MSW Association Site Plan - Final Project Report | BAE 4012, Study Guides, Projects, Research of Engineering

Download MSW Association Site Plan - Final Project Report | BAE 4012 and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Engineering in PDF only on Docsity! MSW Association Site Plan Final Report BAE 4012 – Senior Design Meagan Armstrong, Rachel Cancienne, Megan Perry April 27, 2006 PeAC Designs 2 Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES.....................................................................................................................................................3 LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................................................................4 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................5 STATEMENT OF WORK..........................................................................................................................................6 SITE DESCRIPTION .....................................................................................................................................................6 STRUCTURAL LAYOUT...............................................................................................................................................7 Common Use Facilities ........................................................................................................................................8 Private Use Facilities...........................................................................................................................................9 Open Air Facilities.............................................................................................................................................10 EXISTING UTILITIES.................................................................................................................................................11 Electrical Distribution .......................................................................................................................................11 Water Distribution .............................................................................................................................................12 Sewer Collection ................................................................................................................................................13 SITE EXPECTATIONS ................................................................................................................................................14 LITERATURE REVIEW .........................................................................................................................................15 LAYOUT PLANNING .................................................................................................................................................15 RECREATIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................................................16 THE DESIGN PROCESS..............................................................................................................................................16 STRUCTURAL LAYOUT DESIGNS .....................................................................................................................18 PLAN A....................................................................................................................................................................18 PLAN B ....................................................................................................................................................................20 FEASIBILITY OF STRUCTURAL LAYOUT DESIGNS ....................................................................................22 PLAN A....................................................................................................................................................................22 PLAN B ....................................................................................................................................................................22 FINAL STRUCTURAL LAYOUT DESIGN ..........................................................................................................23 FINAL UTILITIES DESIGN ...................................................................................................................................25 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION.....................................................................................................................................25 WATER DISTRIBUTION.............................................................................................................................................28 SEWER COLLECTION................................................................................................................................................32 UTILITIES DESIGN COST ANALYSIS................................................................................................................36 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION.....................................................................................................................................36 WATER DISTRIBUTION.............................................................................................................................................36 SEWER