United States >
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4607)
EPA815-R-99-016
April 1999
Guidance Manual for
Conducting Sanitary Surveys
of Public Water Systems;
Surface Water and
Ground Water Under the
Direct Influence (GWUDI)
of Surface Water
-------
-------
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 OBJECTIVE OF THIS MANUAL 1-1
1.2 BACKGROUND.. 1-2
1.3 REGULATORY CONTEXT 1-3
1.3.1 Total Coliform Rule , 1-3
1.3.2 Surface Water Treatment Rule 1-3
1.3.3 Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule 1-4
1.4 EPA/STATE JOINT GUIDANCE ON SANITARY SURVEYS 1-6
1.5 RATIONALE FOR SANITARY SURVEYS . 1-6
1.5.1 Goal of a Sanitary Survey 1-6
1.5.2 Benefits of a Sanitary Survey. 1-7
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY 2-1
2.1 DETERMINATION OF OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE 2-1
2.2 REVIEW OF PERTINENT FILES ON PHYSICAL FACILITIES 2-2
2.2.1 Previous Sanitary Survey Reports 2-2
2.2.2 Water System Plans 2-2
2.2.3 Water System Schematic/Layout Maps 2-3
2.2.4 Project Reports 2-6
2.2.5 Construction Documents 2-7
2.2.6 Water Source Information .' 2-7
2.2.7 Source Protection Information 2-8
2.3 REVIEW OF PERTINENT FILES ON WATER QUALITY 2-10
2.3.1 Monitoring Plans 2-10
2.3.2 Compliance Reporting 2-10
2.4 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 2-11
2.5 INSPECTION TOOLS 2-12
2.6 COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES 2-13
2.7 PARTS OF THE ONSITE INSPECTION 2-14
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY 3-1
3.1 SOURCE (PROTECTION, PHYSICAL COMPONENTS, AND CONDITION) 3-2
.1 Watershed Management Program 3-2
.2 Wellhead Protection Program 3-5
.3 Source Vulnerability Assessment 3-6
.4 Source Water Quality 3-8
.5 Source Water Quantity 3-11
.6 Location of Source Facilities 3-13
.7 Capacity of Source Facilities 3-14
.8 Design of Source Facilities 3-16
.9 Condition of Source Facilities 3-30
.10 Transmission of Source Water 3-31
.11 Priority Criteria 3-31
3.2 TREATMENT 3-32
3.2.1 Location of Treatment Facilities 3-33
3.2.2 Treatment Plant Schematic/Layout Map 3-34
3.2.3 Capacity of Treatment Facilities 3-36
3.2.4 Treatment Processes and Facilities 3-38
3.2.5 Priority Criteria 3-79
3.3 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS , ; 3-80
3.3.1 Distribution Maps and Records 3-81
EPA Guidance Manual i April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
CONTENTS
3.3.2 Field Sampling/Measurements 3-82
3.3.3 Distribution System Design and Maintenance 3-84
3.3.4 Priority Criteria 3-95
3.4 FINISHED WATER STORAGE 3-96
3.4.1 Type of Storage 3-97
3.4.2 Location of Storage 3-100
3.4.3 Capacity of Storage Tanks '. 3-101
3.4.4 Design of Storage Tanks 3-101
3.4.5 Painting of Storage Tanks., 3-104
3.4.6 Cleaning and Maintenance of Tanks 3-105
3.4.7 Site Security 3-106
3.4.8 Priority Criteria '... 3-106
3.5 PUMPS/PUMP PAOLO-IBS AND CONTROLS 3-107
3.5.1 Types of Pumps . 3-107
3.5.2 Capacity of Pumps 3-111
3.5.3 Condition of Pumps ...3-113
3.5.4 Pumping Station 3-114
3.5.5 Priority Criteria 3-117
3.6 MONITORING/REPORTING/DATA VERIFICATION 3-118
3.6.1 Regulatory Records Review 3-118
3.6.2 Water Quality Monitoring Plans 3-120
3.6.3 Priority Criteria 3-123
3.7 WATER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT/OPERATION 3-123
3.7.1 Administrative Records Review 3-124
3.7.2 Water Quality Goals 3-125
3.7.3 Water System Management 3-126
3.7.4 Water System Staffing 3-127
3.7.5 O&M Manuals and Procedures 3-129
3.7.6 Water System Funding 3-130
3.7.7 Priority Criteria 3-131
3.8 OPERATOR COMPLIANCE WITH STATE REQUIREMENTS 3-131
3.8.1 Certification of Operators 3-132
3.8.2 Competency of Operators 3-133
3.8.3 Priority Criteria 3-133
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT 4-1
4.1 SANITARY SURVEY REPORT 4-1
4.2 SANITARY SURVEY DOCUMENTATION 4-3
4.3 CATEGORIZING THE FINDINGS 4-4
4.4 CORRECTIVE ACTION 4-7
4.5 OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE 4-8
5. REPORT REVIEW AND RESPONSE 5-1
5.1 STATE ACTIONS 5-1
5.2 WATER SYSTEM ACTIONS 5-3
6. REFERENCES ., , 6-1
APPENDIX A A-l
April 1999 ii EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
DISCLAIMER
This manual provides guidance on how to conduct a. sanitary survey of surface water and
ground water under the direct influence (GWUDI) of surface water drinking water
systems. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency believes that a comprehensive
sanitary survey is an important element in helping water systems protect public health.
This document is EPA guidance only. It does not establish or affect legal rights or
obligation. EPA decisions in any particular case will be made applying the laws and
regulation on the basis of specific facts when permits are issued or regulations
promulgated.
Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute an EPA endorsement
or recommendation for use.
-------
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Environmental Protection Agency gratefully acknowledges the assistance of the
members of the Microbial and Disinfection Byproducts Federal Advisory Committee and
Technical Work Group for their comments and suggestions to improve this document.
