Committee told a $500,000 capital adjustment is needed after Guildhall water tests failed to support sprinkler systems

The Corrections & Institutions committee was told a proposed $500,000 capital‑budget adjustment is needed for the Essex connector renovation after engineers found the municipal water supply in the Guildhall area failed to meet fire‑suppression flow standards.

Speaker 5 reported the project team initially assumed municipal water could feed newly required sprinklers, but flow tests showed the hydrant system “failed” and “it's not enough to support fire suppression,” prompting the recommendation to install a standalone system consisting of a roughly 14,000‑gallon tank and a pump to service the sprinklers when activated. The tank would be sited near the courthouse and the pump would supply sprinkler water independent of the town main.

Committee members asked whether the capital‑budget request would duplicate state drinking‑water funds or whether the town should pursue upgrades through ANR. Speaker 1 warned the committee that either route—direct capital funding for the tank and pump or getting the town prioritized for state drinking‑water upgrades—would require capital dollars; the question is whether the state should fund a standalone system now or wait for a longer ANR project that could take more time and require a local match.

Terry Corson, state court administrator, said the judiciary informed the town of the engineers' results and has not seen a clear municipal plan to address the shortfall. "We informed the town of our test results," he said, adding that the court system proceeded to design a standalone solution so courthouse work could move forward.

BGS staff told the committee they are still refining subcontractor estimates for the pump, tank, precast or cast‑in‑place tanks, excavation, mechanical and electrical work and expected to receive the final equipment estimate shortly. They estimated the $500,000 figure is still an approximation and that any unused funds would revert to capital funding.

The committee directed staff to obtain written estimates and to coordinate with ANR and with the town so the members could decide whether to cover a standalone system in the capital bill or seek state drinking‑water project funds that would require matching dollars. The committee asked for the final estimate to be circulated as soon as it is available and for testimony to be offered to the Senate Institutions Committee if necessary ahead of markup.

Next steps: BGS/judiciary will provide a written estimate for the pump and tank, report back on discussions with ANR regarding municipal water upgrades, and notify the committee when subcontractor numbers are complete.