COLLECTION................................................................................................................................................37 SAFETY AND HAZARDS ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................38 REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................................................39 APPENDIX A.............................................................................................................................................................40 APPENDIX B.............................................................................................................................................................42 APPENDIX C.............................................................................................................................................................45 PeAC Designs 5 Introduction The Muscogee-Seminole-Wichita (MSW) Baptist Association is a fellowship of Native American Baptist Churches from 11 Oklahoma counties. Founded in 1851, it was the first Association organized in Indian Territory. In October of 1956, the Association purchased 40 acres adjacent to the Yardeka Baptist Church grounds nine miles southeast of Henryetta, Oklahoma. They bought the land in McIntosh County for twenty dollars per acre and began constructing the Assembly Grounds in 1961. The Association holds several meetings at the Assembly Grounds throughout the year with the majority of activity during the summer months due to the week-long youth camp, adult church leadership camp, and Baptist Assembly. Ralph Hight, the Chief of Engineering and Construction at the Tulsa District of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), hired PeAC Designs on behalf of the MSW Association in September 2005. The task presented to PeAC Designs was to create an improved site plan for the MSW Tribal Association Assembly Grounds. The site plan needed to improve safety, provide for potential growth, and maintain functionality while keeping within the economic constraints of the Association. The plan needed to include water and power distribution as well as wastewater collection and treatment. PeAC Designs 6 Statement of Work Site Description The legal land description of the MSW Assembly Grounds is the SW ¼ SE ¼ Sec. 3 T10N R13E I.M. The property is bordered on all sides by private property. As shown in figure 1, there is a county road along the north edge of the property and a private road borders the eastern boundary. The grade of the site is fairly level on the north half with a relatively steep, rocky downhill slope on the south half. The property elevation drops roughly 60 feet on the eastern edge and 30 feet on the western boundary, yielding an average downhill slope of 6 percent. This slope change roughly bisects the property with a vegetation change from grasses to trees occurring here, as well. Information about the soils on the property was obtained from Soil Survey of McIntosh County Oklahoma (USDA-SCS, 1981). Soils on the site vary from the northern to the southern boundaries. The soil on most of the north half is a Linker fine sandy loam. In the middle portion of the property, the soils change to a Linker-Hector complex. Soil on the steep, south half of the property is made up mostly of an Enders-Hector association. Figure 1. Topographic map with MSW property identified in red circle. N PeAC Designs 7 Structural Layout PeAC Designs generated a layout of current structures on the MSW property using ArcView 3.2 (fig. 2). The layout was created referencing differential surveys provided by Marjorie Courtright of the USACE Tulsa District, and aerial photography downloaded from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Seamless Data Distribution System. Figure 2. Current structural layout with all facilities highlighted. N PeAC Designs 10 Open Air Facilities The dark green objects in the general structural layout (fig. 2) represent open air facilities. All of these facilities are situated on the north half of the property and most are located where there is very little slope. As shown in figure 5, the open air facilities include: 1. Prayer Garden 2. Nursery Playground 3. Double-sided Carport 4. Open Pavilions 5. Basketball Court Figure 5. Open air facilities layout. 1 2 3 4 5 4 4 N PeAC Designs 11 Existing Utilities PeAC designs gathered the information necessary to create current utility layouts from three sources; the differential survey provided by Marjorie Courtright, a water distribution and sewer collection layout provided by the MSW Association Planning Committee, and site visits. Electrical Distribution The Public Service Company of Oklahoma (PSO) provides electrical power to the MSW Assembly Grounds at single phase. The nearest three-phase line is at the intersection of 1138 and Salem County Roads. A general illustration of the current power distribution on the property is shown in figure 6. The power lines are shown in red and the twelve power transformers located throughout the site are identified as pink dots. All other power poles on the property are marked as light blue dots. Many of the small cabins obtain power by splicing into the power lines and stringing wires around poles and trees. Several of these wires hang dangerously low to the ground. Figure 6. Electrical distribution with power poles, transformers, and power lines. N PeAC Designs 12 Water Distribution McIntosh County Rural Water District #13 serves the facility. Two 1 ½ inch water meters are located on the north boundary of the property