EPA also wishes to thank the representatives of drinking water utilities, researchers, and
the American Water Works Association for their review and comment. Finally, the
Agency would like to recognize the following individuals for their contribution to this
guidance manual:
Charles E. Schwarz, P.E., Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission
Bart Stepp, Regional Engineer, Oregon Drinking Water Program
William F. Parrish, Environmental Engineering Associates, LLP
Brian Tarbuck, Maine Bureau of Health
Frederick N. Macmillan, USEPA Region III
Stan Calow, USEPA Region VI
Blake Atkins, USEPA Region VII
Bob Clements, USEPA Region VIII
Valerie Blank, USEPA, OGWDW
Mariana Negro, USEPA, OGWDW
-------
-------
CONTENTS
FIGURES
Figure 2-1. Schematic of a Typical Public Water System 2-5
Figure 3-1. Major Components of a Typical Ground Water Well 3-17
Figure 3-2. Surface Water Intake with Multiple Level Withdrawals 3-21
Figure 3-3. Infiltration Gallery 3-24
Figure 3-4. Geological Formation for Springs 3-26
Figure 3-5. Catchment and Cistern System Components 3-28
Figure 3-6. Water Treatment Plant Layout Map 3-35
Figure 3-7. Schematic Drawings of Types of Rapid Mix Unit Configurations 3-42
Figure 3-8. Liquid Chemical Feed System 3-47
Figure 3-9. Dry Chemical Feed System 3-48
Figure 3-10. Gaseous Chemical Feed System 3-49
Figure 3-11. Mechanical Flocculator Types 3-55
Figure 3-12. Different Clarifier Shapes 3-58
Figure 3-13. Examples of In-Plant Cross-Connections 3-78
Figure 3-14. Example of a Distribution System Cross-Connection 3-91
Figure 3-15. Common Devices for Cross-Connection Control 3-92
Figure 3-16. Types of Storage Facilities 3-98
Figure 3-17. Typical Hydropneumatic Tank Installation ...3-99
Figure 3-18. Components of a Storage Tank 3-103
Figure 3-19. Types of Pressure Tanks 3-104
Figure 3-20. Common Centrifugal Pump Types and Components 3-110
Figure 3-21. Typical Pumping Station 3-115
Figure 3-22. Typical Water Quality Monitoring Plan Layout for a Surface Water
Treatment Facility 3-121
Figure 5-1. Summary of 40 CFR 142.10 Requirements for a Determination of Primacy
Enforcement Responsibility 5-2
TABLES
Table 1-1. Sanitary Survey Frequency for Public Water Systems under the IESWTR 1-6
Table 2-1. Communication Activities 2-13
Table 3-1. Clarifier Design Factors 3-59
Table 3-2. Typical Maximum Filtration Rates 3-63
Table 3-3. Recommended Backwash Rates 3-65
Table 3-4. Applications for Centrifugal Pumps 3-111
Table 3-5. Pump Sizing Criteria 3-112
Table 4-1. Example of Sanitary Survey Deficiencies* 4-5
EPA Guidance Manual iii
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
CONTENTS
ACRONYMS
ANSI/NSF American National Standards Institute/National Sanitary Foundation
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
AWWA American Water Works Association
CCP Composite Correction Program
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CPE Comprehensive Performance Evaluation
CT Concentration of Residual Disinfectant multiplied by Time of Water
Contact (Detention Time)
CTA Comprehensive Technical Assistance
D/DBP Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts
DHS Department of Health Services
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
GAC Granular Activated Carbon
GIS Geographic Information System
GLUMRB Great Lakes Upper Mississippi River Board
GREP Generally Recommended Engineering Practice
GWR Ground Water Rule
HAA Haloacetic Acids
IESWTR Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
M-DBP Microbial-Disinfectants/Disinfection Byproducts
NODA Notice of Data Availability
NSF National Sanitation Foundation
O&M Operation and Maintenance
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SWTR Surface Water Treatment Rule
TCR Total Coliform Rule
TDT Theoretical Detention Time
THM Trihalomethane
TTHM Total Trihalomethane
TNRCC Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
UFTREEO University of Florida Training, Research, and Education for
Environmental Occupations
USGS United States Geological Survey
VOC Volatile Organic Contaminant
WFI Water Facilities Inventory
WHPA Wellhead Protection Area
April 1999
iv EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Objective of this Manual
This manual provides guidance on how to conduct a sanitary survey of surface water and
ground water under the direct influence (GWUDI) of surface water, drinking water systems.
A comprehensive sanitary survey is an important element in helping water systems protect
public health. Sanitary surveys are carried out to evaluate: (1) the capability of a drinking
water system to consistently and reliably deliver an adequate quality and quantity of safe
drinking water to the consumer, and (2) the system's compliance with federal drinking
water regulations. Much of the information generated by a sanitary survey helps identify
existing and potential sanitary risks. This guidance manual will identify assessment
criteria to be evaluated for sanitary risks. The manual also describes how to identify
significant deficiencies that represent an imminent health risk and require immediate
correction.
This manual is intended to help state agencies improve their sanitary survey programs
where needed and to help ensure consistency in how surveys are conducted and documented
across state sanitary survey programs. In addition, owners and operators of public water
systems may find the information useful in the operation and management of their drinking
water systems and their sources. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
promulgated specific sanitary survey requirements in the Total Coliform Rule (TCR) and
the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) and is considering
expanding those requirements under future regulatory efforts (e.g., the Ground Water Rule).
The overall structure of the guidance manual centers around the four principal stages of a
sanitary survey: (1) planning a sanitary survey; (2) conducting the onsite survey; (3)
compiling a sanitary survey report; and (4) performing follow-up activities including
responding to a sanitary survey. The manual is organized as follows:
Chapter 1 - Introduction. This chapter provides information about the
objective and regulatory context of this manual, as well as other sanitary
survey background information.
Chapter 2 - Planning the Survey. This chapter discusses the preparatory
steps to be taken by inspectors before conducting the onsite portion of the
survey.
Chapter 3 - Conducting the Survey. This chapter discusses each of the
elements of a sanitary survey as listed in the 1995 EPA/State Joint Guidance
on Sanitary Surveys and IESWTR requirements. The chapter explains each
element's importance to the effectiveness of the sanitary survey and presents
general guidelines (assessment criteria) for evaluating important components
of each element. Discussions within each element identify the components of
high priority that may be considered significant deficiencies.
EPA Guidance Manual 1-1 APril 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
Chapter 4 - Compiling the Survey Report. This chapter presents guidelines
for preparing the sanitary survey report, maintaining adequate documentation,
categorizing findings on deficiencies, addressing corrective action, and
determining outstanding performance.
Chapter 5 - Report Review and Response. This chapter provides
information on follow-up activities for the system operator and the inspector/
inspecting agency (e.g., the state).
1.2 Background
In the preamble to the IESWTR, a sanitary survey is defined as:
"an onsite review of the water source (identifying sources of contamination
using results of source water assessments where available), facilities,
equipment, operation, maintenance and monitoring compliance of a public
water system to evaluate the adequacy of the system, its sources and
operations and the distribution of safe drinking water."
Conducting sanitary surveys on a routine basis is an important element in preventing
contamination of drinking water supplies. EPA recognizes the importance of sound sanitary
surveys in helping water systems protect public health. Sanitary surveys are an opportunity
to work and communicate with water systems in a preventative mode.
As stated in the December 7995 EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys, the primary
purpose of a sanitary survey is: "to evaluate and document the capabilities of the water
system's sources, treatment, storage, distribution network, operation and maintenance, and
overall management to continually provide safe drinking water and to identify any
deficiencies that may adversely impact a public water system's ability to provide a safe,
reliable water supply." In addition, the joint guidance notes that sanitary surveys provide an
opportunity for state drinking water officials or approved third party inspectors to establish a
field presence at the water system and educate the operators about proper monitoring and
sampling procedures, provide technical assistance, and inform them of any upcoming
changes in regulations. Sanitary surveys also aid in the process of evaluating a public water
system's progress in complying with federal and state regulations which require the
improvement of the capabilities of the system to provide safe drinking water. Sanitary
surveys provide the water system with technical and management information regarding the
operation of the system from the water source, through the treatment facilities and the
distribution system.
