Pacific and addition of an 8″ main from Harbor to Well No. 2 is $275,000. The cost for installing approximately 1000 feet of 6″ main along Beach Walk is estimated at $125,000. The cost for relocating the six (6) existing hydrants from the 4″ main to the proposed 8″ main is estimated at $10,000. All of the above estimated costs do not include demolition and re-construction of the existing walks. A map indicating these proposed distribution system changes appears as Figure 9-1.

As noted above, present well production is adequate to meet ISO residential fire flow requirements of 750 gpm. Well Nos. 1 and 2 may be capable of producing higher flow rates with modifications to the existing pump and motor. The cost for upgrading each well is dependent on the extent of necessary work, ranging from $7,500 each well for simple pump modifications, to over $30,000 each well, should modifications to wells, pumps, motors and piping be required. An engineering study of the existing wells, including pumps, motors, associated piping and electrical components would be required to determine the extent of work. Such a study is beyond the scope of this report.

It is recommended that the Village first address the distribution system upgrades described herein. The addition of the proposed 8" loop should enable hydrants throughout the system to meet residential fire flow requirements. Once distribution system upgrades are completed, the need for pump upgrades should be reviewed.

The Inc. Village of Saltaire has an adequate supply of groundwater to meet present ISO fire flow demand of 750 gpm in residential areas. The greatest limiting factor in providing this flow to all hydrants is the predominance of 4″ mains in the distribution system and the presence of dead ends in the system. Other factors in improving fire flow are related to current water system instrumentation, water system operations and Fire Department operations.

The following sections describe recommended improvements related to the distribution system, well operations and specific fireflow hardware. Noting that there are a significant number of improvements with an overall estimated cost that would be too expensive to implement immediately, we have prioritized the improvements. It should be noted that the costs provided only represent construction costs. They do not include any non-construction costs such as design, inspection, etc.

As noted above, the theoretical headloss in 4″ diameter main at fire flow rates is in the order of 12 psi per 100 feet of length. Thus, long term solutions for increasing fire flow should be aimed at minimizing the run length in the 4″ diameter main.

As noted above, current operating procedures are to take Well No. 2 off-line for the Winter season due to the presence of iron and hydrogen sulfide in the well. The well is taken off-line by overriding the well controls. The present controls call for alternating lead:lag sequence of Well Nos. 1 and 2. For typical Winter demand, when only one well is required, Village personnel override the controls so that Well No. 1 comes on regardless of which lead well is called for.

In this scenario, however, should a high demand episode occur (i.e., fire flow, leakage), the relay for Well No. 2 has to be physically reconnected in order to allow the well to run. The following recommendations are provided:

1. Automatic Blowoff Valve (Priority Item No. 6) – An automatic valve opens upon well start-up, and allows the well to flow to waste for a pre-set amount of time. This is the standard H2M design for pump stations. The estimated cost for this improvement at Well No. 2 is $35,000.
2. Artesian Waste Line (Priority Item No. 7) – As noted above, Well No. 2 is a true artesian well, capable of flowing under non-pumping conditions. However the present piping does not allow the well to flow in this scenario. It may be possible to construct an overflow line approximately 350 feet in length. The overflow line would flow directly to the Bay and allow continuous artesian discharge from the well. Preliminary testing indicates the well has adequate artesian pressure to flow to the Bay through a 3″ pipe. This design would reduce the build-up of iron in the well during non-pumping periods. The estimated cost for this improvement is $30,000.

A drafting system from the bay is recommended, as previously described. This is likely, the quickest, least expensive way to provide the required 2,250 gpm flowrate to the business district. Prior to design and construction, it is recommended that the Village verify the ability of the pumper trucks to provide adequate suction lift in the worse case scenario and determine possible locations for the system. The estimated cost for the addition of a bay drafting system is $15,000.

Regarding ground water drafting wells, the issue of well rig access to the interior parts of the Village limits this option. Further, the areas along Lighthouse Promenade that allow access by the drilling rig are already served by the 6″ main and appear to have adequate fire flow.

The difference in available fire flow from 4″ and 6″ mains was observed in fire flow tests and seen in the theoretical headloss presented in Table 5-1. The NFPA recommends the following color for hydrant bonnet and nozzle caps, based on the available flow:

Less than 500 gpm Red

500 to 900 gpm Orange

1,000 to 1,499 gpm Green

It is recommended that the Village use similar markings, based on field verified available flows. Alternately, the Village can use different hydrant markings for hydrants on 4″ vs. 6″ mains. This will allow the Fire Department to quickly identify hydrants with the highest available flow when responding to a fire. This item is not considered a capital improvement and has not been prioritized. However, we recommend that an in-house program be instated to address this issue.

As noted above, pumper trucks are operated using pressure gauges for suction and discharge. Thus, these is no clear correlation between the pressures seen during fire flow and flow rates. This may lead to a situation where the pump operator attempts to pump too high a flow rate, resulting in low suction pressure, poor pump performance and possibly loss of prime. It is recommended that the pump be calibrated to correlate pressure and flow for each discharge sizes and this correlation be posted on the truck.