and are identified in figure 7 as red stars. A 3 inch line from the rural water district feeds the meter on the northwest corner and continues east to connect to the second meter in the middle of the property. This 3 inch line is identified in yellow in figure 7. The remaining water distribution on the property is through 1 ½ inch lines that are identified in figure 7 as lime green lines. Figure 7. Water distribution layout N PeAC Designs 15 Literature Review In order to provide the MSW Association with an appropriate and complete site plan, PeAC Designs first performed a comprehensive literature review. The literature review included general layout planning and design, as well as specific recreational design considerations. This research served as a basis for PeAC Designs’ education in planning theory. Layout Planning When considering the general idea of “site planning,” it is necessary to think about the plan in its most basic terms. What type of layout will work best on this site? What shape or pattern is most convenient? According to Lynch and Hack (1984), several commonly used design methods, include modular division and division by aspect. Modular division refers to dividing a site into distinct areas. This type of site development is seen throughout suburban America; a tract of land is separated into discrete regions that, if necessary, can be divided multiple times. This kind of division led to a popular Western U.S. layout, the grid. According to Campbell and Fainstain (1996), the grid has been used in modern times as a plan that neutralizes the environment. Modular design can be a convenient planning method if the program, or site needs, are inclined to this sort of repetitive function. It is possible to integrate this style of spatial division with a little creativity to generate a plan that is not completely modular. The units can be created in different sizes and for different functions, leading to a less monotonous pattern. Division by aspect is a method whereby the planner may regard the basic elements of site design separately (Lynch and Figure 9. Site planning patterns Hack, 1984). First, the activities of the site must be considered. The needs of the site may be met by a formal pattern, such as ring, peak, star, etc. noted in figure 9 (Lynch and Hack, 1984). PeAC Designs 16 If the designers choose this route, they must determine whether the pattern is applicable to the piece of land in terms of topography and hydrography. The next piece considered in layout planning is circulation of the site. Circulation refers to roads as well as foot paths, and is often determined by the presence of passes, ridge and valley systems, or existing routes through the property. Various road arrangements may be tested, including general patterns such as “grid, linear, or concentric schemes” (Lynch and Hack, 1984). Recreational Design Considerations Hultsman et al., (1998) counsels recreational designers to consider the many problems they must address during projects. The authors start with their most fundamental point: water flows downhill. Water-caused erosion can have significant impacts on the environment. The text warns that rapid erosion frequently occurs under rooftops due to rainfall drainage and that the best way to protect these areas is with crushed stone. Hultsman et al. (1998) also identified the importance of knowing the types of soil present at the site. This information can be found through the NRCS. According to the authors, vegetation is another vital aspect in crafting outdoor use areas. Cover planting is essential in the prevention of soil erosion and while shading is crucial for outside environments, the planner should not be afraid of cutting down trees. The next major portion of this publication concentrated on campsite development. The book discussed how universal-type campsites are best because they align the tent pad, garbage can, and fire pit all on the passenger side of the site. The campsites are considered universal because there are no limits to wheel chair-bound or disabled campers since the entire site is level. This type of site also reduces maintenance costs by decreasing site deterioration. The Design Process When designing changes to any type of park or recreational area, a detailed plan is essential. Kelsey and Gray (1985) provide useful information for the detailed steps necessary to create functional, attractive recreational facilities. This reference details how to set forth objectives identified by the sponsoring agency. There should be resource goals to ensure effective and conservative use of land and water sites, as well as participant goals to ensure safety, equal opportunity, and limited costs to those utilizing the facilities. PeAC Designs 17 Kelsey and Gray (1985) go on to discuss the necessity of preparing a supply analysis of the site to identify existing assets of the sponsoring agency, which range from buildings and scheduled events to natural resources. Next, the authors demonstrate the need to make population and demand analyses. They state that the planning of recreational areas “does not occur in a vacuum and the population served is most critical”. The demand analysis consists of polling the community to determine its desires. Once the data collection process is completed, Kelsey and Gray (1985) suggest performing an expenditure analysis to achieve a financial cost estimate of each component of the plan, as well as creating a priority criterion ranking system to determine the