This draft guidance manual provides additional information about planning for, conducting,
and reporting the results of a sanitary survey. As stated in the December 7995 EPA/State
Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys, EPA recommends that states work with EPA Regions
in using sanitary survey guidance to improve their sanitary survey programs while still
addressing the problems and issues specific to the state.
APril1999 1-2 . EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDl
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
1.3 Regulatory Context
Under 40 CFR 142.10(b)(2), as a condition of state primacy, states are required to have "a
systematic program for conducting sanitary surveys of public water systems in the State,
with priority given to sanitary surveys of public water systems not in compliance with State
primary drinking water regulations." Currently, the TCR requires a water system to
periodically undergo a sanitary survey for all systems that collect less than five routine total
coliform samples per month. Additionally, the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR)
requires an annual onsite inspection for surface water systems that do not filter (40 CFR
141.71(b)(3)). The JJESWTR further elaborates on the sanitary survey requirements for all
surface water and GWUDI of surface water systems.
1.3.1 Total Coliform Rule
The first regulatory requirement for the states to have a periodic onsite sanitary survey
appeared in the final TCR (54 FR 27544-27568, 29 June 1989). This rule requires all
systems that collect fewer than five routine total coliform samples each month to undergo
such surveys. These sanitary surveys must be conducted by the state or an agent approved
by the state. Community water systems were to have had the first sanitary survey conducted
by June 29,1994 and an additional survey conducted every five years thereafter. Non-
community water systems are to have the first sanitary survey conducted by June 29, 1999,
and an additional survey conducted every five years thereafter unless the system is served by
a protected and disinfected ground water supply, in which case, a survey may be conducted
every 10 years. (40 CFR 141.21(d))
As stated in the preamble to the IESWTR:
"EPA notes that it will consider sanitary surveys that meet IESWTR
requirements to also meet the requirements for sanitary surveys under the
TCR, since the definition of a sanitary survey under the IESWTR is
broader than that for the TCR (i.e., a survey as defined under the IESWTR
includes all the elements of a sanitary survey as required under the TCR).
Moreover, with regard to TCR sanitary survey frequency, the IESWTR
requires that surveys be conducted at least as frequently, or, in some
cases, possibly more often than required under the TCR."
1.3.2 Surface Water Treatment Rule
The SWTR does not specifically require water systems to undergo a sanitary survey. .
Instead, it requires that unfiltered water systems, as one criteria to remain unfiltered, have an
annual onsite inspection to assess the system's watershed control program and disinfection
treatment processes. The onsite survey must be conducted by the state or a party approved
by the state.
EPA Guidance Manual 1-3 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
This onsite survey is not a substitute for a more comprehensive sanitary survey but the
information can be used to supplement a full sanitary survey. The elements of the onsite
survey include:
A review of the effectiveness of the watershed control program;
A review of the physical condition of the source intake and how well the
intake is protected;
A review of the system's equipment maintenance program to ensure a low
probability for failure of disinfection processes;
An inspection of disinfection equipment for physical deterioration;
A review of operating procedures;
A review of data records to ensure that all tests are being properly conducted
and recorded and that disinfection is effectively practiced; and
Identification of any improvements that are needed in equipment, system
maintenance and operation, or data collection.
As a supplement to the SWTR, EPA published a guidance document entitled Guidance
Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water
Systems Using Surface Water Sources, in 1991. Appendix K of the guidance suggests that
in addition to the annual onsite inspection, a sanitary survey be conducted every three years
for systems serving 4,100 people or less and every five years for systems serving more than
4,100 people for both filtered and unfiltered systems. According to the appendix, this time
period is suggested "since the time and effort needed to conduct the comprehensive survey
makes it impractical for it to be conducted annually."
1.3.3 Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule
The ESWTR requires that a sanitary survey address each of the eight elements listed in the
1995 EPA/State joint guidance. These eight elements are source; treatment; distribution
system; finished water storage; pumps, pump facilities, and controls; monitoring and
reporting and data verification; system management and operation; and operator compliance
with state requirements.
Under the preamble to the ZESWTR:
"The State must complete sanitary surveys for all surface water systems
(including ground water under the direct influence of surface water) no
less frequently than every three years for community systems and no less
frequently than every five years for non-community systems. The State
may "grandfather" sanitary surveys conducted after December 1995 for
the first set of required sanitary surveys if the surveys address the eight
survey components of the 1995 EPA/State guidance. The rule also
provides that for community systems determined by the State to have
outstanding performance based on prior sanitary surveys, successive
April 1999 1-4 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
sanitary surveys may be conducted no less frequently than every five
years. In its primacy application, the State must include: 1) how it will
decide whether a system has outstanding performance and is thus eligible
for sanitary surveys at a reduced frequency, and 2) how it will decide
whether a deficiency identified during a survey is significant.
In the IESWTR, a sanitary survey is defined as an onsite review of the
water source (identifying sources of contamination using results of source
water assessments where available), facilities, equipment, operation,
maintenance, and monitoring compliance of a public water system to
evaluate the adequacy of the system, its sources and operations and the
distribution of safe drinking water.
Components of a sanitary survey may be completed as part of a staged or
phased State review process within the established frequency interval set
forth below. A sanitary survey must address each of the eight elements of
the December 1995 EPA/State Guidance on Sanitary Surveys including:
source; treatment; distribution system; finished water storage; pumps,
pump facilities, and controls; monitoring and reporting, and data
verification; system management and operation; operator compliance with
State requirements. In addition, sanitary surveys include review of
disinfection profiles for systems required to comply with disinfection
benchmarking requirements....
States must have the appropriate rules or other authority to assure that
facilities take the steps necessary to address any significant deficiencies
identified in the survey report that are within the control of the public
water system and its governing body. A State must also, as part of its
primary {primacy] application, include how it will decide: 1) whether a
system has outstanding performance and is thus eligible for sanitary
surveys at a reduced frequency, and 2) whether a deficiency identified
during a survey is significant for the purposes of this rule. In addition, a
State must have appropriate rules or other authority to ensure that a
public water system responds to significant deficiencies outlined in a
sanitary survey report within 45 days of receipt of the report, indicating
how and on what schedule the system will address significant deficiencies
noted in the survey."
Table 1-1 indicates the required frequency for conducting sanitary surveys under the
JESWTR.
EPA Guidance Manual 1-5 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
Table 1-1. Sanitary Survey Frequency for Public Water Systems
under the IESWTR
System Type : , ; r
Noncommunity Water System
Community Water System
Community Water System with Outstanding Performance
Based on Prior Sanitary Surveys
Minimum Frequency of Surveys A;
Every 5 years
Every 3 years
Every 5 years
1.4 EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys
EPA and the states (through the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators) have
issued a joint guidance on sanitary surveys entitled EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary
Surveys. The guidance outlines the following elements as integral components of a sanitary
survey:
Source (Protection, Physical Components and Condition)
Treatment
Distribution System
Finished Water Storage
Pumps/Pump Facilities and Controls
Monitoring/Reporting/Data Verification
Water System Management/Operations
Operator Compliance with State Requirements.
