Friday, June 26, 2009

Golf Course Chemical Mix and Load Facilities

By Michael Vogt, CGCS, CGIA

No other area on the golf course property is as liability sensitive and environmentally worthy of proper planning and scrutiny as the area where golf course chemicals and fertilizers are stored, mixed and loaded for application to the turf. Knowledgeable and expert design in relation to size, space and components will safeguard workers, members and the environment against the event of an unintended chemical release.

Inadequately stored pesticides and improper chemical mixing and loading practices can present a potential risk to co-worker health and to environment. The quality of surface water, groundwater, soil and air can be damaged in areas where pesticides are stored under inappropriate conditions, improperly mixed and loaded into application tanks and where equipment are washed and rinsed after application. Uncontrolled releases or leakages may have serious health and environmental consequences.

The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to golf course superintendents looking for information on appropriate techniques and approaches for the mixing, loading and storage of pesticides. These guidelines were prepared with input from written resources, individuals and organizations with a broad range of expertise and experience. It is a compilation of the best information available regarding the mixing, loading and storage of pesticides. The result is a set of guidelines which represents a general consensus on how pesticide mixing, loading and storage issues should be approached. It is important to remember that mixing, loading and storage needs will vary greatly from golf course to golf course and site to site. No document could specify exactly what approach should be taken in each situation. As such, it should be kept in mind that this document is intended as general guideline only. These are recommendations, not standards or regulations and as such can and should be adjusted to meet individual golf course needs. These recommendations are designed to assist golf course superintendents in managing, renovating and building their storage areas and conduct their mixing and loading operations in ways that will help minimize exposure to pesticides and reduce the risks to public health and the environment. These are not intended to be regulations of any federal, state or local regulatory agency.

The safest approach to any pesticide storage plan is to limit the amounts and types of pesticides stored. The amounts and types of pesticides stored should be maintained at the level that is immediately required and should not be stored beyond short-term needs.

Selecting a Storage Location

An existing or proposed area should be carefully evaluated to determine its suitability for pesticide handling and storage. In particular the potential harm to human health and the environment due to spills, contaminated runoff or fires should be assessed. If possible, the area should be located at least four hundred feet from any public or private drinking water supplies and two hundred from surface water. Separation from water resources should be greater in areas of sandy, rocky or light textured, rapidly draining soils. Whenever feasible, the area should not be located in a 100 year floodplain. Runoff from adjacent areas resulting from a 25 year 24 hour storm (2.9 - 3.6 inches of rainfall) should be diverted around the facility. The site location should be accessible in the event of a fire or any another emergency situation. The pesticide storage area should be protected against direct sunlight, freezing temperatures and extreme heat. Temperatures in the storage area should be kept between 40F and 100F. Pesticides should not be stored outdoors. Where practical, the mixing/loading area should be located in close proximity to or physically attached to the chemical storage facility to minimize the distance that chemicals are transported to combine finished spray mixes. Consideration should also be given to the additional area required by a mixing/loading pad when selecting the site for pesticide storage.

Storage Practices

Pesticide storage should be restricted to a first story room or area which has direct access to the outside. Pesticides should never be stored in basements. Pesticides should be stored in accordance with their label requirements in their original container with the original label attached and clearly visible. They should always be kept off the ground to prevent the accumulation of water in or under the containers. Separation of pesticides by hazard and function is essential. Flammable pesticides should be stored separately from non-flammable pesticides, preferable in a fire proof cabinet. Dry pesticides should be stored above and separately from liquid pesticides to avoid wetting from spills. Fungicides, herbicides and insecticides should be stored in separate locations of the storage area to prevent cross contamination and accidental misuse. Pesticides should be stored away from fertilizer, potable water supplies, seeds and personal protective equipment (PPE) to avoid cross-contamination. Particular care should be taken when storing petroleum based emulsifiable concentrate chemicals due to their potential high volatility. Pesticides should not be stored in the same place as ammonium nitrate fertilizer. Exposure to sunlight can cause pesticides to chemically breakdown. Windows are not recommended in pesticide storage areas do to light infiltration / chemical degradation and security reasons. Because shelf life is difficult to predict, pesticides should not be stored longer than two years.

Two options for storing pesticides should be considered where possible:

1) The acquisition of a Hazardous Materials Storage (HMS) Building

2) The construction of a new Pesticide Storage Facility.

(1) Hazardous Material Storage (HMS) Building

Free standing hazardous materials storage buildings composed of heavy duty steel frames with twelve gauge steel roof and walls are available commercially. The building should ideally have a two hour fire rating. Secondary containment is achieved by means of sumps or grated floors. Doors are self closing and can be locked.







Prefabricated chemical storage building


The walls have air vents or ventilation fans for improved circulation and relief of gaseous vapor build up. Generally the capacities of the HMS buildings vary from under 30 ft² to over 600 ft². Options on these buildings are varied and can be added as required.

(2) Construction of a New Pesticide Storage Facility (general recommendations)



Typical Chemical Mix and Load Building

It is important to consult with an engineer or licensed contractor familiar with the state and local building code requirements before implementing any plan. Before construction begins, consult with local agencies that deal with planning, zoning, wetlands, health and fire regulations. Buildings used for the storage of pesticides should be fire rated in accordance with NFPA 30 ASTM E119 - 08a and International Building Code Type H-1. A properly designed storage area should be built with regard for worker safety and protection of the environment and public health. It should, at a minimum, facilitate the secure, dry storage of pesticides and safe conditions for workers with easy access to worker Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), secondary containment of incidental spills due to normal mixing / loading practices and secondary containment of large accidental spills.

Containment

The building should provide adequate within-building spill containment. In the event of an accident or major spillage, the building should be capable of containing 125% of the volume of the largest container. This can be achieved by surrounding the storage room floor with a 4 to 8 inch curb and / or by a grated trench which drains to a sump. If possible the floor should slope slightly to the center. A change in floor perimeter to sump slope of 0.5% is advisable. These measures will also prevent water or other liquids from seeping or flowing onto the storage area. The storage facility should be constructed in such a way that run-off from fire streams will not contaminate streams, ponds, groundwater, croplands or buildings.

Walls

The storage building should be separated as much as is reasonably possible from other use areas. The building should be designed to prevent against potential fires due to storage of flammable pesticides within the building and from fire in adjacent buildings. A fire wall slows the spread of fire from one area to another. It is recommended that a storage building with a 1-hour fire wall should be located at least fifty feet from other buildings. For a 2-hour fire wall, the set back distance should be twenty five feet.

4 Hour Fire Wall

For a 4 hour fire wall (highly recommended), there is no minimum setback distance. The building should be accessible from all sides for emergency and fire fighting equipment.

Hollow Masonry Definition: Less than 75% solid cross section or greater than 25% void.

Solid Masonry Definition: Greater than 75% solid cross section or less than 25% void.

Gypsum wallboards of 5/8" thickness on both sides of the wall constitute a one hour rated firewall. Two gypsum wallboards on both sides are considered to be 2 hour rated fire wall. An untreated or unlined gypsum wallboard or wood product wall type is not recommended for any wall surface except to partition indoor office or non chemical dry storage area. The interior wall surfaces should be impervious to pesticides and easily cleaned. Suitable wall liners applied over gypsum wallboard are painted steel, aluminum, fiberglass, or high density plastic panels.

Doors

The interior doors should be windowless, steel (solid core), at least 36" wide, set in a steel frame and open to the outside. Exterior doors should be windowless; steel (solid core) one door set to temporary storage should be an overhead or double door to allow access of palletized chemical products. Exterior passage doors should be fitted with self-closing and locking mechanisms. A manual device to hold doors open during pesticide movement from place-to-place is recommended.

Overhead doors should be steel roll up type as opposed to commercial section steel or fiberglass construction. Powered door lifts can extend the life of overhead doors and offer a greater degree of operator safety and security.



Steel Roll-Up Door

Floors & Concrete Specifications

The storage building floors should be water tight, chemically impervious and skid resistant. Concrete floors with an impervious sealant or some other material of comparable strength and impermeability should be used. The following specifications should be used for concrete:

• Type I or Type II high quality cement with 5 - 7.5% air entrainment (this improves water tightness) and compressive strength of 4,000 - 4,500 psi

• Water - cement ratio of 0.40-0.45 for a stiff (1.5" - 3") slump; a relatively dry mix for maximum strength, pesticide and fertilizer resistance, freeze / thaw resistance and water tightness

While concrete is durable, it will deteriorate over time. Liquid fertilizers are the main cause of concrete deterioration. However, pesticides can contaminate concrete and leak through cracks into groundwater. Protective coatings for concrete seal the surface and help prevent the corrosive actions of pesticides and fertilizers on concrete. Among the coatings commercially available are epoxies, urethanes, polyesters, vinyls, chlorosulfonated polyethylene, and polyureas. The appropriate type of coating will depend on the types of pesticides and fertilizers being stored and should be determined in consultation with a distributor.

At the entrance to the overhead doors should be a ramped section of concrete that extends into the building approximately 6 inches pitched towards the door. This 6 inch ramp will shed water away from the mix and storage area from melting snow and rain. Water entering the building would be considered rinsate and must be treated for reuse.

Flexible water stops should be installed at all control joints and in floor to wall joints. A perimeter concrete curb in storage areas should be a minimum of 8 inches in height to contain any accidental release of concentrated chemicals or finished spray preparations in storage.

Lighting

Lighting should be bright enough so that labels may be easily read. The lighting and exhaust system should be turned on by the same switch located on the outside of the entry door to the chemical storage area. The switch should be equipped with a signal light indicating the exhaust system is on and functioning properly.

Electrical Design

Electrical equipment and wiring should be designed to explosion proof. The wires should be shielded in approved electrical conduit. An exterior electrical service disconnect in a locked National Electric Manufacturers Association (NEMA) rated, weather proof box should be provided.



Explosion Proof Fixtures


Security and Fire Control

A system should be installed to monitor doors and interior spaces for unintended intruders. Door sensors and motion detection is the preferred systems. These intrusion warning systems can be installed to contact management or police in the event of unauthorized intrusion.

A fire control and alarm system is also recommended. By nature of chemical composition of stored liquid and dry pesticides a dry fire suppression system is recommended. A direct call system to local fire protection district is advisable.

Temperature

Area temperatures should be kept below 100 F and above pesticide freezing points. An electrical heater can be used to keep the temperature above 40 F during the winter. Open flame heaters should never be used. Air conditioning may be needed during the summer to prevent the volatilization of pesticides, if this is likely to be a problem.