specific importance of each recommendation. PeAC Designs 20 Plan B A second site plan created by PeAC Designs utilizes many aspects of the current structural layout on the Assembly Grounds. This plan makes use of all large permanent structures and a majority of the private church cabins currently on the site. As in Plan A, an additional dormitory building is included as well as the motel-style building for offices and sleeping quarters. The new dormitory is located adjacent to the existing one, with a breezeway in between and the new office building is situated just north of the cafeteria. Two restroom/shower facilities are added; one on each edge of the property. As requested, designated RV and tent camping areas are on the western edge of the property. The main prayer garden and hiking trail are in the same locations as Plan A. As shown in figure 11, the additional buildings include: 1. Dormitory 2. Office Building 3. Restroom/Shower Facilities PeAC Designs 21 Figure 11. Plan B: Utilize current structural layout. 1 3 3 2 N PeAC Designs 22 Feasibility of Structural Layout Designs Plan A Plan A centralizes common use facilities and employs the topography for outdoor recreation. The feasible developments of this plan include using the shaded area on the western edge of the property for RV and tent camping facilities. The gentle grade on this portion of the property is conducive to the minor leveling needed for RV and tent pad sites. The addition of hiking trails and prayer gardens make use of the undeveloped south half. These amenities can be implemented with minimal construction effort. Many of the structural changes necessary for this design make it difficult and expensive to implement. In order to execute the “star” planning pattern, the cafeteria, dormitory, women’s ministry building, nursery, and both sets of restrooms must be demolished and reconstructed in the center of the property. To adjust for the relocation of these buildings, new trenches must be excavated for water and sewer line connections. Although the Linker-Hector soil complex in this area is adequate for constructing buildings, the shallow soil depth to bedrock makes excavation extremely difficult and cost prohibitive. PeAC Designs believes utilizing as many existing utility trenches as possible will be the most cost effective solution. Due to the Enders-Hector soil association on the south half of the property, PeAC Designs does not believe it is feasible to develop this area for anything other than recreational purposes. The shallow depth to bedrock, moderate to steep slope, and shrink-swell tendencies of the soil make excavation and construction impractical. Plan B Plan B maintains as much of the current structural layout as possible in order to limit the construction and excavation costs. It utilizes all feasible additions discussed in Plan A, which include designated camping areas, hiking trails, a larger prayer garden, and two new restroom facilities. The main difference between the suggested site plans is that Plan B takes advantage of the current structural layout on the property. All large permanent structures are retained as well as most of the private church cabins. Maintaining the current structural layout allows utilization of the existing utility trenches which makes this plan more cost effective than Plan A. PeAC Designs 25 Final Utilities Design Electrical Distribution Upon visiting the site, PeAC Designs noted several areas of concern within the electrical distribution on the Assembly Grounds. Due to the scope of this project, only the major existing lines which pose a problem on the facility are addressed. However, PeAC designs offers recommendations for the additional concerns. In order to provide the MSW Association with a safer facility, PeAC designs recommends relocating the power line that currently crosses the playing field, running from the northwest corner of the property to a transformer near the dormitory. The new path for the power line will follow the west entrance of the property, labeled as section A in figure 13. From this point, the line runs between the dormitory and women’s ministry building and connects to an existing power pole which serves the center of the property. This section of line is labeled as section B in figure 13. An additional line near the west boundary of the property should be added to accommodate the installation of the RV loop and is labeled as section C in figure 13. Figure 13. Final electrical distribution layout N A B C PeAC Designs 26 This task requires moving a total of 550 feet of existing line and purchasing an additional 390 feet of new line. One power pole and one transformer from the original layout can be utilized in this design; however, the purchase of two power poles and one transformer is required. The total material needed is given in table 1. Table 1. Electrical distribution necessities Description Length (ft) Total line 940 Old line to be moved 550 New line needed 390 New transformers needed 1 Transformers/power poles to be moved 1 New power poles needed 2 Because many power lines which feed the private cabins were installed without proper guidance from PSO, PeAC Designs recommends the MSW Association consult PSO and a licensed electrician to properly install all service. After consultation with the electric provider, PeAC Designs determined that the infrastructure is adequate to supply power to all existing buildings. Although the MSW Association was concerned the power supply feeding the air