The IESWTR requires that sanitary surveys address all of the eight elements of the EPA/
state joint guidance. These elements are described in Chapter 3.
1.5 Rationale for Sanitary Surveys
1.5.1 Goal of a Sanitary Survey
As stated earlier, sanitary surveys are a means by which a comprehensive inspection of the
entire water delivery system and its operations and maintenance (O&M) can be performed.
These surveys are structured to determine whether a system's source, facilities, equipment,
operation, maintenance, and management are effective in producing safe drinking water.
Sanitary surveys also evaluate a system's compliance with federal drinking water
regulations, as well as state regulations and operational requirements. In addition, a sanitary
survey evaluates water quality data and administrative issues and draws conclusions about
the system's integrity and its capability for consistently and reliably delivering an adequate
April 1999 1-6 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
supply of safe drinking water to consumers. Conducting sanitary surveys on a regular basis
is the best means of identifying potential problems and possible reasons for trends in
finished water quality and demand that may need to be addressed by enhanced O&M or a
system upgrade. Sanitary surveys play a fundamental role in ensuring that reliable and safe
drinking water is provided to the public by public water systems.
1.5.2 Benefits of a Sanitary Survey
EPA believes that periodic sanitary surveys, along with appropriate corrective measures, are
indispensable for assuring the long-term quality and safety of drinking water. Properly
conducted sanitary surveys help public water systems protect public health; Sanitary
surveys have many benefits for the operation and management of public water systems.
Sanitary surveys may also provide support to enforcement actions by establishing a record
of conditions and operations at a point in time.
The 1995 EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys lists the following specific
benefits of conducting sanitary surveys:
Operator education;
Source protection;
Risk evaluation;
Technical assistance and training;
Independent, third party system review;
Information for monitoring waiver programs;
Identification of factors limiting a system's ability to continually provide safe
drinking water;
Reduction of monitoring requirements;
Reduction of formal enforcement actions in favor of more informal action;
Reduction of oversight by state monitoring and enforcement personnel;
Increased communication between state drinking-water personnel and public
water system operators;
Provision of contact personnel to notify in case of emergencies or for technical
assistance;
Improvement of system compliance with state drinking water regulations;
; Identification of candidate systems for enforcement action;
Identification of candidates for Comprehensive Performance Evaluations;
Verification of data validity;
Validation of test equipment and procedures;
Reduced risk of waterbome disease outbreaks;
EPA Guidance Manual 1-7 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
Encouragement of disaster response planning; and
Improved system security.
April 1999 1-8 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
This chapter describes some basic activities that the inspector should accomplish before
conducting the onsite portion of the survey. These activities help the inspector determine
what areas to focus on and how to divide up the limited time during the onsite inspection.
Once onsite, the inspector may identify other priority areas that need more attention. If so,
the inspector should then adjust the onsite schedule accordingly.
Prior to initiating other activities for a survey, an inspector should review the previous
sanitary survey report and other relevant records to determine if a system has an outstanding
performance designation. Since this designation affects the required frequency for a survey,
it may impact whether that system will be inspected at the current time. When a system is
being inspected, a review of the water system's file should be conducted to obtain pertinent
information about the physical facility and water quality data before the actual site visit.
Information that should be collected includes: the treatment process(es) in place,
monitoring requirements, the compliance history of the facility, and the condition of the
system during the previous sanitary survey. This information is used to compile a list of
questions/assessment criteria for the onsite inspection. Familiarity with federal and state
requirements (e.g., operational requirements, operator certification, design standards) can
assist the inspector in preparing for the sanitary survey.
This chapter also includes a list of equipment which the inspector should take to the onsite
inspection. A list of persons to contact before the inspection is provided with some
suggestions for the types of topics to be discussed. The chapter concludes with an overview
of the onsite inspection process.
2.1 Determination of Outstanding Performance
Community water systems that are classified as having outstanding performance are eligible
for having sanitary surveys conducted less frequently than other community systems. Under
the ffiSWTR, community water systems must have a sanitary survey performed by the state
at least once every three years, unless the system has outstanding performance. If the state
determines that a community system has outstanding performance, it must be surveyed at
least once every five years.
Each state, as part of its application for primacy, is required to develop a means for
determining whether a system has outstanding performance. A state should have defined
outstanding performance and established certain specifications for determining outstanding
performance. To determine if a system has outstanding performance, the inspector should
review the report from the system's previous sanitary survey to see if the system was
considered to have outstanding performance then. If the state includes information on
outstanding performance designations in a tracking database, the inspector should check the
system's listing in the database. The inspector should also examine the state's records on
the facility collected since the last sanitary survey. The records of interest will depend upon
the state's criteria for outstanding performance but may include: monitoring data, violation
EPA Guidance Manual ฃl APril 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
records, and notifications of changes to the physical facility or the operator personnel. This
information will help the inspector to determine if there are any changes in performance
since the previous survey that indicate the system no longer satisfies the state's definition of
outstanding performance.
2.2 Review of Pertinent Files on Physical Facilities
Office files and files provided by the water system owner and operator will provide insight
into the design, construction, operation, maintenance, management, and compliance status
of the facility. The sanitary survey inspector should thoroughly review all pertinent
documents before the onsite inspection in order to fully understand the site-specific issues.
The following subsections describe important types of documentation which the inspector
should review if possible. While not all-inclusive, the following subsections discuss
significant types of information often available. Information to review includes:
Previous sanitary survey reports;
Water system plans;
Water system schematic/layout maps;
Project reports;
Construction documents;
Water source information; and
Source protection information.
If available, cross connection control plans should also be reviewed.
2.2.1 Previous Sanitary Survey Reports
Previous sanitary survey reports provide valuable information on the system's history and
compliance status. The sanitary survey report includes a record of system treatment
processes, operations, and personnel and their compliance with SDWA requirements.
Significant deficiencies identified in the previous sanitary survey indicate some of the areas
the sanitary survey inspector should focus on during the inspection to determine if they have
been corrected and have not become problem areas again. Review of several previous
sanitary survey reports may reveal a pattern of noncompliance in certain aspects of the
system. If so, the inspector should pay particular attention to these areas during the onsite
inspection and ask appropriate personnel about these problems and how they are being
addressed.
2.2.2 Water System Plans
Some states may require water systems to develop and maintain comprehensive plans
describing the operations, financing, and planned improvements for the system. The level '
April 1999 2-2 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUrJr
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
of detail in the plans depends on the size, complexity, past performance, and use of the
water system.
The water system plans may include a description of the following items:
A description of the water system;
Basic planning data including population served, service connections, and
land use and development;
System analysis including design standards, water quality data, and a system
inventory description;
Water source analysis including water use data, water demand forecasts, a
conservation program, source of supply analysis, water shortage response
plan, water rights analysis, and water supply reliability analysis;
A description of source protection measures;
Monitoring plans;
A description of the facility operation and maintenance program;
An emergency response/preparedness plan;
A description of capital improvements planned for the system; and
Financial information, including demonstration of financial viability.