Ventilation Design

For safety and protection, good air ventilation should be present at the facility. The area should have an operating ventilation system sufficient to prevent the accumulation of vapors and to control temperature. Ventilation should be provided by means of fans. The fans should operate off the same switch as the lighting system. An air inlet should be located within 12" of the floor to facilitate the escape of heavier than air vapors. During occupancy, the ventilation system should provide a minimum of 6 air changes per hour.

Bulk Containers

Storage and rinsate containers and appurtenances such as valves, fittings, pipes and hoses, should be installed and maintained so as to prevent the discharge of liquid pesticides, finished spray mixes and rinsate. As such they should be structurally sound, resistant to changes in temperature extremes and be constructed of materials that are resistant to corrosion, puncture or cracking. Stainless steel, fiberglass, polyethylene, and lined ferrous metal are acceptable. Valves on storage containers should be locked or otherwise secured except during times of authorized access.

Mixing and Loading Facilities

Contamination of soil, groundwater and surface water can result from small quantities of pesticides spilled regularly in areas where pesticides are mixed and loaded into applicator tanks and where equipment is washed and rinsed after application. Spills or overflows can lead to the accumulation of pesticides in the soil and possible drinking water supplies.

Mixing / Loading Location

Mixing and loading should be avoided in areas where a spill, a leak or overflow could allow pesticides to get into water systems. The mixing and loading of pesticides should not occur within four hundred feet of any private or public drinking water supply or two hundred feet of surface water. No pesticide application equipment or mix tank should be filled directly from any source waters unless a back siphon prevention device is present. Mixing and loading should not occur on gravel driveways or on other surfaces that allow spills to move quickly through the soil. Prior to building a mixing and loading facility it is advisable to install and maintain test wells near the site to have the ability to monitor ground water quality. A sample boring of soil to test for chemical contaminants is also recommended before construction.

Mixing / Loading Practices

Mixing or loading of pesticides should be avoided in areas where a spill, leak or overflow could allow pesticides to get into water systems. All transfers of pesticides between containers, including mixing, loading and equipment cleaning, should be conducted over a spill containment surface designed to intercept, retain and recover spillage, leakage and wash water.

Appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) should be worn before opening a pesticide container, check product label for appropriate PPE. The label should be checked for Use Restrictions. PPE may include front protection such as a bib top apron made of butyl, nitrile, or foil laminate material. A face shield, shielded safety glasses or goggles should be worn. When pouring any pesticide from its container, container and pesticide should be kept below face level. A respirator will ensure protection against dusts or vapors per label requirements. The container should be closed or sealed after each use. A tank should never be left unattended while it is being filled. If the pesticide user should splash or spill pesticides on his person, he should stop the operation, wash thoroughly with a mild liquid detergent and water or as advised on the product label, put on clean PPE and clean up the spill. Containment needs depend on the quantities of pesticides that are being mixed and loaded. If mixing small quantities, a tarpaulin can be sufficient to contain any spills. Spills can be then cleaned up with an absorbent material or commercially available chemical release control kit. If mixing large quantities regularly, the construction of a mixing/loading pad is an option to consider.

Construction of a Mixing/ Loading Pad

It is important to consult with an engineer or licensed contractor familiar with the state building code requirements before implementing any plan. Before construction begins, consult with local agencies that deal with planning, zoning, wetlands, health and fire. If pesticides are often mixed and loaded in the same place, or application equipment is cleaned in the one spot, a permanent pesticide mixing / loading pad is a sound option. Spill clean ups can be made easier, and pesticide waste can be reduced and reused. They can also prevent the harm that spills and runoff can cause to the environment or to people. The area should be located at least four hundred feet (preferably down hill) from any public or private drinking water supplies and two hundred feet (preferably down hill) from surface water. It should not be located within any residential area or other sensitive area (such as feedlots, animal shelters, play areas, schools). For obvious reasons areas prone to flooding should be avoided for construction of permanent mixing / loading pad.

Design

The design of the pad should be a function of the operations performed at the site – the number and volume of different pesticides stored and applied the rinsing procedures, the size of the spray boom- and also the weather conditions, especially the levels of precipitation and freezing conditions. The pad should be located adjacent to the storage area. It is recommended that the pad be constructed of an impervious material such as sealed concrete. The pad should remain intact under freezing conditions. The following concrete specifications should be followed to ensure a water tight pad and good surface durability:

• Type I or Type II high quality cement with 5 - 7.5% air entrainment (this improves water tightness) and compressive strength of 4,000 -
4,500 psi;

• Water- cement ratio of 0.40-0.45 for a stiff (1.5" - 3") slump; a relatively dry mix for maximum strength, pesticide and fertilizer resistance, freeze/thaw resistance and water tightness;

• The subgrade (original ground) upon which the pad will be placed must be dense, uniform and relatively free draining to provide a good foundation for the concrete pad. If the subgrade is not adequate a sub-base material should be installed consisting of 4 inches of well compacted clean sand, gravel or sand and gravel mixture;

• The subgrade or sub-base should be moistened immediately prior to concrete placement to minimize shrinkage and cracking potential;

• Large coarse aggregate (1 to 1.5 inches) which permits a lower water content and reduces the potential for cracking should be used;

• Reinforcing steel should be placed two inches from the top of the pad. Reinforcing bars (supported #4 bars at 15 to 18 inch spacing) are superior to wire mesh for proper location of the steel in the slab and to allow workers to step between the bars. Reinforcing steel will keep shrinkage cracks closed if properly located;

• A high level of workmanship should be ensured during concrete placement and curing of the pad.

While concrete is durable, it will deteriorate over time. Pesticides can contaminate concrete and leak through cracks into groundwater. Protective coatings for concrete seal the surface and help prevent the corrosive actions of pesticides and fertilizers on concrete. Among the coatings commercially available are epoxies, urethanes, polyesters, vinyls, chlorosulfonated polyethylene, and polyureas. The appropriate type of coating will depend on the types of pesticides being used and should be determined in consultation with a distributor.

Containment Volume

The total mixing / loading area containment volume should be 1.25 times the volume of the largest tank to be loaded in the area. If the area is not protected from contact with precipitation, the containment volume should be equal to the volume generated by a 2 year 24 hour storm (2.9 - 3.6 inches of rainfall). If the rainwater mixes with a single known pesticide or compatible pesticides (i.e., pesticides with at least one common use site on their labels) the mixture can be applied to the field at or below the label rate.


The pad should be curbed to a sufficient height in order to contain spills, leaks, releases or other discharges that are generated during the mixing and loading of pesticides and to prevent water or other liquids from flowing onto and off of the surface.

To avoid rainwater mixing with pesticides, it is recommended that the area be roofed. Roof overhangs should be at least a thirty degree angle from vertical from the edge of the mixing/loading pad in all directions Containment needs may be further met by constructing the pad in such a way that it slopes (at least 2%) to a single liquid tight sump.

Example of dimensions of a mix / load pad with a length of 30 feet a width of 20 feet with a pad slope of 3% to a center sump, a curb of 3 inches high and 24 inches wide will contain a total of 717 gallons.

Sump Designs

The pad should slope to a water tight sump or catch basin. The purpose of a sump is to collect the spilled material and facilitate its reuse. Collected rinsates should be pumped to an above ground holding tank and reused for mixing subsequent loads or field applied at lowest reasonable rates. The sump pump should be capable of transferring the liquid to the holding tank from the sump at a rate equivalent to the fastest sump filling rate. The tanks should not be filled beyond 95% of their capacity to allow for thermal expansion and must be placed on a concrete or other impervious surfaced floor on stands or on a raised platform to allow the detection of leaks from, or water in or under, the pesticide container.


Example of Below Grade Sump System

A single sump can be placed monolithically with the mixing/loading pad or a precast concrete or prefabricated steel sump could be installed before the concrete pad is placed. Precast concrete sumps are built in a range of sizes with capacities up to 100 gallons. A double lined stainless steel sump allows the monitoring by inspection of potential leaks from the sump. Most have a capacity of thirty gallons.


The sump should be kept clean to avoid the creation of sludge due to dirt, mud, trash, rocks or grass clippings. Sludge is considered to be a hazardous waste if contaminated by unknown or incompatible pesticides. If the sludge is contaminated by only one pesticide or a compatible mix, the material can be applied to the land at or below the label rate. To reduce sludge problems in sumps where application vehicles are washed, some facilities may elect to install two sumps in series. Sumps should be kept clean as contaminated soil and debris in sumps creates a serious hazardous waste disposal problem. In addition, the sump should be covered with a structural grate to ensure safety. The grate could be covered with a finer mesh dust cover. The sump should be kept covered and cleaned out especially during spraying season.

Washing and Rinsing Operations

Washing and rinsing of pesticide residues from application equipment, mixing equipment or other items used in storing, handling or transporting pesticides should occur on the pad.

Protection of Water Supplies

No pesticide application equipment or mix tank should be filled directly from any source waters unless a double back siphon prevention device is present. Additionally, an air gap between full tank level and water source device is recommended.

Non-Liquid Pesticides

If non-liquid pesticides (fertilizer combination pesticides, dry granular application types) are loaded the spill containment surface may consist of a tarpaulin made of non-absorbent materials which is of adequate thickness to withstand all foreseeable loading conditions.

Pesticide Handling Instructions

Materials Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for each pesticide should be on file and posted in a prominent location. At a minimum the employer should have posted the product label and physical and health hazards associated with the pesticides being used. The measures employees can take to protect themselves from these hazards, including safety precautions and protective work procedures, should be posted.

Emergency Response Plan

An emergency response plan should be developed. Such a plan lists actions to take and personnel to contact in the event of a spill or accident. The plan should begin with a current listing of the pesticides used or stored at the facility and should include the following information:

• Names and quantities of pesticides;

• Location of the property including a map with directions;

• Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner and key employees;

• Plan of the facility showing pesticides locations, flammable materials, electrical service, water supply, fuel storage tanks, fire hydrants, storm drains, and nearby wetlands, ponds, or streams;

• Location of emergency equipment supplies including breathing equipment and protective equipment;

Copies of the emergency response plan should be located near the entrance to the pesticide facility and with business records. Copies should also be given to the local police department and fire department. Contacts should include the following: fire department; police; spill clean up firm; nearest hospital; pesticide bureau; board of health; owner and or manager of the facility;

The plan should be available in both English and the language or languages understood by workers if this is not English.