conditioning unit at the dormitory was inadequate, the problem is actually an under-sized breaker box. The breaker box needs to be sized to the correct amperage. According to the National Electric Code (NFPA, 2004),section 225.18 part 1, electric cables shall have a clearance of at least 10 feet above the finished grade, sidewalks, or any platform from which they might be reached where the voltage does not exceed 150 volts to ground and is accessible to pedestrians only. In addition, it specifies that there be a minimum clearance of 3 feet for all electrical lines above rooftops provided that those rooftops have slopes no less than 4 inches of vertical rise per 1 foot of horizontal run. These requirements are demonstrated as Figure 9-18 and Figure 9-15 in the National Electric Code (NFPA, 2004) and below as figure 14 and figure 15, respectively. PeAC Designs 27 Figure 14. Minimum ground clearance of electrical lines Figure 15. Minimum clearance for electrical lines above rooftops PeAC Designs 30 tall. This elevation was determined from the concept that 1 psi corresponds to 2.31 feet of water in a tower. To provide an initial pressure of 40 psi the tower needs to be 92.4 feet tall. However, this pressure will drop with every gallon used; therefore, the addition of 7.6 feet would maintain the ideal pressure for a longer period of time. After studying this option, one major roadblock came to light. With a static pressure in the main line of 40 psi, it would not be possible to fill the tower without the aid of a pump. The size of pump necessary to pump water 100 feet in the air would require 3-phase power, which is unavailable on the site. In order to achieve 3-phase power, it would be necessary to install either a diesel or wind-operated generator. Both types of generators would have a sizeable initial investment and considerable maintenance costs. The next design considered to address the water distribution problem incorporated a smaller potable water holding tank with a booster pump for distribution. The tank would be large enough to provide the peak water demand for up to an hour and the pump would be small enough to run on single-phase electric power. This design proved to be the better of the two options. PeAC Designs used WaterCAD to accurately size the distribution lines, the water holding tank, and the booster pump, for the pressures and demands needed. Using this software, PeAC Designs modeled a looped distribution system with a more direct configuration for the property, noted in figure 16. Rather than bisecting the property at a diagonal from the northwest water meter and running haphazardly throughout, the configuration for the west side of the property is streamlined. The system modeled in WaterCAD was with 3-inch distribution lines throughout the property, a 10,000 gallon water storage tank, and a 7 ½ horsepower, motor driven pump. The modeled system was set to have the pump turn on when the system pressure dropped to 25 psi and then turn off when the system pressure reaches 40 psi. With this set up, the resulting pressures at the various junctions on the site proved adequate based on Table 15 from Private Water Systems Handbook (MWPS, 1979). This handbook recommends a minimum water pressure of 20 psi at a typical flush-valve toilet. The lowest pressure on the modeled system is 25.9 psi. A junction, pipe, pump, and tank report are found in Appendix B. PeAC Designs 31 Figure 16. Final water distribution layout In order to effectively implement this solution, PeAC Designs recommends the installation of at least two 220 gallon pressure tanks and a simple valving system. The pressure tanks should be installed parallel to one another and downstream from the distribution pump. They would act as a pressure buffer system, allowing the use of at least 60 gallons of water on the property before the pressure would drop below 25 psi, necessitating activation of the booster pump by a pressure switch. The valves necessary for the distribution system include a set of manual valves on either side of the pump, allowing the pump to be removed from the system for maintenance; a check valve in the line coming off the second water meter, allowing water to only flow into the system and not back into the main line; a check valve in the line between the two junctions where the line splits off to feed the tank and where the tank feeds back into the system, allowing water to only flow into the system and not back into the main line or circulate back into the tank. It will be necessary for the MSW Association to construct a building large enough to N PeAC Designs 32 house the holding tank, booster pump, and the two pressure tanks. The building needs to have a concrete foundation, be vented for air circulation, and be insulated to prevent freezing. For future growth, including the addition of a dormitory, a restroom facility on the east side of the property, and providing water hook-ups to the RV sites, it will be necessary for the MSW Association to implement an additional holding tank and pump system. Sewer Collection The current sewer collection layout on the Assembly Grounds is both logical and appropriate for the needs of the MSW Association as per the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality Chapter 641, Individual and On-site Sewage Treatment Systems (Oklahoma, 2004). According to Appendix C of Chapter 641 (Oklahoma, 2004), 4 inch diameter pipes are applicable when the total average flow from buildings feeding the pipe is less than