The water system plans should be reviewed by the inspector in advance of the sanitary
survey. Review of these plans will assist the inspector planning for the survey to identify
those portions of the system which require special attention during the survey. The state
may require reports from water systems identifying the progress made in developing their
water system plans. Water systems may also have to transmit their water system plans to
adjacent utilities, and local governments having jurisdiction to assess consistency with
ongoing and adopted planning efforts. These plans may require periodic update, depending
upon the state regulations.
2.2.3 Water System Schematic/Layout Maps
A schematic or layout map of the public water system will enable the inspector to obtain a
quick understanding of the complete drinking water system. If possible, prior to the site
visit, the inspector should obtain a schematic or layout drawings of the portions of the
facility that will be evaluated during the survey. The schematic or layout map should start
at the source and continue through the treatment facilities and storage facilities to the
distribution system.
The primary purpose of the schematic or layout map is to help the inspector quickly
understand the basic operation of the system. Therefore, it should be drawn in enough
detail to facilitate the inspector's understanding. A schematic typically provides general
information on the basic system components and the direction of water flow in the system.
Water system schematics should include an identification of source water supply facilities
EPA Guidance Manual 2-3 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
(e.g., source water body and intake, or well; pumping station; transmission line), the
treatment plant, any booster plants, finished water storage (e.g., clearwells, elevated and
ground storage tanks, pressure zones), the entrance to the distribution system, any
associated facilities (e.g., pumping stations), and any interconnections with other public
water systems. A schematic of a typical public water system is provided in Figure 2-1.
Layout maps are more detailed than schematics and contain more specific information on
the location and orientation of physical facilities. In collecting the layout data, an inspector
may easily obtain the latitude and longitude data of a public water system by using portable
Geographic Positioning System (GPS) equipment. A water system may have separate
layout maps for its treatment plant and distribution system.
For identification purposes, the name and identification number of the public water system,
as well as the date of the sketch, should be included on each schematic and layout map. The
dated schematics and layout maps will help future inspectors identify water system changes.
The schematic and/or map should be current and reflect any changes that have been made
since initial construction of the system and since the last sanitary survey.
Suggested criteria for assessing treatment plant schematic or layout map(s):
1. Does the drawing(s) show the name of the facility and date of the last
modification made to the drawing(s)?
This will help future inspectors know between which two sanitary surveys
modifications took place. Taken together, a chronological set of schematics
will help document a system's history.
2. Does the schematic or map(s) contain a legend that explains key symbols
used in the drawing(s)? Is there a numerical or a graph scale on the
layout map?
With the aid of a legend, the inspector will get a better idea about the location
of principal treatment units and appurtenant equipment. The drawing with its
legend will provide the inspector with information useful for determining
where to start and end the inspection, as well as areas that the inspector should
focus on and inspect in particular detail.
3. Does the schematic or map(s) identify source water type(s)?
Many treatment plants draw raw water from different sources (ponds, rivers,
lakes, springs, and ground water). Some treatment plants use ground water to
supplement scarce surface water during the summer season or occasionally
during a dry year. Highly variable raw water quality greatly impacts treatment
requirements and processes.
4. Are influent, effluent, and residual disposal points clearly shown on the
drawing(s)?
APril1999 2-4 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
(0
C
o
0>
>
c
o
o
S
4-1
C
JO
Q.
C
0)
ฃ
CO
CD
n
_o
'EL
>.
i-
Q.
UJ
O
CO
0>
I
3
Q.
"to
U
CO
5
u
u
CO
CM
I
O)
il
EPA Guidance Manual 2-5
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
If these points are not shown on the schematic or the layout map during the
onsite inspection, the inspector should add sketches for these points to the
drawing(s) or use a separate sheet and have inspection comments adjacent to
the sketches.
5. Does the schematic or map(s) show all the elements of the water system,
from source facilities to the distribution system? Does the schematic or
map(s) reflect the actual water system?
The inspector should review the schematic or map(s) to verify that all
elements of the treatment system are shown and the drawings are complete.
During the onsite inspection, the inspector should compare the drawings to the
actual system layout to assess the accuracy of the drawings. Some systems do
not update their maps to reflect system modification or have incomplete
drawings, limiting their usefulness.
2.2.4 Project Reports
The water system may need to submit project reports to the state for approval before any
change in equipment, chemical treatment, or operation, or installation or construction of any
new water system, water system extension, or improvement, or when requested.
A project report should demonstrate consistency with the state design requirements for
water systems and should include:
A project descriptionWhy the project is being proposed, how problems are
to be addressed, the relationship of the project to other system components,
and the impact of the project on system capacity and ability to serve
customers. In some states a project description should contain "a statement of
determination" related to the state environmental policy act, and include
source development information and type of treatment;
Planning dataGeneral project background with population and water
demand forecasts, how the project will impact neighboring water systems,
construction schedule, estimated capital and annual operating costs;
An analysis of alternativesDescription of options and the rationale for
selecting the proposed option;
A review of water qualityHow water quality relates to the purpose of the
proposed project, including analytical results of raw water and finished water
quality;
A review of water quantityApplicable water rights as they relate to the
project;
Engineering calculationsSizing justification, hydraulic analyses, physical
capacity analyses, and other relevant technical considerations necessary to
support the project; and
April 1999 2-6 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING
Design and construction standardsPerformance standards, construction
materials and methods, and sizing criteria.
The inspector should review any available project reports for proposed, ongoing, and
recently completed projects at the water system. These reports may describe upcoming
activities that are already planned and may address some of the problems the inspector finds
during the sanitary survey.
2.2.5 Construction Documents
Water systems typically are required to submit the construction documents to the state for
approval prior to installation of any new water system, or any significant modification to an
existing water system (e.g., change in treatment or water system extension or improvement).
At the completion of construction, the water system may be required to submit an as-built or
record set of the construction drawings and a certificate of completion.
Construction documents should be consistent with state required design standards and may
include:
Drawings, such as detailed drawings for each project component;
Material specifications;
Construction specifications, including a list of detailed construction
specifications and assembly techniques for the project;
As-built construction drawings with the latest updates on all significant
modifications;
Testing criteria and procedures;
Disinfection procedures; and
Inspection provisions.
The inspector should obtain and review construction documents, including for all
significant modifications to the water system. These documents will provide the inspector
with a description of how the system should exist, and will assist the inspector in locating
components of the system.
2.2.6 Water Source Information
A water system seeking source approval may need to provide the state with sufficient
documentation, in a project report or in supplemental documents, for demonstrating the
feasibility of using the water source. These materials may show that:
The source is reasonable and feasible, when compared with alternatives, based
upon preliminary cost estimates of construction, conservation, vulnerability to
contamination, and operation and maintenance costs;
EPA Guidance Manual 2-7 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
The system has adequate water rights sufficient to meet maximum daily
demand without exceeding the maximum instantaneous or annual withdrawal
limits specified by the water right;
The source is physically and reliably available in the necessary quantities;
Whether ground water is under the direct influence of surface water; and
The source meets water quality criteria as required by the state.