Fire Prevention

An automatic smoke detection system or smoke and heat detection system should be installed. The appropriate fire prevention and emergency procedures should be developed in consultation with the local fire department. Suitable methods for extinguishing fires should be installed, such as the appropriate type and number of fire extinguishers. The number and placement of fire extinguishers should conform to the National Fire Protection Association Standard No. 10. All electrical fixtures and appliances should be explosion-proof units approved for use in facilities storing flammable and combustible liquids.

In the event of a fire it is frequently more environmentally sound to allow the fire to burn itself out if it can be contained within the area. This avoids the likelihood of pesticides being released into the ground as a result of water being added. Dry chemical fire suppression systems are superior in chemical storage areas.

Personal Safety

Personal protection equipment such as respirators, chemical resistant (CR) gloves, CR footwear, coveralls with long sleeves, protective eyewear, CR headgear, CR aprons and a first-aid kit should be available immediately outside the storage area. The first-aid kit should include the following items: adhesive strips, tape, ammonia inhalant, eye pads, burn cream, gauze bandages and tweezers. Gloves should be made of rubber, neoprene or other chemical resistant material. It is essential that protective eyewear be worn during mixing/loading. The protective eyewear should consist of safety glasses that provide front, brow and temple protection, goggles or a face shield.

Workers should be instructed in the correct procedure for the removal of contaminated clothing. Eye wash stations or portable eye wash bottles should be easily accessed by each person engaged in the operation and should be capable of flushing eyes for a minimum of fifteen minutes. Drench showers should be located at or near storage and mixing location. Routine wash up facilities, equipped with soap, hand cleanser and single use paper towels should be available near the storage area.

Record Keeping

A daily record of all chemical applications should be located on premises, preferably away from chemical storage areas. All chemical discharges to the environment or spills should be recorded. The records should include chemical or chemicals, the date and time of the incident and the cleanup method.

Accident Response

An absorbent material such as re-usable gelling agents, vermiculite, clay, pet litter, activated charcoal or commercially available spill containment kit should be on hand along with an approved recovery drum and shovel to quickly contain and clean up any small spills.

Security

The chemical storage area should be kept locked when not currently being used by a qualified applicator and the door to the storage area should contain a weather proof sign warning of the existence and danger of pesticides inside. The sign should be visible at a distance of twenty five feet and should read as follows:

DANGER
PESTICIDE STORAGE
AREA and MIXING AREA

ALL UNAUTHORIZED
PERSONS KEEP OUT

KEEP DOORS LOCKED
WHEN NOT IN USE

The sign should be posted in both English and the language or languages understood by workers if this is not English.

While the above has illustrated basic guidelines for the safe storage and mixing of golf turf chemicals they are not intended to be complete or definitive in identifying all hazards associated with your club, preventing workplace accidents, or complying with any safety related, or other, laws or regulations. You are encouraged to alter them to fit the specific hazards or situations of your club and to have your legal counsel review all of your plans and club policies.


Literature sited in the composition of this article:


National Fire Protection Association 434, Code for Storage of Pesticides in Portable Containers
National Fire Protection Association 30, Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code
An H-1group building construction is by definition a high hazard building hallmarked by 4 hour fire resistant exterior walls.
Over Head Door Plan Courtesy Alpine Overhead Door, Inc.
NFPA 101, Section 7-7.3, Other Automatic Extinguishing Equipment
Sump Photo Courtesy of Carbtrol Corporation
NFPA 1600, Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management and Business Continuity Programs
Midwest Plan Service, Pesticide Storage & Mixing Building, 74002, Noyes, R.T. and D.W. Karnmel
Pesticide Storage & Mixing Facilities, Cooperative Extension Service, The University of Georgia, College of Agriculture & Environmental Sciences, Athens, Paul E. Sumner and Michael J. Bader, Extension Engineers
USGA Green Section Record, March / April 1997, Pesticide Storage: One Step Ahead, Gary Bogdanski
Audubon International, Maintenance Facility BMPs-A Self-Assessment Checklist
Best Management Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Departments, May, 1995, Florida Department of Environment, Agricultural Source and Water Well Management Section
The Florida Green, Summer, 1995, Water Quality Management for the Equipment Wash Area, Darren Davis
Equipment Washing Regulations: Michigan Case Study, Michigan Turfgrass, Environmental Stewardship Program, August, 2006

Bollinger, Inc., Bulletin #120, 2006, Golf & Country Club - Pesticide Storage

About the Author

Michael D. Vogt, CGCS, CGIA, is a Golf Facilities Consultant with McMahon Group. McMahon Group is a full-service private club consultancy serving golf and country clubs worldwide. Mr. Vogt can be reached at 800-365-2498 or visit
http://www.mcmahongroup.com/ .






Friday, June 12, 2009

SAMPLE - BASIC IRRIGATION AUDIT



Irrigation Audit – Results and Conclusions
Fairway Country Club
Your Town, New York
May 12, 2009

Certified Golf Irrigation Auditor: Michael Vogt, CGCS, CGIA #58853

Introduction

In order to locate problem areas on the course and evaluate equipment performance, I have performed a preliminary irrigation audit of the golf course irrigation system. The audit consisted of both, visual and mechanical inspections of the irrigation system.
Visual Inspection identifies problems such as poor head spacing, tree limbs, soil type, thatch, broken sprinklers, etc… and the Mechanical Inspection is an actual System
Performance Test using catch pans to evaluate sprinkler performance. The areas tested for the System Performance Test were on Holes 7, 11, and 14 fairways. Fairway areas were tested since these showed signs of poor irrigation coverage throughout the summer months. Results and recommended corrective actions from both the Visual and Mechanical Inspections are included.

Visual Inspection

One of the largest problems with the irrigation system is the lack of a “pump watch” cable, which sends real-time, pump flow data (GPM), to the irrigation computer. For the irrigation computer to calculate the number of heads the system can run at one time the irrigation computer must rely on a Precipitation Rate value (PR), which is manually entered into the irrigation software. i.e. 25 heads running at a PR of 30 GPM per head = 750 GPM of pump flow.

However, the pump station flow meter shows 740 GPM at the same time the irrigation computer shows 600 GPM. This inconsistency between actual pump station flow readings and the irrigation computers predicted flow calculation is evidence that the
Gross PR value entered into Nimbus is off by 20-30%.

When the system was designed and programmed many years ago, a value of 30
GPM/per head was used as the PR. This value is incorrect and is the primary reason for poor system performance. Also, since that time, many nozzles have been switched out with a higher flowing “double-tail” nozzle. Citing current Rainbird nozzle specifications, the actual flow of the nozzles is probably 33-39 GPM depending upon if the nozzle has a single or double-tail.

I have temporarily solved the problem by lowering the irrigation computers maximum flow to 600 GPM, or 20 heads, which gives a pump station flow reading of 740 GPM when the system is running at 100%. The drawback is that the lower maximum flow used for the irrigation computer means fewer heads can run at one time, and causes the irrigation cycle to be extended. During summer months, the system runs approx. 20 hours/day. This creates problems when trying to schedule irrigation cycles around the many golf tournaments each season.

Unfortunately, increasing the pump flow above 750 GPM is not an option. Since pump station flow above 750 GPM exceeds the carrying capacity the mainlines were designed for and will result in system pressure loss, poor coverage, and equipment failure, due to friction loss forces of the water moving through the pipes.

Friction loss forces caused by the distance from the pump station to the Upper holes are also one of the reasons why the irrigation cycle must run for 20 hours/day.
Visual Inspection (continued)

When the pump station flow exceeds 450 GPM pressure problems become apparent on the Holes 13,14 and 15. To solve this problem I have programmed separate irrigation cycles for the Upper and Lower holes. When running the Lower holes, the system will run at maximum flow, 750 GPM. Once the Upper holes begin to water, the system will stay below 450 GPM. This means that for half the night, you will be running the irrigation system at less than maximum output.

Isolating the Upper and Lower irrigation systems from each other would be the best way to solve the 20 hour-a-day irrigation cycles. If you could run both the upper and lower holes at the same time, you would cut your nightly run times in half, and minimize irrigation system runtime during daylight hours. Installing larger irrigation mainlines, and installing a new VFD pump, is one way to increase system flow above the 750 GPM it is currently designed for. Alternatives, would be to locate a booster pump at the Paseo
Street crossing, or build a 2nd pump station, using the lake on Hole 12 as it’s’ source.
This would allow you to run irrigation cycles on both the upper and lower holes concurrently.

Another problem needing corrective action is the levelness of the irrigation heads. I inspected all of the greens heads for levelness. Each green had several heads that need to be leveled. Several greens had heads that were 3 to 4 inches below grade. I recommend including an aggressive head-leveling program into the maintenance scheme, for the next several years. This is an important job, and all crew members should be properly trained to perform this task, before allowing them undertake it unsupervised. Repairing the greens heads should be a priority over the next year.
Areas of importance would be: greens 1st, then approaches, fairways, tees, perimeters, and rough last.

It has also come to my attention that the pressure regulators on the sprinkler heads for Hole 11 may have been adjusted fully open several years ago. I recommend purchasing a Pitot tube pressure gauge, and resetting the pressure regulators on Hole 11, and any other areas suspected of over pressure water loss. This is the first corrective action that should be taken since it is the least expensive and locating sources of water pressure loss is a priority. Holes 10, 6, and 5, would be adjusted next, since they sit at lower elevations than the rest of the course. Eventually, all heads on the course should be tested and have their pressure regulators set at the proper level.

Tree limbs are problematic throughout the course, but not a priority. Holes 13-16, 10,
11, 5, and 6 have the worst areas where tree limbs are causing poor irrigation coverage.
Thatch accumulation and soil compaction on many of the fairway areas is causing runoff and water waste. Specifically, the fairways on Holes 5, 7, 13 and 14 have up to 1.5 inches of thatch. Excess water must be applied to wet the thatch layer before water can move into the soil profile. This results in water runoff, shallow roots and increases irrigation run times. I have addressed the issue by creating “soak cycles” for certain fairway areas with excess thatch and areas where slopes can cause water runoff during/after the irrigation cycle.

Hole #7 is showing the worst signs of thatch accumulation. Sod in the fairways can be peeled up, since the roots don’t extend very deep into the soil. Another side effect of excess thatch seems to be an accumulation of salts just beneath the thatch layer.