or equal to 2000 gallons per day (gpd); whereas, 6 inch pipes must be used for flows greater than 2000 gpd. PeAC Designs calculated the typical wastewater flowrates for each building on the property using Table 4-4 by Crites and Tchobanoglous (1998). All present sewer line sizes are suitable for the current structural layout except for segment A in figure 17. Using the lower limit for wastewater production because the Assembly Grounds is a seasonal facility, PeAC Designs computed that the flowrate for the dormitory, with 100 people using the building, is 2000 gpd. Because the dormitory sewer pipe is serviced by segment A, this line must be increased from a 4 inch to a 6 inch pipe. The MSW Association needs to verify that all sewer collection pipes are constructed from either acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) or polyvinyl chloride (PVC) of standards listed in Appendix C of Chapter 641 (Oklahoma, 2004), as well. PeAC Designs 35 capacity becomes 85,979 cubic feet with 69,822 cubic feet of water-holding space. The Association needs to remove all woody vegetation from the top of the dikes and make sure the top of the dikes are at least 1 foot above the surrounding topography. Chapter 641 (Oklahoma, 2004) mandates this requirement and mandates that a six-foot woven wire fence surround all on- site lagoons located in public access areas. PeAC Designs 36 Utilities Design Cost Analysis The necessary materials and associated expenses for the renovation of the electrical, water, and sewer distribution system are described below. These prices are estimates and based on availability in the spring of 2006. PeAC Designs recommends that all utility installations be performed by licensed professionals. Electrical Distribution PSO estimates the associated costs for the changes in the power distribution to be $6200.00. This includes the relocation of the existing line, power pole, and transformer as well as the purchase of additional line, transformers, and power poles needed to complete the project. This fee does not include the installation of electrical hook-ups for the RV loop. However, the electrician installing the loop would be provided a "connection point" from PSO. This “connection point” would cost an additional $1000 and would include a transformer and a "drop" to the point of connection. A complete list of the material needed is listed in Table 1. A site visit from PSO is suggested in order to provide a more accurate cost analysis. Water Distribution The water holding tank that PeAC Designs recommends is a 10,000 gallon polyethylene fresh water tank which meets all National Sanitation Foundation requirements for potable water. This particular tank, made by Water Tanks.com of Columbus, OH, has an 11.75 feet diameter and is 13.3 feet tall. The steel building required to house the water tank can be custom built. Estimated dimensions of the building are 16 feet long, 16 feet wide and 16 feet tall. These approximations were given by Brian Strader Construction of Stillwater, OK. The concrete foundation for this building must be 6 inches thick on the outer edges with a 4 inch thick center. Cowboy Concrete of Stillwater, OK provided this information. An example of a pump-motor combination required for this project can be found in the Berkeley Pump Systems catalogue. PeAC Designs referenced a Model B2TPM pump with 7 ½ horsepower motor combination for this cost analysis. In order to start the pump-motor combination with the single phase power on the site and not overdraw power from the system, a PeAC Designs 37 soft start controller is required. The controller operates at 30 amperes, 220 volts, and 7 ½ horsepower and can be obtained from Advanced Motor Power Systems of San Clemente, CA. Pressure tanks necessary to prevent the pump from cycling on and off too frequently were priced through Yourwaterneeds.com which operates out of Tampa, FL. PeAC Designs priced the SR-PS220 Model, a 220 gallon-size bladder tank. Each of these tanks is 51 inches tall with a 24-inch diameter. PeAC Designs estimates the new looped water distribution layout will require 4,020 feet of 3-inch Schedule 40 PVC pipe. Cost approximations for this product were obtained through Wilson’s Pipe of Tulsa, OK. A trencher required to install the PVC pipe can be rented for a monthly or weekly fee from a company such as Pioneer Rental of Stillwater, OK. All costs associated with water distribution are summarized in table 4. Table 4. Water distribution cost estimates Description Quantity Size Cost/ unit Total Water tank 1 10,000 gal $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Pump/Motor 1 2x2.5x6M $2,600.00 $2,600.00 Controller 1 7.5 Hp $470.00 $470.00 Pressure tanks 2 220 gal $485.00 $970.00 PVC pipe 40.2 100 ft $180.00 $7,236.00 Steel building 1 18x16x16 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 Concrete Foundation 1 16x18 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 Equipment Rental 1 month $2,160.00 $2,160.00 Total $24,136.00 Sewer Collection Although PeAC Designs has made several recommendations for improvement of the lagoon, it is difficult to provide accurate cost estimation without a site visit by a licensed professional. PeAC Designs can estimate a total lagoon excavation of 16,500 cubic feet and a total fence length of no less than 525 feet. At a cost of $6 per cubic yard, total excavation costs, without disposal, would be approximately $3700. This general excavation cost was provided by Carrier Construction of Stillwater, Ok. A 