The documentation may include: construction documents for the water intake or well (e.g.,
the driller's log); a copy of the water right or other written evidence of the existence of the
right; a map showing the intake or well location and the vicinity; a map depicting
topography around the source, and distances to the intake or well from property boundaries,
buildings, potential sources of contamination, ditches, drainage patterns, and any other
natural or man-made features affecting the quality or quantity of water. The system's water
source information will provide the inspector with a preliminary assessment of the potential
for contamination of the source. This information can be verified by the inspector during
the onsite inspection, discussions with the operator(s), and document review.
2.2.7 Source Protection Information
The system may have prepared a plan to control sources of pollutants before they reach the
source water under Source Water Assessment and Protection Programs (SWAP and
SWPP), the Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP), and the Watershed Control Program.
The 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) expanded information
gathered on source water to include systems using surface water sources. Under Section
1453 of the SDWA, states are required to develop and implement Source Water Assessment
Programs (SWAPs). The SWAP must:
Delineate the source water areas for all public water systems in the state,
Identify the potential sources of contaminants within the areas, and
Determine the susceptibility of the water systems to the contaminants.
In creating SWAPs, states should use information and analyses from previous related efforts
such as developing Wellhead Protection Programs.
State SWAPs are intended to serve as a basis for developing, implementing, and improving
source water protection efforts in source water protection areas and to encourage the
development and implementation of local Source Water Protection Programs (SWPPs).
Water systems may develop and implement SWPPs to protect the drinking water in a
protection area. A local SWPP often incorporates the SWAP elements and adds the steps of
developing a local team, monitoring source water quality, implementing management
measures for sources of contamination, and planning for contingencies (EPA, 1997c).
April 1999 2-8 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
State Drinking Water programs are required to develop Wellhead Protection Programs
(WHPPs) under Section 1428 of the 1986 Amendments to the SDWA. Implementation of
WHPPs is voluntary in many states. The WHPPs are to:
Identify the members of a team to develop and implement the WHPP,
Delineate a wellhead protection area surrounding the well based on "all
reasonably available hydrogeologic information,"
Identify all potential sources of contaminants,
Describe a program to protect the water supply within the wellhead protection
area(WHPA),
Include contingency plans for providing drinking water in the event of
contamination of the water supply, and
Consider potential pollutant sources for all new wells.
State WHPPs provide guidelines and a framework for the development of local, system-
based WHPPs. Many systems have used these guidelines to develop their own WHPP to
address local water protection concerns.
Unfiltered systems are required by the SWTR (40 CFR 141.71) to satisfy a number of
filtration avoidance criteria which include the preparation of a watershed control plan. The
watershed control plan must minimize the potential for contamination of the source water
by Giardia lamblia and viruses. The BESTWR also requires that the plan minimize the
potential for contamination by Cryptosporidium.
The watershed control plan should include:
A comprehensive review of the watershed,
A description of activities to monitor and control detrimental activities in the
watershed, and
A description of the ownership or other land use controls within the
watershed.
To the extent that they are available, an inspector should review the source water
assessment and any source water protection plans, WHPP, and watershed control plan for a
system in advance of the sanitary survey. This information will provide the inspector with a
list of potential contamination sources which may require investigation. The information
may also identify source control measures which may require inspection to determine if they
are being implemented. In addition, the source water assessments will provide valuable
information on well or intake integrity and hydrogeologic or hydrologic sensitivity.
EPA Guidance Manual 2-9 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
2.3 Review of Pertinent Files on Water Quality
A review of pertinent files addressing water quality is a useful tool in identifying potential
problems with a public water system. Monitoring plans and compliance reporting are the
two primary sources of water quality information.
2.3.1 Monitoring Plans
EPA drinking water regulations and state equivalents establish minimum requirements for
the contaminants to monitor and acceptable concentrations for each in the finished water
stream. The monitoring frequency, requirements for re-testing, and sample location are also
typically included in the monitoring plans.
Separate monitoring plans are typically prepared for:
Total coliforms;
Inorganic chemicals;
Organic chemicals;
"Unregulated" chemicals; and
Radionuclides.
2.3.2 Compliance Reporting
The water system should submit reports to the state on a regular basis (typically monthly)
detailing the system operations and identifying any problems encountered during the month.
This monthly operating report (MOR) includes information about system flows, samples
collected, sample analytical results, and any changes. Ideally, an inspector would review all
of the MORs submitted since the last sanitary survey to ascertain any trends (e.g., changes
in water quality, chemical usage, flow rates, or chlorine residuals) which may help to focus
the inspection. Often there is not enough time available to review all of the reports.
Therefore, the inspector should focus on violations or system problems which either the
water system reported to the state or were identified during the previous sanitary survey, as
well as water quality problems typical for the geographical area.
Federal regulations require the water system to issue notices to the public when the system:
Violates an MCL or treatment technique requirement; or
Fails to comply with monitoring requirements or analytical method
requirements.
All public notices should include:
April 1999 2-10 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
A clear, concise, and simple explanation of the violation;
A discussion of potential adverse health effects;
A discussion of any segments of the population that may be at higher risk;
A list of steps the water system has taken or plans to take to remedy the
situation;
A list of any preventive steps consumers should take;
Any need for seeking an alternative water supply; and
The water system's name and telephone number.
In some cases, depending on the severity of the violation, additional specific requirements
(e.g., including mandatory health effects language in the notice) apply. The public notices
are to be distributed by mail or hand delivered to all consumers served by the water system,
or placed in newspapers widely-circulated in the area. Certain violations may also require
announcements on radio and television stations serving the area. (40 CFR 141.32)
State regulations may also require the water system to submit a report to the state or issue
a public notice under certain conditions [e.g., a system is identified as the source of a
waterborne disease outbreak (surface water systems), experiences an unscheduled loss in
pressure, or fails to comply with a state order].
2.4 Assessment Criteria
As part of planning for a sanitary survey, the inspector should prepare a set of criteria to
evaluate during the onsite inspection. Inspectors should generally start with a standard set
of criteria that are used for all sanitary surveys done by the state primacy agency. This
standard set should then be tailored as appropriate based on water system-specific
information obtained from the pre-survey file review and onsite observations. These criteria
assist the inspector with evaluating key processes where potential significant deficiencies
may exist.
The 1995 EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys recommended that states develop
assessment criteria for each of the eight minimum elements reviewed during a sanitary
survey. The IESW.TR reiterates the need to address these eight elements in conducting
sanitary surveys. Assessment criteria are needed to ensure that deficiencies are evaluated
consistently by sanitary survey inspectors. As part of this effort, states should identify the
types of deficiencies that are considered to be significant and should provide appropriate
follow-up actions for both significant and lesser deficiencies.
As outlined in the joint guidance, the eight essential elements of a sanitary survey are:
Source (Protection, Physical Components and Condition)
Treatment
EPA Guidance Manual 2-11 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
Distribution System
Finished Water Storage
Pumps/Pump Facilities and Controls
Monitoring/Reporting/Data Verification
Water System Management/Operations
Operator Compliance with State Requirements.
Chapter 3 of this guidance manual provides assessment criteria that inspectors may use to
evaluate each of the eight elements. The criteria include descriptions of what inspectors
should look for and how the criteria are related to sanitary risk. Since states may have their
own set of assessment criteria for sanitary surveys, inspectors should check with the
primacy agency before preparing a list of criteria for a sanitary survey.