I have provided an example in the following photos. Notice how the sod peeled up in an almost even layer just below the thatch layer. This is how shallow the roots are. The white salt nodules on the soil surface are very evident as well.

The typical treatment for thatch accumulation is aerification and/or verti-cutting. An alternative is the application of wetting agents to the problem areas. If you have noticed the large, dark green areas on #7 fairway, these are test areas where I applied a wetting agent several months ago. Although temporary and rather expensive, using a wetting agent to help water move past the thatch layer appears to be an option in increasing irrigation efficiency. Future testing of excessively thatched areas, using an infiltrometer, is recommended to document the thatch layers effect on water infiltration rate, and establishing soak cycles, for future irrigation programming. This could help shorten overall irrigation run-time as well, by eliminating run-off and water waste.

System Performance Test

System performance can be measured in what is termed Distribution Uniformity.
Distribution Uniformity is the "measure of how uniformly water is made available to the plants over an area. DU value is expressed as a percentage and generally represents the major component of irrigation efficiency". Specifically, I looked at the Lowest
Quarter DU, which is calculated by taking the lowest 1/4 of the catch pans' values from the irrigation audit as an average, and dividing them by the average for all the catch pan values. Most new irrigation systems are designed with a minimum DU value of 80% and several states have already mandated an 80% DU for all new systems. Having a high
DU (>80%) is a good PR tool, as it shows you are making efficient use of your water resources with documented results.

Precipitation Rate is the "rate at which irrigation water is applied per unit of time". For these tests I calculated Net PR, which takes into account the water losses that occur between the nozzle and the ground. As I mentioned before, you’re Rainbird Central
Computer has a PR value manually entered into it. This value represents the Gross PR, and does not take into account any water losses between the nozzle and the ground.
Gross PR represents the actual water flow out of each head.

Each test consisted of a before-and-after evaluation of Precipitation Rate (PR) and Distribution Uniformity (DU). The initial test (Audit 1) was an "as-is" test and the 2nd test (Audit 2) in each area was done after replacing the nozzles in each tested head with new nozzles. Initial results showed that the DU can be increased by 10% and PR can be made more uniform for the entire system, simply by replacing the old nozzles with new ones.

I used 25 catch pans in each audit area. 4 adjacent heads were used for the audit and run for approximately 16 minutes each.

Soil samples were also taken from each area to determine the soil "texture" classification. Combined with the PR value calculated from the audit, the soil texture information will be used when scheduling future irrigation run/soak cycles. I have attached copies of each Audit Worksheet for your inspection.

Test Results Summary: Run Time per DU PR (in/hr) head at 0.20ET

Hole #7 Audit 1 – Green 66% 0.54 32 sand
Audit 2 – Green 75% 0.47 32

Hole #11 Audit 1 – Tee 69% 0.51 33 loamy sand
Audit 2 – Tee 82% 0.44 31

Hole #14 Audit 1 – Green 70% 0.41 40 sand
Audit 2 – Green 77% 0.41 37

As you can see from the results, I obtained an average DU increase of 10% each audit area. The interesting thing was that, the PR went down considerably on both holes 7 and 11, simply by replacing nozzles, and at the same time, the irrigation run-time went down by several minutes on Holes 11 and 14. This shows the value of increasing DU, since even though the PR went down, the irrigation efficiency was increased enough to lower overall run times for the sprinkler heads.

Conclusions

Pressure problems are the primary cause of poor irrigation system performance on the upper Holes 12-16. By making changes to the irrigation schedule, the pressure problems can be overcome, but also create a new problem, a 20 hour watering cycle during peak watering periods. So now, in order to reduce the length of time we are watering each night, we must increase the efficiency, or DU, of the irrigation system.

Many of the fairways on the course show symptoms consistent with the areas I tested for this initial irrigation audit. My opinion is that, if we were to replace the nozzles in these problematic areas with new ones, we could save several hours of irrigation time each cycle. Further increases in DU, could be achieved by beginning an in-house head leveling program, or perhaps contracting the work out to a 3rd party.

My recommendations for increasing the efficiency, or DU, of the irrigation system are:
In order of priority:

1. Adjust pressure regulators on sprinkler heads.
2. Replace nozzles in problem areas.
3. Intensive head-leveling program.

Turfgrass cultural recommendations are:
1. Continue aggressive turfgrass cultural program on fairways (aerification and verticutting).
2. Use of wetting agents on problem areas could be an alternative, when aerification is not possible.
3. Refine irrigation schedules, by using an infiltrometer, to establish soak cycle lengths required during irrigation schedules.

Future capital improvement projects and long-range planning should include:

1. Installation of an irrigation computer-to-pump station, “pump watch” cable.
2. Separation the Upper and Lower irrigation systems, by installing 2nd pump station on
Hole 12 lake, or install a booster pump on the section of mainline crossing Smith Road.

I also recommend, performing further irrigation audits on the greens next spring.
Getting a better idea of the actual PR for the greens, would allow more precise programming of the irrigation schedules. This could help to eliminate many man-hours dedicated to hand water the greens during warm periods.

Michael Vogt, CGCS, CGIA #58853

Friday, May 22, 2009

Golf Course Irrigation Water



Michael D. Vogt, CGCS, CGIA
McMahon Group, Inc.


Turfgrass has a dramatic impact on life in the United States. According to the Irrigation Association, “There are over 50 million acres of turfgrass in the United States with an estimated annual value of $40 billon. The annual value of turfgrass is greater than the value of America's corn and soybean crops combined.” With the onset of the devastating drought and government imposed restrictions on water use in the southeast United States last year the golf industry is asking the question of, “How long will the water last?”

The topic of water and its relationship to golf is so inseparable that the United States Golf Association has spent 18 million dollars in university grants to develop new turf varieties that use less water and still provide suitable playing surfaces for the game.

Golf course irrigation is estimated to use more than 476 billion gallons of water annually in the
United States. Water consumption is highest in the southwest, with a reported average use of 88 million gallons annually per course. The Irrigation Association reports that of all fresh water used in the United States for the purpose of irrigation, 79.6 percent is in agriculture, 2.9 percent is in landscape, and golf courses consume 1.5 percent. The remaining 16 percent is consumed by humans, animals, or industry.

These figures can be misleading as to the significant role of water used in golf course irrigation. Many golf courses located in urban areas use potable water supplies for irrigation. This water is highly treated and very expensive. The reduction of use of these potable water sources can provide great cost savings as well as benefits the local population.

Recent news headlines have been highlighting drought conditions throughout the United States. Andrew K. Smith, external affairs director for the Irrigation Association said about localized drought conditions throughout the southeast United States, “They weren’t ready up front. When you have to deal with these things after the fact, you have a problem.” Georgia’s Governor, Sonny Perdue declared a state of emergency October 20th, for the northern third of the state of Georgia and asked President Bush to declare it a major disaster area. Not only has Georgia struggled with the drought crisis, neighboring states that depend on water from Georgia’s Lake Lanier have felt the severe stain form months of below normal rainfall. More than a quarter of the Southeast United States is covered by an "exceptional" drought — the National Weather Service's worst drought category. The Atlanta area, with a population of 5 million, is smack in the middle of the affected region, which encompasses most of Tennessee, Alabama and the northern half of Georgia, as well as parts of North and South Carolina, Kentucky and Virginia.
The following is the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America’s position statement on water use:

“Golf course superintendents are responsible stewards of water resources. GCSAA supports collaboration with all levels of government to address water use and quality issues and for golf course superintendents to be involved in the construction of productive public policy related to water issues. GCSAA supports the use of reclaimed, effluent or other non-potable water for golf course irrigation when the water quality is suitable for plant growth and there are no public health implications. GCSAA does not support mandated use of reclaimed water when the water quality or water quantity is not adequate, when use is not cost effective or when the golf course superintendent does not play a key role in the decision-making process for the development of effluent water standards. GCSAA supports water conservation and the utilization of irrigation/water use BMPs.”

What the GCSAA is effectively saying hear is; that the association supports the role of the superintendent as a steward of the environment and as good environmental stewards the superintendents should prescribe to water conservation and the best management practices associated with water conservation.


Water sources for turfgrass irrigation have already come under-fire from activist groups and even local and state governments. Watering bans have had impacts on lawns, landscapes, and golf courses where just years ago were thought to have ample sources of good quality water for a variety of recreational and aesthetic uses. The fact of the matter is that food, drinking water, and sanitation will always be the most important use for the most valuable resource, good quality water.

In an effort to begin saving and measuring amounts of valuable water resources on golf courses a study was preformed by the Center for Irrigation Technology (CIT). The CIT studied 5 separate 18-hole private golf courses, with irrigation systems ranging in age from 10 – 17 years old. Distribution Uniformity (DU) was measured at each golf course, it was determined that a change in sprinkler nozzles would increase efficiency on all 5 test cases. To measure DU, a test was preformed, that is a placement of graduated containers in a measured grid on an irrigated area. The amount of water caught in each container is measured. The calculation requires ranking the containers values from highest to lowest, with the value of the lowest 25% divided by the overall average of the graduated containers. The calculation is expressed as DULQ which indicates the calculation is based on the low quarter or the lowest 25% of the containers. A DU of 100% would indicate perfect uniformity (not achievable in the field).

According to the Irrigation Association’s Certified Golf Irrigation Auditor manual, rotary sprinkler DU is listed in 3 categories, with 80% considered excellent (achievable), 70% good (expected), and 55% or less considered poor. It stands to reason that the lower the DU the longer the irrigation head or heads have to run to achieve uniformity at the worst area or coverage. All of these test golf courses retro-fit new nozzles into the sprinkler heads on the golf course.

These are the comments by the golf course superintendents after the sprinkler nozzle retro-fit:

“Dry spots and wet spots are much less numerous”
“We are able to run sprinkler heads longer without puddling”
“Turf areas had many donuts throughout the course. The new nozzles evenly distributed the water, reducing and eliminating this issue on my golf course.”
“After installing the new nozzles I was able to reduce the ET (evapotranspiration) demand 5% lower than the previous year.”
“Significantly improved coverage”
“Less water around head, less disruption of head position with mud and mess.”
“Better performance in higher elevation pressure sensitive areas”
“Well worth the investment.”
“It has reduced our hand-watering requirements, perhaps saving around $8,000 per year.”
“Absolutely would recommend the (nozzle) change given a similar situation.”

