Correspondence between

5ee attached letter. xxxEND_PAGE:deq11_b180_0969_0969_1

That sourds great. Yes | was informed of the testing methodology yesterday. | discussed this with American yesterday and | believe we are doing the magnetic particle testing. Once this is verified | will let you know and send the revised spec, These will either be in the addendum or on the original spec if we get it out prior te bidding. One way or another it will get placed in the spec. 1 xxxEND_PAGE:deq25_b124_1164_1166_1 As for the surge. Yes i spoke to the PM team yesterday and they are in the process of responding. | do not see any problerns with providing a quick response.

Matt, We do not have an objection with KWA wanting to use the more conservative leakage formula for the pipeline as opposed to the formula provided in AWWA C-604. We are also not opposed to the exclusion of the welded joints in the formula; however, since this results in a much lower leakage tolerance... all welded joints need to be properly tested. The specification should clearly state an acceptable testing methodology such as radiography, sonograms, or magnetic particle testing. Finally, it is our understanding that we will be receiving a response from Genesee County concerning our questions/comments from the updated surge analysis. Michael Prysby, PLE. District Engineer Office of Drinking Water and Municipal Assistance 517 290-8817 Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 6:05 PM

i would like to revisit the conversation this morning regarding the pressure test. The new leakage method based on AWA GIM-11 the 66” nipe would allow 55 gal/mile leakage ina 2 hour pariod. The current specified method in section a2315 would allow roughly 0.2 gal/mile leakage ina 2 hour period depending on the pressure [150 to 350 psi) and the(} number of juints b ger mile to £2 per mile (welded isints do not count so only the valves count on the 66” fine, but if you count the hydrants, and air release valves, which are not normally courted, it could be 6-12 par mile depending on the section}, Note that you would have to have about 165 joints per mile {an average of 1 joint every 32 feet) @ 350 psi te equal the 55 gal per 2 hours allowed bry the new formula. For 150 psi, it would have to have the equivalent of 252 joints per mile to get the 55 gal leakage in 2 hours that is alowed by the new method. The current specification indleates to test ai the pressure equal to the pressure ciass listed on the drawings, where the new version would say test at no more than 125% of the working pressured. The working pressure is not defined anywhere so is that the pressure class of the roe, or the oressure within the pioe that is expected during operation? The 60” would be somewhat similar to the 66°, except the pressures would be lower on the 60" pipe. With that being sald will the MDEQ allow the current specifications to remain or do we need te still reference AWWA 604-41 for testing even though the allowable leakage is well above what we are allowing.

Docs(2).pdf Daryl, attached is some information. We will definitely send you the addendurn when it goes out.

Dard, | don't know Nyou received my response an the 25" but l want to make sure Vou are aware that | ari taking care of your concerns. On the 25’? laweote that we will Incormorate the drawing modifications into an addendum. Once the addendum is distributed we willce the MOEO. ‘This should address jrenis 2 and 3. Dadi ete PDF of the final POR and provide @ hand cony and tigital coy for your use.

Matt, Based on our review, the following isaues remairy a) The Engineers response to our comment #3 indicated that the PDA had been corrected, However, we did nol receive an updated copy of the POR, and thus have no way te confi thet ib was corrected, 2) The Engineers response to aur coranient #6 indicates that the septic tank wes tn be relocated per aur request, The plans that we received show na change in the location of the septic tank, 3) The detail of the tunk overflow was added buck to Sheet P19, however It contains twa dimensions on the overflow weir cone that are listed ac "as req'd”, This iscue is the same as that for the sizing of the tank, MDEC canned issue a permit for “as reas”. Please note thet | will be oul of the office next week and will return on Agri 7). Thanks, Dard J Gotham PE. Michigan Demernaent of Environmental Quality Olice of banking Wailer & Municipal Assistance Saninaw-Bay Distict Ohics 404 Kelchuin Street, Suse b Bay City Bl 48708 BEO-4250.98 146 (Phone) BEU-BAT-821 8 (Fae ee Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 6:28 AM

Attached are the MDEQ review cornments for Contract S-4(4}4. Please forward thern to anyborly that | may have left off the distribution list. See you tornorrow. Daryl J. Gotham, PE. Michigan Depariment of Environmental Quality Office of Drinking Water & Municipal Assistance Saginaw-Bay Disirict Office 401 Keichum Sireei, Sulle B Bay Clty, ME 48708 989-450-8148 (Phone) 989-801-9213 Fax} xxxEND_PAGE:deq11_b411_1884_1884_1