2.5 Inspection Tools
Prior to the onsite inspection, sanitary survey inspectors should ensure that their field
equipment is in good working order. Preventive maintenance is essential for all types of
equipment. Equipment which is broken, dirty, in disrepair, out of calibration, or otherwise
improperly maintained will not provide dependable, reproducible, or accurate data. For best
results, the inspector should follow the manufacturer's specifications for preventive
maintenance. The inspector also should check expiration dates and keep up with and use
current standard testing procedures and calibration methods. Recommended types of field
equipment include but are not limited to:
Portable pH meter with digital readout;
Hand held colorimeter, portable spectrophotometer, or other mechanical
residual chlorine test kit;
Accurate pressure gauge;
Portable Geographic Positioning System (GPS) equipment;
Camera with automatic time/date stamp;
Binoculars;
Small mirror (to inspect areas that are not accessible or are not in the direct
line of sight); and
Flashlight.
The sanitary survey preplanning effort needs to address safety considerations, both for the
field inspector and the system's operating staff. Safety hazards can include head injuries
from low clearance piping, snake and spider bits, insect stings, electrical shock, chemical
exposure, drowning, confined space entry, noise, lifting injuries, and slipping, tripping, and
falling. Prior to the onsite inspection, the inspector should ensure that personal protective
April 1999 2-12 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
equipment is available. The most frequently used equipment includes safety hats, goggles,
gloves, ear plugs, and steel-toed safety shoes. Respirators and a self-contained breathing
apparatus may also be used in some cases.
2.6 Communication Activities
Coordination and communication between the inspector and the primacy agency, local
health department, and water system management personnel are essential in preparing for a
sanitary survey. The inspector needs to work with each of these entities to be properly
prepared for the sanitary survey. Some of the information the inspector should exchange
with each of these entities is listed in Table 2-1.
Based on the information collected and reviewed during survey planning and preparation,
the inspector should make an assessment of which areas need particular attention during the
onsite visit. The inspector can then establish a preliminary schedule for the onsite visit,
allocating more time to the areas that seem to warrant greater focus. Once onsite, the
Table 2-1. Communication Activities
Entity
Primacy agency
Local health department
Water system management
personnel
Activities
The primacy agency should provide the inspector with information on
which water systems to consider for sanitary surveys (based on when the
previous survey was done), past sanitary survey reports, and other
information in the agency files for the relevant water systems. The
primacy agency should also provide the inspector with agency inspection
requirements and guidelines, such as assessment criteria, a list of
significant deficiencies, and any sanitary survey forms used by the agency.
The inspector should contact the local health department to find out if the
water system is in compliance with OSHA (Occupational Safety and
Health Administration) requirements and has been issued a rodent/pest
control permit. The inspector should also ask the health department if
there have been any reported illnesses attributed to drinking water.
The inspector should contact the water system and first determine the
appropriate personnel for further sanitary survey discussions. With the
appropriate personnel, the inspector should describe the purpose of the
sanitary survey and the steps of the survey, particularly the onsite
inspection (described in the next section).
Preliminary discussions should also include:
- a review of previous sanitary survey reports and the system's
historical records (including chemical and bacteriological data),
correspondence,
engineering studies,
past violations, and
any records that are needed for review but are not available from the
primacy agency's files.
The inspector should also schedule the onsite inspection with the water
system.
EPA Guidance Manual 2-13
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
2. PLANNING THE SURVEY
inspector may observe problems in other areas that need detailed inspection and thus require
changes to the preliminary schedule. Through these preparations, the inspector will be able
to assemble and evaluate the proper information during the survey and make sound
recommendations in the sanitary survey report.
2.7 Parts of the Onsite Inspection
The onsite inspection includes the following parts:
(1) Opening interview
- Introductions
- Review of the purpose of the sanitary survey
- Review of the parts of the onsite inspection and the schedule for the
inspection
- Review of the facility layout and location of the intake(s) and treatment
processes
- General discussion of basic system information; the condition of the
system and its operation, staffing, and management; whether relevant
plans and procedures have been developed and are adequate
- Discussion of deficiencies identified in previous sanitary survey reports
and any violations/compliance problems since the last survey, and
corrective actions taken and their effectiveness in addressing the
deficiencies and problems.
(2) Walk through
- Physical inspection of all eight elements of a sanitary survey
- Asking questions of appropriate personnel for clarification, to determine
the knowledge of system personnel, and to check information obtained
during records review and other aspects of survey planning and
preparation
- Note taking for documentation and writing up the findings in the sanitary
survey report.
(3) Organization of findings and documentation
- Filling in any gaps in inspection notes and add detail where needed
- Completing sanitary survey checklists/forms (if used)
- Clarification of any remaining issues with water system personnel
- Obtaining any documentation still needed
- Preparation for closing interview.
(4) Closing interview/debriefing the system on inspection findings
- Presentation of findings, particularly any significant deficiencies, to the
water system
- Informing water system management of next steps (i.e., writing and
submitting the report, corrective action).
April 1999 2-14 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Previous chapters of this manual have provided a definition of a sanitary survey, the
regulatory framework for conducting a survey, and the critical steps for planning a sanitary
survey. This chapter presents the essential elements for completing the walkthrough
inspection of an onsite sanitary survey. The onsite sanitary survey includes visiting the
water supply source and source facilities, pump stations, the treatment plant, storage
facilities, the distribution system, and sampling locations. One of the most important
functions of the onsite portion of the survey is to determine whether the existing facilities
are adequate to meet the needs of the water system's customers at all times. Therefore, this
visit should include review and verification of the capability and capacity, construction and
operation, and physical condition of the water system's facilities.
There are eight elements that are considered essential for review in the proper conduct of a
thorough sanitary survey. These eight elements are listed below:
Source (Protection, Physical Components, and Condition)
Treatment
Distribution System
Finished Water Storage
Pumps/Pump Facilities and Controls
Monitoring/Reporting/Data Verification
Water System Management/Operations
Operator Compliance with State Requirements.
This chapter presents a general description of each element and its importance as part of the
sanitary survey, general guidelines for evaluating important components of each element,
and a discussion of priority components under each element. The order of the eight
elements is not intended to dictate the sequence of survey activities, but to provide a logical
division of the essential elements for a sanitary survey. Each element is divided into
components and includes a discussion of the issues that an inspector should consider when
evaluating a particular component. Guidelines for evaluating the components are provided
in the form of a list of assessment criteria. The assessment criteria identify areas that need
to be reviewed during a sanitary survey. The criteria are intended to help the inspector
identify sanitary risks that may arise due to deficiencies in a particular component.