Not all superintendents were able to document a net savings in water and energy, but all 5 superintendents did see improvements in turfgrass quality and better water distribution. According to the CIT study the basic lessons learned are:

· It is very important to know the distribution uniformity of your existing irrigation system.

· If improvement is warranted (based on the irrigation audit), then evaluate the numerous options available. These options include, but are not limited to, pressure changes, sprinkler changes, spacing changes, and/or nozzle changes.

· It is highly recommended that the superintendent seek out professional consultation in selecting the correct replacement nozzles, as simply replacing nozzles may not achieve the desired results.

As responsible users of our water resources we are in a position to be proactive. Taking steps now to evaluate your golf course’s irrigation system will reinforce your commitment to wise use of this finite natural resource. A golf irrigation audit will often uncover inefficiencies that can be corrected with simple maintenance practices. For example; a sprinkler nozzle is a simple and low cost remedy to distribution inefficiencies. If a superintendent acquired irrigation audit results leading to nozzle replacement and sprinkler head alignment as a leading factor in distribution problems the cost per head would be about $10.00 plus $8.00 labor. Assuming the golf course has 800 sprinkler heads, which equates to a retro-fit cost of $14,400. Adjusting for the increased efficiencies in distribution a golf course will often save irrigation run time and eliminate costly repairs associated with over-watering wet spots. Appling enough water to dry areas to keep turf green and healthy often leads to over-watering adjacent turf areas causing waterlogged conditions. Increases in turf playability and turf health can be difficult to measure, but be assured your regular player will notice that the puddles in the landing area of number 13 fairway have disappeared, he doesn’t necessarily know why, he just likes the extra roll, and now the ball sits-up to accept his perfectly executed shot.

Savings in energy and water alone will often justify the expenses, for example:

· The average U.S. golf course uses 51,000,000 gallons of water annually (157 Acre Feet).

· Let’s assume an acre foot of water (325,851 Gallons) cost $360 to deliver, (U.S. average energy and water cost) $56,520, per year.

· By increasing golf course watering efficiencies by 13% (the average yield of a nozzle retro-fit and head adjustment) a slightly greater than a 2 year payback can be realized, that does not take into consideration the improved playing conditions and repair of traffic ruts, soil compaction, and reduced turf density on over-watered areas.

Another Case study examines the irrigation system in a more graphical way, a golf course superintendent’s irrigation system, after retro-fit and head alignment, increased Distribution Uniformity from 60% to 70%. The turfgrass plants require 15.6 inches of water per year. Because of inefficiencies, the superintendent needed to apply 20.59 inches to be able to supply that turf with the poorest uniformity the needed 15.6 inches of water. If irrigation system uniformity can be increased only by 10% the superintendent will only have to apply 19 inches of water per year. It requires 27,154 gallons of water to cover one acre with one inch

If this golf course must purchase water for irrigation, here is an example of water purchase savings. Let’s assume that water is billed per unit, with a unit consisting of 1000 gallons. Divide 4.2 million gallons by 1000, the product is 4,236 units. At $1.40 per unit, a 10% increase in efficiency would yield a yearly savings of $5930.40.

The savings does not stop at water alone, if the pump station operates at 1000 gallons per minute, not pumping 4.24 million gallons of water would translate to a yearly hourly savings of 70 hours. With pump station average life expectancy of 15 years, that’s a savings of 1050 hours, that savings is near 132 days of pump station operation. The average 18-hole golf course in the north-east and mid-west areas of the United States, this savings can equate to one free year of pump station operation!

The cost savings alone should be justification enough to audit your golf course irrigation system, but there is the most important reason, it’s the right thing to do. By being a wise consumer of water, you as a responsible manager of our resources telegraph a message to government and community that golf cares about our valuable resources. If golf as an industry and a community professes to be stewards of the environment, our stewardship should begin by wisely using our limited resources to the best of our ability.

Golf course superintendents are some of the best water management professionals in the “Green Industry”. Be assured that in the no-to-distant future golf courses will be regulated with some type of water budget. The following is a checklist of Best Management Practices (BMP) for irrigation system use and maintenance:

· Irrigate to a depth just below active rooting.

· Observe irrigation system pump station for pressure and flow, compare with design parameters.

· Sloped areas and compacted soils will need to be irrigated in short, frequent intervals.

· Periodically test the irrigation system to make sure it is producing an acceptable level of uniformity (DU).

· Use ET modeling to establish baseline irrigation programs.

· Have frequent system checks for sprinkler head rotation, leaks, level head-to-surface adjustment and arc adjustment.

· Have a written plan or protocol for limited water use or water restrictions in your area.

Carry a soil probe to examine soil moisture at root depth.

· Know how much water you use!

At McMahon Group we now offer this valuable golf course irrigation audit by an Irrigation Association trained and certified auditor. We, at McMahon Group do not have any affiliation with golf irrigation products or companies that supply golf irrigation. We audit your irrigation system from an unbiased position and recommend money saving and better playing conditions without regard to irrigation companies.

For more information on how a golf course irrigation audit can improve turf conditions and save valuable water resources and operational expense call or e mail, Michael Vogt, CGCS, CGIA, at McMahon Group.

Irrigation audits are valuable tools to fine tune your golf course irrigation system and demonstrate that your management efforts are aimed at conservation and environmental responsibility.

Protecting the Golf Course: Funding It's Future



Michael D. Vogt, CGCS, CGIA, McMahon Group, Inc.

When assembling a long-range plan for properly funding capital projects on the golf course, a club manager, superintendent, and green committee should know when the funds will be required. A sound plan must provide the appropriate amount of funds to meet the needs of each golf course component, feature, or piece of equipment. A stable contribution to a fund that supports capital replacement will guard against the diminishing of the long-term and short-term assets for the golf course. A funding plan should not very wildly from year to year; it is recommended that funding a capital replacement plan be done on a monthly allocated basis to avoid large sudden expenditures that upset a club’s normal cash flow. A reserve study for golf asset replacement is good business and makes good sense.

A Golf Reserve Study consists of two parts, one: Physical Analysis (visual inspection by a course maintenance expert) that result in a comprehensive inventory of design / equipment elements and a prioritized schedule of future replacement costs; and two: The Financial Analysis that recommends a minimum and stable level of funding into a reserve account over the next 15 to 20 years, so your club has the money for capital projects when it is needed. The well executed Golf Reserve Study becomes the basis of your long-range financial plan to provide continuity and dependability for maintaining a high quality course for years to come.
The Process is to accumulate the raw data needed to evaluate your unique golf course operation. Generally, an inventory of all golf assets is developed with appropriate age and condition information, ranging from all golf facilities, buildings, irrigation systems, down to all maintenance equipment. The inventory and condition data is digested into useful tables identifying dates of purchase / construction and original costs.

A Golf Reserve Study is formulated in an easy to use understandable narrative about property conditions, recommended cost saving methods and normal times of replacements. The reserve study is specifically tailored to your club’s goals and objectives and becomes the centerpiece of your long-range golf strategic plan.

The Golf Reserve Study clearly identifies long-term assets and near term replacements, adequate and actual funding for future repairs and replacements, normal routine maintenance, life cycle capital replacements, etc. On-site visual inspection and historical analysis of each property / equipment component determines theoretical useful lives and accurately measures remaining useful lives. A narrative explains the best practice method for:

1. Capital repairs
2. Partial or phased replacement
3. Complete replacement

The goal is to save money and help you with a realistic plan for future capital spending to maintain a consistent, stable financial capital improvement plan, and to assure a good capital improvement environment for years to come.

Two Funding Methods
Cash Flow Funding Verses Component Funding

To protect the appearance, value, playability, and safety of a golf course property, it is essential that the management have a financial plan that provides funding for the projected replacements. In years past, many public and private golf courses typically left the capital funding of assets to the best judgment of management, with private clubs funding capital projects from special assessments or initiation fees, in the public sector, taxpayers voted on bond issues from the municipality, and privately owned golf courses normally made due until funds could be allocated from revenue or in some cases institutional lending. Management of golf businesses in an effort to short-circuit these knee - jerk reactions to capital replacement needs, began funding a special account for asset replacement. In conformance with American Institute of Certified Public Accountant guidelines, Replacement Reserve Analysis evaluates the current funding of Replacement Reserves by two generally accepted accounting methods: the Cash Flow Method and the Component Method. In effect, this look into the future smoothed the highs and lows of asset replacement and made for a better maintained business model and renewed worn assets saving valuable cost of funds and increasing the quality of the product.

Cash Flow Method calculates Minimum Annual Funding of Replacement Reserves that will fund Project Replacements identified in the Replacement Reserve Inventory from a common pool of Replacement Reserves and prevent replacement Reserves from dropping below a Minimum Recommended Balance.

In this method, Minimum Annual Funding remains the same between peaks in cumulative expenditures called Peak Years. This is the preferred funding method for most asset reserve studies. This newer Cash Flow Funding Method provides adequate reserves without the requirement of carrying a large unused balance, thus reducing the annual contributions to the reserve fund. Under the Cash Flow Funding Method, the reserve fund is established as an aggregate pool of funds with no individual line item budgets. Funds set aside to adequately cover all reserve expenditures included in this pool are funded so the reserve pool never drops below zero.

Component Method is a time tested and very conservative funding model developed by Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in the early 1980’s. The Component Method treats each projected replacement in the Replacement Inventory as a separate account and deposits are made to each individual account, where funds are held for exclusive use by that item.
The Component Method overtime reveals some hidden drawbacks. Suppose an irrigation system for example is ten years old and was allocated no funding in the past. Based on a useful life of 30 years and a cost to replace of $1,000,000.00 we have missed 10 years of funding at $33,333.00. To catch – up the business would need to fund the irrigation system $50,000.00 per year to establish funds before our target date to replace. This accelerated funding has a result of becoming financially burdensome and in most cases will not be funded in full. This funding scenario will be especially pronounced at older clubs and golf courses that have not had a reserve funding plan in place.

Conclusion

At golf and country clubs today, the need for long-range golf course planning is paramount to each club’s success. While day-to-day golf course maintenance management is vital, the truly wise clubs have forward thinkers and have a plan for continuous improvement to the golf course and its associated buildings and equipment.

About the Author

Michael D. Vogt, CGCS, CGIA, is a Golf Facilities Consultant with McMahon Group. McMahon Group is a full-service private club consultancy serving golf and country clubs worldwide. Mr. Vogt can be reached at 800-365-2498 or visit
www.mcmahongroup.com .