As noted above, the Saltaire Fire Department personnel should also be instructed on the location and operation of the interconnecting valve between Saltaire and Fair Harbor.

These items are not considered capital improvements and have not been prioritized. We recommend in-house programs be instated to address the issues of pumper truck calibration and valve locations.

Priority Item # Description Estimated Construction Cost

In summary, the existing Village water system is capable of meeting most of the recommended fire flows throughout the Village. However, some minor modifications are necessary to ensure that the system operates effectively during the emergency situations. Some minor water main improvements as presented herein should be considered to improve the distribution of flow to all areas of the Village.

H2M Project No.: SALT 99-02

Test Date: October 5, 1999

Personnel: Larry Slack (Saltaire), Vernon Henrikson (Saltaire),

Test Description No. 1 - Fire Flow Scenario of January 1999

Ø Test Hydrant – End of Beacon Walk

Ø Residual Pressure hydrant – Pennant & Lighthouse

Initial Static Pressure = 44 psi

TIME	FLOW	PRESSURE	PUMP HOUSE
tinitial	750	34	36
t1 = 3 min.	700	30	35
t2 = 10 min.	650	26	30
t3 = 15 min.	630	25	30

AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL (NFPA 291): Q_A = Q_F(h_a^.54)

(h_f^.54)

Q_A - Available fire flow at 20 psi residual

Q_F - Actual full flow measured during test

h_a - Pressure drop to 20 psi residual

h_f - Pressure drop measured during test

H2M Project No.: SALT 99-02

Test Date: October 5, 1999

Personnel: Larry Slack (Saltaire), Vernon Henrikson (Saltaire),

Test Description No. 2 - SE Dead End of Distribution System (Zone 12 on map)

Ø Test Hydrant – East Walk and Lighthouse

Ø Residual Pressure Hydrant – Seawalk and Lighthouse

Initial Static Pressure = 41 psi

AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL (NFPA 291): Q_A = Q_F(h_a^.54)

(h_f^.54)

Q_A - Available fire flow at 20 psi residual

Q_F - Actual full flow measured during test

h_a - Pressure drop to 20 psi residual

h_f - Pressure drop measured during test

H2M Project No.: SALT 99-02

Test Date: October 5, 1999

Personnel: Larry Slack (Saltaire), Vernon Henrikson (Saltaire),

Test Description No. 3 – NE End of Distribution System (Zone 18 on map)

Ø Test Hydrant - "Pennant" and West Bay

Ø Residual Pressure Hydrant - "Richards" and West Bay

Initial Static Pressure = 42 psi

TIME		FLOW	PRESSURE
tinitial		770	35
t1 = 2.5 min.		750	26
t2 = 5 min.		740	26
t3 = 8.5 min.	2nd Well Kicks On	840	34 40 in pump house
t4 = 13.5 min.		920	36
t5 = 15 min.		970	42
t6 = 17 min.		--	--
t7 = 18 min.	Only 1 Well On	750	28

AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL (NFPA 291): Q_A = Q_F(h_a^.54)

(h_f^.54)

Q_A - Available fire flow at 20 psi residual

Q_F - Actual full flow measured during test

h_a - Pressure drop to 20 psi residual

h_f - Pressure drop measured during test

H2M Project No.: SALT 99-02

Test Date: October 5, 1999

Personnel: Larry Slack (Saltaire), Vernon Henrikson (Saltaire),

Test Description No. 4 – SW End of Distribution System – Single Hydrant on 4″ Main

Ø Test Hydrant – End of Surf

Ø Residual Pressure Hydrant – Beach and Lighthouse

Initial Static Pressure = 50 psi

TIME	FLOW	PRESSURE	PRESSURE AT HYDRANT
tinitial	578	36	12
t1 = 2 min.	550	36	11
t2 = 4 min.	550	36	11
t3 = 6 min.	550	36	11
t4 = 8 min.

AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL (NFPA 291): Q_A = Q_F(h_a^.54)

(h_f^.54)

Q_A - Available fire flow at 20 psi residual

Q_F - Actual full flow measured during test

h_a - Pressure drop to 20 psi residual

h_f - Pressure drop measured during test

H2M Project No.: SALT 99-02

Test Date: October 5, 1999

Personnel: Larry Slack (Saltaire), Vernon Henrikson (Saltaire),

Test Description No. 4a – One vs. Two Hydrants in SW End of Distribution System

Ø Test Hydrants – Surf & Lighthouse

End of Surf

Ø Residual Pressure Hydrant – Beach & Lighthouse

Initial Static Pressure = 54 psi

TIME	FLOW Surf & Lighthouse	FLOW End of Surf	PRESSURE
tinitial
t1 = 1 min.	920		38
t2 = 2 min.	880		36
t3 = 4 min.	850		36
(both hydrants open)
t4 = 4.5 min.	700	380	24
t5 = 5.5 min.	670	425	24
t6 = 7.0 min.	650	410	22
t7 = 7+ min. (both wells on)	750	446	26

AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL (NFPA 291): Q_A = Q_F(h_a^.54)

(h_f^.54)

Q_A - Available fire flow at 20 psi residual

Q_F - Actual full flow measured during test

h_a - Pressure drop to 20 psi residual

h_f - Pressure drop measured during test

H2M Project No.: SALT 99-02

Test Date: October 5, 1999

Personnel: Larry Slack (Saltaire), Vernon Henrikson (Saltaire),

Test Description No. 4b – Flowing two hydrants in SW corner of Distribution System

Ø Test Hydrants – End of Surf

Beach & Lighthouse

Ø Residual Pressure Hydrant – Surf & Lighthouse

Initial Static Pressure = 50 psi

TIME		FLOW End of Surf	FLOW Beach & Light	PRESSURE
tinitial
t1 = 1 min.		350 <5	540	14
t2 = 2 min.		350 <5	520	12
t3 = 4 min.		350 <5	455	12
t4 = 6 min.		350 <5	455	12
t5 = 10 min.	2nd well on	350 <5	455	12
t6 = 11.5 min.		425 <5	700	22
t7 = 12.5 min.		440 <5	700	34

AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL (NFPA 291): Q_A = Q_F(h_a^.54)

(h_f^.54)

Q_A - Available fire flow at 20 psi residual

Q_F - Actual full flow measured during test

h_a - Pressure drop to 20 psi residual

h_f - Pressure drop measured during test

H2M Project No.: SALT 99-02

Test Date: October 5, 1999

Personnel: Larry Slack (Saltaire), Vernon Henrikson (Saltaire),

Test Description No. 5 – Flowing two (2) Interior Hydrants on 4″ main

à One (1) flowing vs. Two (2) flowing

Ø Test Hydrants – Atlantic & Harbor

– Marine & Harbor

Ø Residual Pressure Hydrant – Atlantic & West Bay

Test Description No. 5a – Atlantic & Harbor only

Initial Static Pressure = 45 psi

TIME	FLOW Atlantic & Harbor	FLOW Marine & Harbor	PRESSURE
tinitial
t1 = 2 min.	530	--	25
t2 = 4 min.	530	--	25
t3 = 6 min.	530	--	25

Test Description No. 5b

Initial Static Pressure = 50 psi

TEST	FLOW Atlantic & Harbor	FLOW Marine & Harbor	PRESSURE
tinitial	--	690	38
t1 = 2 min.	--	670	35
t2 = 4 min.	--	650	32
t3 = 6 min.	435	450	16
t4 = 8 min.	380	430	16
t5 = 10 min.	380	410	14
t6 = 12 min.	380	390	14
t7 = 14 min.	380	380	14

AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL (NFPA 291): Q_A = Q_F(h_a^.54)

(h_f^.54)

Q_A - Available fire flow at 20 psi residual

Q_F - Actual full flow measured during test

h_a - Pressure drop to 20 psi residual

h_f - Pressure drop measured during test

H2M Project No.: SALT 99-02

Test Date: October 5, 1999

Personnel: Larry Slack (Saltaire), Vernon Henrikson (Saltaire),

Test Description No. 6 – Flowing two (2) interior hydrants in distribution;

4″ vs. 6″ hydrant

Test Hydrants – Neptune & Harbor (4″)

– Pacific & Harbor (6″)

Residual Pressure Hydrant – Neptune – between Harbor & West Bay

Initial Static Pressure = 55 psi

TIME			FLOW Neptune & Harbor	FLOW Pacific & Harbor	PRESSURE
tinitial			580		28
t1 = 1 min.			530		22
t2 = 2 min.	2nd well		650		32
t3 = 4 min.	kicks on		670		34
t4 = 5 min.		2nd hydrant	530	700	24
t5 = 7 min.		flowing	530	720	22
t6 = 9 min.			530	735	22
t7 = 11 min.			530	735	22

Test Description No. 6a – Flowing one (1) hydrant on interior 6″ main

Test Hydrant – Pacific & Harbor

Residual Pressure Hydrant = Neptune and West Bay

Initial Static Pressure = 55 psi

AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL (NFPA 291): Q_A = Q_F(h_a^.54)

(h_f^.54)

Q_A - Available fire flow at 20 psi residual

Q_F - Actual full flow measured during test

h_a - Pressure drop to 20 psi residual

h_f - Pressure drop measured during test

H2M Project No.: SALT 99-02

Test Date: October 5, 1999

Personnel: Larry Slack (Saltaire), Vernon Henrikson (Saltaire),

Test Description No 7 – Flowing one (1) hydrant next to Town Hall

Ø Test Hydrant – Broadway in front of Village Hall

Ø Residual Pressure Hydrant – Broadway & Harbor

Initial Static Pressure = 45 psi

AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW AT 20 PSI RESIDUAL (NFPA 291): Q_A = Q_F(h_a^.54)

(h_f^.54)

Q_A - Available fire flow at 20 psi residual

Q_F - Actual full flow measured during test

h_a - Pressure drop to 20 psi residual

h_f - Pressure drop measured during test