6-foot chain-link fence can be purchased from Lowe’s in 50 foot increments at a total uninstalled cost of approximately $815. PeAC Designs 40 Appendix A Un-looped Distribution System PeAC Designs 41 Junction Report Label Base Flow (gpm) Demand (Calculated) (gpm) Calculated Hydraulic Grade (ft) Pressure (psi) J-1 132 132 -832.14 -360.03 J-2 13 13 -935.25 -404.64 J-3 29 29 -957.58 -414.3 J-4 16 16 -963.42 -416.83 J-5 0 0 -440.29 -190.49 J-6 26 26 -440.29 -190.49 J-7 34 34 -404.67 -175.08 J-8 0 0 -273 -118.11 J-9 0 0 -268.56 -116.19 J-10 0 0 -272.96 -118.1 Pipe Report Label Length (ft) Diameter (in) Discharge (gpm) Pressure Pipe Headloss (ft) Headloss Gradient (ft/1000ft) P-1 230 1.5 -199 563.58 2,450.34 P-2 230 1.5 0 0 0 P-3 316 1.5 67 103.12 326.32 P-4 102 1.5 54 22.32 218.85 P-5 450 1.5 9 3.57 7.93 P-6 254 1.5 16 5.84 23 P-8 513 1.5 0 0 0 P-9 630 1.5 -26 35.61 56.53 P-10 495 1.5 -60 131.67 266 PeAC Designs 42 Appendix B Looped Distribution System with Tank and Pump PeAC Designs 45 Appendix C Safety Report and Analysis PeAC Designs 46 SYSTEMS SAFETY FPST 4333 BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING PROJECT Fire and Safety Engineering Recommendations for PeAC Designs Site Planning Consultants By: Andrea E. Sebree Fire Protection & Safety Engineering PeAC Designs 47 Introduction This report on the fire and life safety concerns identified at the Muscogee-Seminole- Wichita Baptist Association Camp site in Henryetta, OK will pin point the major areas of concern, cite the regulating code or standard followed by corrective recommendations. Attached is a preliminary hazards analysis that was conducted after the site visit to help identify the key issues that presented a particularly complex or repeated exposure of a hazard (or hazards) to the occupants. The situation is further complicated by the desire to minimize impact of these urban upgrades on the rural environment. With these issues in mind the following items are listed violations for fire and/or life safety. Electrical wires Although this subject has already been discussed in PeAC’s recommendations for utilities upgrade, the need to emphasize the fire and life safety concerns relating to this particular issue is evident. The recommendations for improved services are valid but do not supersede the requirement for electrical safety that abounds in the numerous electrical issues at the MSW camp. The issue of low hanging electrical wires is a frequent occurrence at the MSW camp site. (See figure 1 & 2) This situation is a critical hazard and has the potential to become catastrophic with the remote chance of electrocution but the probable chance of fire, entanglement and electrical shock are crucial. This is an unacceptable risk when children are present on the property. The fire danger is further complicated by being located near the tree line in an area prone to drought and often under high fire danger. NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE (NFPA 70) NEC 225.18 (2) states the following: “Clearance to Ground. Overhead spans of conductors and open multiconductor cables… shall conform to… 3.7 m (12ft)- over residential property and driveways, and those commercial areas not subject to truck traffic…” The recommendation for correction is that once electrical upgrades are made through the local electrical utility (PSO) ideally MSW should have the distribution wiring from the transformers and distribution poles to the individual buildings replaced and upgraded as well so to also comply with the requirements of NEC 230.52 Individual conductors entering buildings or other structures (Also figure 1), NEC 230.49 Protection of Open Conductors and Cables Against Damage – Aboveground (See figure 2) NEC 310.61-67 Thickness of Insulation for Conductors (See figure 3). PeAC Designs 50 Cooking Operations (NFPA 96) is the standard for industrial type kitchen stoves such as the one founding at the site dining facility. Conclusion In conclusion, the corrective recommendations for the more serious violations of the fire code need to be addressed to insure the safety of all occupants who use the Muscogee- Seminole-Wichita Baptist Association Camp site. The fire and life safety issue recommendations, to be reviewed by the owner/operator, are not required however are strongly recommended to maintain a level of fire and life safety. Some of these corrections may be considered costly however, there are many cost effective ways to accomplish the intent of the standard and recommendations. Compliance with proven standards of fire and life safety will ensure a safe and protected environment for campers and congregation members to enjoy. PeAC Designs 51 Referenced Codes & Standards National Fire Protection Association, Quincy,MA Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers NFPA 10, 2002 edition Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems NFPA 25, 2002 edition National Electric Code NFPA 70, 2002 edition National Fire Alarm Code NFPA 72, 2002 edition Standard for Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking Operations NFPA 96, 2004 edition Life Safety Code NFPA 101, 2003 edition Standard on Manufactured Housing NFPA 501, 2005 edition PeAC Designs 52 Figure 1: Low hanging electrical wire improperly attached/entering a building Figure 2: Damaged fuse box in disrepair Figure 3: Damaged conductor insulation covered with tape. Figure 4: Current fire protection standpipe. Figure 5: Current kitchen range hood with out any grease collection/removal device.