Golf Maintenance Design Criteria


By Michael Vogt, CGCS, CGIA

Introduction

During the past decade as the number of golf courses has continued to increase the number of golf rounds played have remained about the same. These new golf courses, public and private, all are capable of providing a quality golf experience. As a result of increase in the availability of golf, the challenge to existing golf course operators, and private clubs, is to continue to deliver a high quality golf experience and to effectively manage costs associated with the golf course. Delivering a quality golf experience ensures that a golf operation retains its loyal group of customers and supports the golf course’s goal of maintaining a positive revenue stream.

At the McMahon Group as we continue to work with different types of golf course operations we have seen the contribution that a well designed golf maintenance facility can make to the quality of a golf course. For private golf and country clubs golf is the number one reason an individual will decide to join a club. For a daily fee or municipal golf course the most important product is the condition of the course and practice facilities. Often players will discuss the speed of the greens, the condition of the fairways, bunkers and rough. During these discussions one golf course is often compared to another and that is typically where the decision to return to a golf course is made.

For the operator, loyal customers translate into an increase in rounds played, more golf shop sales, an increase in food and beverage sales, in short more revenue. However many times operators of golf courses (private country clubs, daily fee and municipal) do not consider the condition of the golf course as a competitive necessity and therefore do not engage in the necessary planning of the facilities that support the condition of the golf course, specifically the golf maintenance facility or turf care center.

Based on recent survey results private country clubs as well as daily fee operators can be expected to spend $35,000 to $78,000 per hole in golf maintenance dollars (these figures vary based on the region of the country). Typically these figures include payroll, supplies, employee taxes and benefits. In addition, daily fee, municipal and private clubs alike have made significant investments in maintenance equipment. For example, many clubs currently have well over one million dollars inventoried in equipment and related golf maintenance items needed for the smooth operation of the golf course and surrounding grounds. Regardless of the dollar amount a significant investment is made in the equipment and the facility that maintains the golf course and the adjacent property.

The Planning Process

A. A decision must be made

As with all organizations whether they are private country clubs, daily fee or municipal operators, the first priority is the golf course. The second priority is typically those areas that are highly noticeable to a club’s membership or the public, such as the clubhouse or other recreational facilities. The golf maintenance facility is often overlooked. The most important step in this process is the first. The leadership must reach consensus that something needs to be done.

A method that many country clubs, daily fee golf courses and municipal operations can employ is the use of a Strategic/Business Plan. This type of plan would accomplish the following; identification of the issues and clarification of the goals. The plan establishes a time line as to when the issue should be studied and a recommendation of a solution is proposed. Finally a person or group is assigned ownership of the task. The benefit is when a club or business creates a written record it is usually followed and most issues can be addressed before they become major problems.

B. Formation of a committee to analyze the issue.

The task of analyzing and studying the golf course’s maintenance facility is normally assigned either to the club’s Planning Committee, the Green Committee or an ad hoc Golf Planning Committee. Typically the task of reviewing the maintenance facility occurs in conjunction with a golf course improvement project. Ideally this committee is composed of past and present members of the Green Committee and the Board of Directors, who, in total represent every segment of the club’s membership. For technical expertise the committee may also include the club’s professional staff, specifically the golf course superintendent. Additionally, the committee should also include the appropriate specialists such as a golf course architect, and an environmental specialist. For those committees who are assigned the task of analyzing just the golf maintenance facility the participants within this group will change.

Once assembled the committee’s initial tasks are to study the condition of the existing maintenance facility and its infrastructure to determine the full scope of work needed in a master plan of improvements. From here an improvement plan for the maintenance facility can be developed with the issues prioritized. During the development of the plan the committee begins to develop probable cost estimates. These figures are reasonable costs of construction plus any contingency amounts. For example, cost overruns, and an estimate of the financial impact to the golf operation, etc.

One of this committee’s responsibilities is to communicate with the membership and other parties that are interested in the development of this project. In a private club environment space should be dedicated within the club’s newsletter for the Chairman of the Planning Committee or another officer of the club to provide periodic updates regarding the progress of the project.

For municipal and daily fee golf operations the manager/owner is the primary decision-maker regarding the project, consequently consensus is more easily achieved. Within this stream lined environment it is helpful to have experienced individuals available to assist with the development of the plan.

C. Developing a Financing Plan

In the private club environment developing financial options is the most critical success factor in cultivating membership support and approval for capital projects. Typically the most preferred methods of funding a capital improvement are: 1) a monthly capital dues increase 2) a non- refundable assessment 3) a refundable assessment and 4) cash flow from operations. Each funding method provides the club and membership with advantages and disadvantages. What follows is a summary of these financing methods.

1. Monthly Capital Dues Increase: Using this alternative the club uses a capital dues increase to finance a loan. The advantage of this funding method is most members prefer a low monthly payment in lieu of a large one-time payment. A member is excused from future payments if he or she leaves the club. The disadvantage of this financing method is a loan will put a club in debt, and future member resignations could threaten a club’s finances.

To illustrate how a loan program is applied, a club borrows $1,000,000 to pay for a capital improvement. The loan interest rate is 6% fixed over a term of 10 years equating to an annual 13.33% principal and interest repayment cost. Monthly the club would be required to make a payment of $11,108 to support the loan. If a club had 400 members, each would be required to pay $27.77 per month. If a loan option is considered, a provision should be obtained to allow the loan to be repaid ahead of schedule.

2. Non-Refundable Assessments: Using this method the total project cost is divided equally among all golfing members and immediately paid. The advantage of this method is the project is immediately paid for. The disadvantage is it is the most unpopular method of securing funds with a membership due to the high initial cost, and it forces the current membership to pay most of the cost.

3. Refundable Assessment: The upfront assessment can be made more marketable to a membership if the club provides a refundable feature that becomes effective if a member leaves the club. It is recommended that the refundable amount be depreciated over the life of the project. For example, if a member were assessed $5,000 to fund a capital project, a depreciation schedule of 10% per year for 10 years might be used, therefore if a member left after five years the assessment balance he or she would be refunded would equal 50% of the original assessment amount ($2,500). Experience has shown the depreciation feature has little impact on gaining member approval for the project, but it will support the future financial profile of your club.

4. Cash flow from operations: At times private country clubs as well as daily fee and municipal operations will set aside a portion of their revenue in a “Capital Reserve Fund” which has been created for improvement projects. For a private clubs initiation fees or funds generated from a monthly capital fee is normally the source of this revenue. For the other types of operators a percentage of greens fee revenue may be set aside to fund capital projects. Ideally operating surpluses would be used to finance golf projects.

The important point is for the owner/operators to carefully monitor their cash flow from operations. The primary revenue source for municipal golf operations is tax revenue. As with private club’s it is important for a municipal operation to clearly explain the benefits to the taxpayers of the community.

The Use of a Consultant

At times it may be necessary to locate and use a third party to review the existing facility, provide recommendations, and prepare communications for a project related to the Golf Maintenance Facility. At the McMahon Group we offer two services to the golf course superintendent. One, which we visit your golf course maintenance facility, review the site and floor plans of the facility, conduct a needs analysis, review the golf course maintenance schedule and staffing levels then compare the facility itself to the strategic goals of the club/golf course. Along with this analysis a report will be generated to include an architectural solution as well as an opinion of probable cost, an outline of specifications and how to proceed with improvements. This process will identify the facilities shortcomings and propose a solution. The second service is less expensive but still requires a site visit. This product will review your golf course, staffing, golf maintenance facility site and building floor plans, conduct a needs analysis and provide a recommendation based on a review of the site and floor plans of the maintenance facility.

Golf Maintenance Facility Design and Sizing Criteria

Golf maintenance facility design should attempt to accomplish three primary objectives. The first objective is to provide a safe environment for the employees of the club and golf course. Second, to allow for optimal efficiency by the maintenance staff and third, the maintenance area should be designed in such a way that the risks to the immediate environment are reduced. Improper handling and disposal methods at a golf maintenance facility can create serious environmental problems and potentially expose members and owners to legal liabilities.

The golf maintenance area is where pesticides are handled, equipment and fuel are stored and where general equipment maintenance is conducted. It is essential that this facility is well conceived and organized; otherwise a club could be living with a maintenance facility that is wasteful, fails to address the needs of the golf operation and could expose the club to legal liabilities, which could include penalties and fines. What follows are the general sizing guidelines for golf maintenance facilities.

Determining the Facility Site:

A few planning issues to be considered when selecting a site for the golf course maintenance facility. For new and existing golf courses identification of the site is important to the design and efficiency of the facility. While some courses will attempt to centrally locate a maintenance facility within the course (see figure 1) other clubs do not have this option. Consequently the location of the maintenance facility is on the border of the club’s property sometimes next to a residential area. Regardless of the location the site should have enough space where good traffic circulation is ensured. When deciding on a location several key questions should be answered, such as:

- Does the proposed site provide enough space for a building(s) of the size you want? If the total space requirement of your facility is 12,000 square feet, a site that supports 8,000 square feet is unacceptable.
- Are there utilities nearby?
- Is there space on the site for fuel storage and dispensing?
- Are natural water sources (ponds and streams) nearby?
- Is there sufficient space for chemical, fertilizer storage, and equipment wash areas?
- Is there sufficient space on the site that allows for the primary structure, ancillary buildings and the delivery of golf course supplies, storage bins and waste gathering areas?
- Is there enough space on the site to provide employee parking?
- Ideally this facility provides a loading dock that is compatible for a forklift.
- What are the anticipated reactions from your neighbors?

In addition to the questions noted above, it is equally important to know if the site that is being considered is on a floodplain and is suitable for construction. At times this critical piece of information is overlooked and causes problems when the time comes to secure building permits. Other issues to consider: Is the area concealed from the golf course? This is usually a consideration when the quality aspects of the golf operation are reviewed. Whether or not the initial site analysis is favorable it is always advisable to have a secondary location in mind in case an unforeseen circumstance eliminates the first choice.

For maintenance facilities that care for more than 18-holes it is recommended that the floor space for each of the key areas be increased by 50%, with the exception of the administrative office spaces. For example a maintenance facility may have 8,000 square feet of space to store the club’s equipment. If this facility were required to maintain a total of 36-holes an additional 4,000 square feet should be secured for additional storage.

Building and Site Requirements:
In general a few planning guidelines should be considered when designing and building a golf maintenance facility. A total of 10,000 – 13,000 square feet should be allocated for the main structure. Within the primary structure administrative space, primary equipment storage, the mechanics area including a lift, parts storage, a grinding room, and possibly an irrigation storage room would be included. The chemical and fertilizer storage building(s) should be separate from the main building, construction materials of these buildings should be chosen based on local and federal codes designated for these uses. During the planning process and reviewing the operation of the site it is critical that all government requirements are verified (federal and local environmental guidelines, OSHA, etc) to ensure code compliance. Other planning characteristics include:

- The outside area should be paved (highway code) to support the delivery of equipment and supplies by large trucks and a paved area allows for the easier pick up of waste materials.
- Fuel Storage areas should be above ground (compliant with the EPA and OSHA).
- Outdoor covered storage bins for sand and soil.
- A greenhouse if it is feasible for your operation.
- Waste and dumpster areas. Consider excavating and paving a bay that puts the top of the dumpster at ground level.


The Primary Maintenance Facility Structure: If site conditions permits it is recommended that this structure range from 10,000 to 13,000 square feet and include the following characteristics

- Administrative Space
- Equipment Storage
- Mechanics Repair Areas and Parts Storage
- Compressor/Grinding/Sanding and Painting Rooms
- Other Considerations

Administrative Space: This area handles the communication of the daily work priorities. Ideally the location of this space should be as far away from the equipment storage area as possible. Maintenance logs, invoices and other essential records must be maintained daily, and a quiet workspace ensures accuracy. Storage should be provided for the maintenance department’s records and supplies. A fireproof cabinet should be used to store MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheets), plant protectant spray application records, back-up irrigation programs and inventory documents; these documents along with others should be duplicated and stored off site.

Climate control is a requirement of this area as well. Computers are used for record keeping and the update of the superintendent’s maintenance procedures. Very often the computers located in the area are dedicated to run a golf course’s irrigation system. Climate control will help your computers operate efficiently. If your club’s maintenance and invoice records are stored on a computer in this area the superintendent should consider having this information “backed up” on a daily basis. Depending upon how your golf course’s computer system a 3rd party provider should be considered as a resource to back up important records. Other key characteristics of this area include:

- Typically 1,500 to 2,500 square feet is allocated to administrative/break room areas, record storage etc. Depending upon the size of the maintenance staff.
- Private office space for the superintendent, assistant superintendent, horticulturist, irrigation technician and the club’s mechanic and a conference room area, if feasible.
- A break room/conference room.
- Men’s’ and women’s locker room areas equipped with ½ lockers.
- A guest restroom for club members or other visitors.
- A drying/mudroom to hang and store damp overalls, etc.


The goal of the administrative area is to provide and efficient workspace that promotes communication of the daily golf course requirements.

Equipment Storage: For most golf course maintenance facilities the McMahon Group has recommended 6,000 – 8,500 square feet to be allocated to the storage of maintenance equipment. A few key characteristics are as follows:

- Floor areas of the storage area should be marked so each piece of equipment has a designated space.
- The storage area should provide a small / secure equipment storage area for handheld equipment such as trimmers, chain saws, etc.
- This area should be designed for optimum circulation so the equipment can be driven through (eliminate the need to back up into a space).

Mechanics Repair Area / Parts Storage: Aside from the primary equipment storage area the mechanics repair shop is the second largest space within the maintenance facility’s primary structure. On average most equipment repair areas are 1,500 – 2,000 square feet and are connected to the equipment storage area and the parts storage room. Within the repair area space should be designated for equipment that is scheduled for repair. Ideally the mechanic’s repair area is equipped with a hydraulic lift that positions the equipment for quick and timely repairs and adjustments. Attachments are available for many lifts so that the golf course smaller equipment may be lifted during repair.

Parts storage in most golf maintenance facilities average approximately 200 - 250 square feet in size and should be used to store the most frequently used repair items. Some club’s will secure this area with a locked door so that the mechanics and the superintendent are the only personnel that have access. Regardless of access this room should have a direct entry into the equipment repair area so that the technicians working on the equipment do not have to waste time retrieving parts. Other considerations may include:

- An identified area for equipment in repair
- An overhead rail system (if feasible).
- For northern climates this area should be supplied with forced air heating with thermostat control.


Compressor Rooms: For southern climates a separate compressor building is acceptable but a compressor should be located inside the primary structure in northern climates. Additionally, the noise from a compressor can be distracting to the players on the course and to the local neighborhood. If feasible it is recommended that a separate compressor room be provided within the equipment storage area or main repair shop with ventilation and sound insulation.

Grinding Room: Similar to the parts storage room the grinding room in the main structure of the maintenance facility should be located adjacent to the mechanic’s repair area. Grinding rooms range in size from 200 to 300 square feet and should support rotary, reel and bed knife grinding. An adequate ventilation system should be available, one that controls the filings that are created when grinding is performed.

Other Considerations: Depending upon the size of the golf maintenance facility’s primary structure other rooms may be introduced. Some of the plans that have been reviewed show that many operations have added the following:

- Irrigation storage rooms
- Oil and lubrication storage rooms
- Equipment tool set up rooms.

Good planning will determine what features the primary golf maintenance facility will include. It is important to the maintenance needs of the superintendent be accurately accounted for during this process.

Chemical and Fertilizer Storage Facilities

Chemical Storage: One of the most important features of a golf maintenance facility is the chemical storage building. Normally it is recommended that a maintenance facility use a separate structure that meets local environmental and safety requirements. The most obvious benefit of a separate facility is employee safety. If the golf course’s chemicals are not stored properly they could end up in high traffic areas where the original container could be ruptured, resulting in a spill. The second benefit of a chemical storage facility is the ability to properly contain a spill and minimize your club’s exposure to the immediate environment. Finally a dedicated space promotes an accurate inventory, reducing waste, theft and the duplication of your businesses orders. Other key characteristics include:

- Ideally this structure is located at least 50 feet away from other structures on the site to allow for emergency access and 500 feet away from natural water sources.
- Chemical storage areas should average 400 – 500 square feet. More space is required if a mix load area is incorporated in the design.
- All steel or sealed masonry construction (non-combustible materials).
- Shelving should be chromed, coated or painted metal or plastic.
- All light switches should be located on the outside of the building and control the ventilation system so all systems are activated prior to entry.
- If feasible an electric garage door opener so the building may be opened with entry.
- Fire/smoke, security alarm with a dedicated line to the fire department or security company.
- Exhaust fans and an emergency shower / eye wash stations are mandatory.

When the installation of a new chemical storage facility is necessary the use of a pre-fabricated structure should be given consideration. One of the advantages of a pre-fabricated structure is the assortment of sizes that are available for the maintenance facility site. Reviewing a manufacturer’s web site shows that a pre-fabricated structures range in size from 62 cubic feet to 2,300 cubic feet and all have the necessary safety features. Other benefits include that all of the necessary building, fire and electrical codes are met and these structures are compliant with environmental legislation. The use of this turnkey approach would offer your golf operation an efficient alternative in meeting you chemical storage needs.

Fertilizer Storage Facilities: Fertilizer storage areas are equally important and many of the principles outlined above apply as well. An important feature of the fertilizer storage area is a racking system that has a high weight capacity (18-ton) and is capable of being loaded with a forklift (reducing manual labor). Other key characteristics are as follows:

- Fertilizer storage area should average 1,500 square feet and feature a high weight racking system that can be loaded using a forklift.
- Seamless flooring made of metal or concrete that is non-skid and treated with chemically resistant paint.
- Exhaust fans and emergency wash areas are mandatory.
- Ensure OSHA and Federal and Local EPA compliance.


Mix Load Area/Storage Combination Facility: A golf turf care center mix load area is used to fill the sprayers that are used on a golf course and grounds. The principle goal of this area is to provide an environment that promotes efficient mixing of the club’s plant protectant chemicals and water-soluble fertilizers while maximizing safety and minimizing environmental risk. Some maintenance facilities have created a combination facility where chemical and fertilizers are close to the mix load area. A few of the features of a mix load area are as follows:

- Ideally a minimum 600 square feet and connected to the chemical storage facility.
- The building itself is all steel or masonry walls and made of non-combustible materials.
- This structure should have 3 bays, one drive through bay as rinsate/mix load pad, one to store products, and one to store spray equipment.
- The door height of the entrance should be large enough where the club’s equipment can be parked for filling.
- Two available water sources, potable water for eyewash and safety shower and non-potable irrigation water (unless effluent) to fill the sprayers.
- Equip with exhaust fans with the volume capacity that can exceed 6 air changes per hour.
- Electric to code with wires in sealed conduit between inner and outer walls.
- Concrete filled steel pipe to protect corners of the building and entryways.
- Air gap quick cam hose hook ups.


Note: This floor plan should have provided forklift access to the fertilizer storage area. Depending on your golf operation ability to receive supplies quickly a larger fertilizer storage facility may not be necessary.

Equipment Cleaning: The Clean Air and Water Act is very specific about what can and cannot be passed as effluent from the wash down from a maintenance facility’s equipment cleaning area. Ideally when a golf course or private club is renovating or building a new facility the wash down area should strive to meet three objectives. The first is 100% containment of the oils, greases, solvents, fuels and any other contaminants found on the equipment. Second, it must be compliant with state and federal environmental protection agencies and third it must be affordable and within the overall budget of the capital project.

- Create a blowing station that has the ability to remove materials from the equipment prior to washing.
- Typically a wash pad is 750 square feet (30 X 25) this allows two machines to be washed at one time.
- Water recycling systems that are compliant with state and federal EPA requirements.


Environmental Concerns & Resources:

A golf course superintendent has many resources available to him/her when an environmental issue presents itself. Perhaps the easiest resource to use is the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America’s homepage. The GCSAA web site provides policy updates on a regular basis that are easily found. The association’s home page can be found at http://www.gcsaa.org/. In addition to environmental updates this site is an excellent source of ideas and other information.

The federal government’s Environmental Protection Agency’s web site has plenty of information regarding the sale, storage and use of pesticides. Specifically these topics are covered in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). After these products are used on golf courses the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act governs the disposal or recycling of the remaining material. For detailed information the web site is: www.epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/storage_resources.htm

Interestingly the Federal EPA does not have regulations regarding the sale and use of fertilizers. Those requirements are defined at the state level. With regard to water and rinse containment federal legislation was drafted in 1994 and has yet to be adopted. The Container and Containment rule covers the majority of the issues regarding the handling of refillable and non-refillable containers, the structure of the container and labeling however this proposal does not cover pesticide rinsate.

While the Federal Government has yet to establish regulations regarding pesticide rinsate many states have, it is best to review these requirements at the local level. Several states have published detailed guidelines reviewing the handling of chemicals, rinsate and other environmental issues facing golf maintenance departments, for example the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection has develop an entire manual entitled “Best Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Departments” while this document was originally drafted in 1995, and currently out of print, it contains information and practical advice that are relevant for today’s golf courses. A copy can be obtained by visiting www.dep.state.fl.us/water/nonpoint/pubs.htm

During the planning and construction phase of the maintenance facility it is best to review the environmental and zoning requirements with local resources.

Conclusion:
Many times a golf course’s maintenance facility is constrained by the physical size of the building site, where the entire complex is located, or by the funding capacity of the operations (club or daily fee alike). When considering the installation of a new facility or a renovation of an existing facility it is important that the best general practices be observed. Specifically the following:

- Ensure that the safety needs of the staff are met.
- The facility is organized to minimize the cost of labor and supplies
- Chemicals and fertilizers should have a defined storage place that can contain a spill.
- That the maintenance facility complements the strategic needs of your golf course (i.e., the best quality daily fee course in the metropolitan area).
- Compliant with all Federal and State EPA and OSHA guidelines.
- Compliant with all local zoning guidelines.

For the physical facility it is best to see if your plans address the following areas:

- Overall site circulation
- Staff and fleet parking
- Outdoor storage bins for topdressing sand, bunker sand, mulch and other materials.
- Green waste disposal and recycling
- Chemical storage and mixing areas
- Fertilizer storage
- Fuel storage
- Equipment wash and rinse containment
- Equipment storage and circulation
- Equipment maintenance, including a lift and parts storage
- Administrative offices, staff locker and break room.



Sources used in the development of this publication:

USGA Green Section Record
Golf Course Management Magazine
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Midwest Association of Golf Course Superintendents
Illinois Department of Agriculture
Carbtrol Corporation, Bridgeport, CT
Audubon International, Selkirk, NY
Midwest Plan Services, Ames, IA

Special thanks to:

Daniel Dinelli, Superintendent North Shore Country Club, Glenview, IL
Paul Vermeulen, PGA of America
Allen Zelco, Superintendent, Missouri Bluffs Golf Club, St. Charles, MO
Rob Ritchie, CGCS, Persimmon Woods Golf Club, Weldon Springs, MO
J. Scott Warner, CGCS, Superintendent, Lincolnshire Fields Country Club, Champaign, IL
Bay Hill Lodge & Country Club, Orlando, FL

THE SAMPLE COUNTRY CLUB 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE
GOLF TURF CARE/MAINTENANCE FACILITY CONSULTANT’S REPORT

CURRENT DATE

Maintenance Facility Overview:
Michael Vogt, CGCS of the McMahon Group and the Golf Course Superintendent of Sample Country Club, met to review the Club’s current golf and grounds maintenance facility. Golf Digest Magazine currently ranks the Sample Country Club’s golf course as one of America’s top 100 Greatest Golf Courses. The golf course maintenance budget for the year is projected to be XXX for the upcoming years, or approximately XXX per hole. The Sample Country Club is located on 200 acres in the Midwest United States.

Key Characteristics of the Golf Operation:
Total Acreage:
- 24 acres of fairways
- 4.2 acres of tees
- 4.25 acres of greens
Bunkers:
75 total bunkers, a total of 80,000 square feet.
Average Green Size:
8,900 square feet, as compared to a typical course where the greens are approximately 5,000 to 6,000 square feet.
Practice Facilities:
13,000 square feet practice green.

2 chipping greens

2 short game practice greens

3 target greens on the driving range with a total square footage of 18 – 20,000 square feet.

5,000 square feet of tee space on two tiers that support the primary practice facility.
Rounds Played
Approximately 22,000
Primary Maintenance Schedule:
Greens:
- Greens are mowed 7 days per week weather permitting with 6 green mowers and 2 collar mowers.
- Aeration occurs twice per year (spring and fall)

Top dressing is performed twice a month. A typical golf course may perform this task once a month. This contributes to a smooth fast putting surface.

The approach areas to the greens are mowed 3 times per week using a tri-plex mower.
Tees & Fairways:
Mowed 3 times per week. Typically 3 men mow the fairways in the morning and this takes a total time of 4 to 6 hours.
Rough:
The rough is cut 1 to 2 times per week, along with the bunker side grass, depending upon the rainfall and grass growth.
Bunkers:
Bunkers are hand raked every day and machine raked after a heavy rain.

Strategic Goals of the Golf Course:
The Sample Country Club has hosted national championships. The condition of the course is very important to the membership of the Club as the course receives national exposure on a periodic basis. As noted above members and their guests play approximately 22,000 rounds of golf per year. According to the National Golf Foundations “Operating & Financial Performance Profiles of 18-Hole Private Golf Facilities” the number of rounds is significantly lower than the median for the region, 26,500 rounds.

The Club’s golf maintenance budget of XXX is significantly higher than the average of XXX (based on a marketplace analysis conducted by the McMahon Group). In conclusion, the Sample Country Club’s goal is to provide its members with the best condition course that is possible and is easily accessible to member play.

Personnel and Staffing:
The staff at the Sample Country Club includes the (1) superintendent, 1 part-time secretary, 2 assistant superintendents, 1 irrigation technician, 1 horticulturalist and 2 mechanics. The club has a total of 22 employees that are responsible for turf care and maintenance.

Maintenance Facility Current Characteristics:

THE SAMPLE COUNTRY CLUB: MIDWEST, UNITED STATES
Facility / Characteristics
Square Feet Est.
Percent Allocation of Space
Comments
Acreage of Site

Approximately 1.7 acres
Total Number of Golf Holes
18 holes of regulation golf

Site Issues:
The facility is located on a road that is perpendicular to the road that features the Club’s main entrance. The location of the maintenance facility is located on the lowest point of the club property. The maintenance facility is protected from “heavy rains” by a large storm washbasin that channels the majority of storm run off away from the facility. In order for the facility to be flooded a large amount of rain would have to fall rapidly and/or the washbasin would have to be blocked with organic material (brush, branches, etc).

The current asphalt surface is suitable for deliveries and the movement of the Club’s maintenance equipment. A few minor areas were noted as in need of repair but in general the area was to be found in good condition.

Primary Facility Analysis:

Administrative and Employee Areas: The superintendent’s office was found to be in excellent condition with sufficient space to meet with the Club’s Green Committee and other visitors. In addition to the Superintendent’s private office workspace has been provided for the Club’s assistant superintendents. They are stationed in a 400 square foot office that is equipped with 3 workstations all of which have a view of the maintenance site.

Daily work priorities and assignments are posted on large “white” boards that reside within the employee break room and are located next to the time clock. The Club is currently using manpower/time management software that requires an employee to enter the hours spent on a specific task. This has helped the Club understand the allocation of payroll dollars on the golf course.

The Club has a large break room (600 square feet) located next to the men’s and a women’s locker rooms. A drying room/mud room is available for hanging of overalls and damp clothes. The addition of this room has helped reduce locker room odor. The maintenance facility has restroom facilities for visitors as well, located away from the employee areas.

Equipment Storage: In total the Club has 7,200 square feet of space dedicated (among 2 buildings) to the storage of the Club’s equipment. Each piece of the Club’s equipment has been assigned a designated storage space and the layout of the facility allows the Club to flow the machinery through, eliminating the need to back equipment into its space. This area was found to be appropriate in terms of storage the Club’s equipment (see inventory) and layout.

Mechanics Shop and Supporting Areas:

1. Parts Storage: The Club’s parts are stored in an area that is adjacent to the equipment repair area. The inventory of parts is well organized and accessible to the staff.

2. Grinding Room: The grinding room is convenient to the hydraulic equipment lift and is well ventilated to control the shavings that are generated during routine maintenance.

3. Sanding and Painting Room: Currently the Club does not have a sanding and painting room. Theses functions are performed on the Club’s parking lot.

Fertilizer Storage: The Club has an adequate fertilizer storage area that features a high weight racking system that is forklift accessible. This storage area shares an enclosed barn that also allows for indoor storages of the Club’s topsoil and other planting material.

Soil/Sand/Planting material covered storage: The Club uses a large structure that stores the planting materials and the Club’s fertilizer. The structure is adequate in that trucks and small vehicles may be backed up for loading.

Fuel Storage: The Club’s fuel storage tank is underground and is thought to be in good condition. Should the Club consider the removal of the existing tank and replacement with an above ground tank the location should be carefully studied.

Pesticide Storage: The Club has purchased a pre-fabricated structure and it is located next to the area that is used by the irrigation technician. This structure is located sufficiently far away from any natural water sources. The only concern is that the structure is located just close enough to the irrigation technician’s area where it might be difficult to access in time of an emergency.

Pesticide/Fertilizer Mix – Load Area: Currently the Club does not have a defined area for the mixing and loading of water-soluble pesticides and fertilizers. The equipment is flushed after every third application of pesticides. It is unknown if the maintenance area has a non-potable source of water to fill the equipment.

Blowing station: At the present time the Club designated “blowing station” where impediments may be removed from the Club’s equipment prior to washing.

Wash-off rinsate water containment: The Club does not have a specific area where the equipment is washed after use.

Waste Dumpster Areas: Currently the Club has one dumpster. Any trees, branches etc. are typically mulched and used on certain areas of the golf course, for example to the right of the 12th fairway.

Recommendations:

1. Covered Storage: While comparing the equipment inventory to the available square footage indicates that sufficient storage is available at the Club, it should be noted that much of the equipment remains outside during the winter months. The Club should consider the addition of covered areas where at least this equipment is protected from the elements.

2. Mix – Load Area: Presently the Club does not have a formal area for the mixing and loading of water-soluble fertilizers and pesticides. Future improvement should incorporate this feature within the plan.

3. Equipment Blowing Station: Presently the Club does not have a formal that allows materials to be removed for the Club’s equipment prior to washing. Future improvement should incorporate this feature within the plan.

4. Equipment Rinsate water containment: Presently the Club does not have a designated equipment rinse area that provides water containment. Future improvement should incorporate this feature within the plan.