At the end of the discussion for each element, a set of priority criteria are provided. Priority
criteria are those criteria that generally have the greatest impact on health risks related to a
given element and thus should be considered significant. Since states should develop their
own lists of significant deficiencies, this guidance manual does not contain a standard list of
what deficiencies all states should consider significant. However, Section 4.3 discusses the
EPA Guidance Manual ,._ 3-1 April 1999
Conducting^Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
process of categorizing the findings of the sanitary survey and provides examples of
potential significant deficiencies. In conducting the sanitary survey, the inspector should
pay particular attention to those areas where deficiencies would be considered significant
and thus warrant prompt corrective action. This format allows states flexibility in
evaluating the components based on system type, size, and complexity. Appendix A
includes examples of sanitary survey checklists used by several states and EPA regions.
These checklists are from the 1995 EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys.
3.1 Source (Protection, Physical Components, and
Condition)
The water supply source is the beginning of the drinking water system. As such, the source
can provide the opportunity for the reduction of contaminants, pathogens, and
macroparticles. Preventing source water contamination is the most effective means of
preventing contaminants from reaching consumers. Source water protection also helps
ensure that additional, potentially more costly treatment is not necessary to remove further
contaminants. As the first opportunity for controlling contaminants, the reliability, quality,
quantity, and vulnerability of the source should be evaluated during the sanitary survey.
The objectives of surveying the raw water source are to:
review the major components of the source to determine reliability, quality,
quantity, and vulnerability; and
determine and evaluate data that define the potential for degradation of the
source water quality.
To accomplish these objectives, the inspector needs to review available information on
source water facilities, including watershed control plans, source water assessment reports
and protection plans, and/or wellhead protection plans where they exist for a system. In the
field, the inspector should discuss the water supply source with the operator(s) and verify
the information received from the plans with field observations.
The following areas should be reviewed as part of the sanitary survey.
3.1.1 Watershed Management Program
The primary goal of watershed management programs are to maintain the highest quality
feasible for a surface water source. For an unfiltered water supply, it is particularly critical
to achieve the highest level of raw water quality practicable. A watershed management
program is designed to protect the quality of a water system's surface water source by
monitoring activities in the source watershed and minimizing their impact. An effective
watershed management program will reduce the levels of pathogens, turbidity, organic
compounds, and coliforms.
Development and implementation of a watershed management program is generally done
by a team that may include water system staff, private consultants, planning agencies,
ApriM999 3-2 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
cooperating agencies, and advisory committees. The water system often takes the lead, and
can gain valuable contributions (e.g., expertise, resources) from the other agencies with
jurisdiction over the watershed. Cooperative efforts are particularly valuable when the
water system does not have the staff or expertise to fully develop and implement a program,
and when difficult issues are involved. (EPA, 1999c)
A watershed management program should include a description of the watershed,
identification and monitoring of activities in the watershed that may impact water quality, a
program to control land use activities in the watershed, and annual reporting (EPA, 1991).
Source water assessments should provide valuable information on the vulnerability of the
source water(s) of a surface water-supplied public water system. Each component of the
program is described in the following sections.
3.1.1.1 Watershed Description
A description of the watershed provides valuable information to both the inspector and the
system personnel to evaluate the vulnerability of the source. The watershed description
should include the geographical, geological, and physical features of the watershed;
pertinent hydrology (e.g., annual precipitation patterns, stream flow characteristics, etc.);
land use/ownership in the watershed; location of the surface water intake or well; as well as
any open-air conveyances that carry water from the intake to the treatment plant.
It is important that the intake(s) or well(s) for a public water system be located as accurately
as possible. The intake(s) or well(s) may have been located previously and the inspector
need only verify that the location(s) is correct. The inspector may find that a new intake or
well has been constructed since the last inspection, either authorized or unauthorized, and a
previous one has been abandoned and/or plugged. The inspector should make note of this
new condition and advise the system if they should report the new intake or well to the
state. A U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle or similar map
can be used to plot the location of the water sources. The Global Positioning System (GPS)
is a recently developed tool that can be used to determine the precise location of a surface
water intake or a well.
3.1.1.2 Watershed Characteristics and Activities
The characteristics and activities that may affect the source water quality should be
identified by the system. The naturally-occurring attributes that can affect the source water
quality include terrain, soil types, land cover, precipitation and runoff, and animals. In
particular, the animal populations that can be found in the watershed should be identified,
so that potential contamination sources of Giardia, Cryptosporidium, and any other
pathogens can be evaluated.
The man-made attributes that can affect water quality include point and nonpoint sources.
Point sources of particular interest are discharges from wastewater treatment and industrial
plants and runoff from barnyards, and feedlots. The nonpoint sources that can significantly
impact source water quality are septic systems, construction activities, impervious cover
runoff (i.e., runoff from a highway or parking lot); farming and ranching activities (e.g., the
EPA Guidance Manual 3-3 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
use of pesticides, animal husbandry); logging; recreational activities; and unauthorized or
accidental discharges of contaminants.
Various techniques or plans can be developed to minimize the effect of watershed activities
on source water quality. Some of the more common techniques used to control watershed
activities include ownership of the land by the water systems, obtaining zoning restrictions
from local governments, as well as entering into agreements with the present landowner(s).
With zoning, the local government can control the degree of land development and require
erosion control. Land ownership by the water system and agreements with landowners are
discussed in the next section.
3.1.1.3 Land Ownership/Agreements with Owners
For a water system to have the best opportunity to realize the goals of a watershed
management program, the water system should have complete ownership of the watershed.
However, complete ownership is not practical for most water systems. Therefore, the water
system should try to gain ownership of the critical elements in the watershed, such as
reservoir or stream shoreline, highly erodable land, and areas providing access to the water
supply source.
The water system should enter into agreements with landowners in the watershed that will
allow the water system to have control of the land use so that activities having an adverse
effect on water quality can be minimized. The agreement should also include a provision
stating that the water system has the legal right to ensure that the land use complies with the
agreement. As an example, the water system enters into an agreement with a logging
company (man-made attribute) located in the watershed. The agreement states that the
logging company will develop and implement procedures or practices, such as installing silt
fences around all disturbed areas to control erosion, that will minimize the impact of
logging on source water quality. With the logging company controlling erosion in disturbed
areas, the elevated turbidity levels (caused by the erosion) in the source water will be
reduced. The inspector should review the water system's plans to minimize the water
quality impact of the various activities in the watershed.
3.1.1.4 Annual Reports
A watershed management report should be prepared annually that outlines the steps taken to
acquire all or critical elements of the land within the watershed, efforts made to monitor the
watershed activities, a list of activities that cause special concern, efforts to mitigate the
detrimental affects to water quality, and known future activities that may impact water
quality and a plan to reduce the potential impacts. This report should be submitted to the
state primacy agency for review and approval.
Assessment Criteria
The following are suggested assessment criteria for the watershed management program:
April 1999 3-4 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
1. Is the entire watershed for the source protected? Is the water system
trying to purchase all land within the watershed? If not, are the critical
elements of the watershed protected or purchased by the water system?
The origin of most contaminants, either chemical or biological, found in
drinking water can be traced to the watershed of the source. If the watershed,
all or critical parts, for the source is protected, then potential sources of
contamination can be reduced significantly. By reducing the level of
contaminants in the water source, the water treatment process has to remove
or inactivate less contaminants.
2. If the water system cannot purchase portions of the watershed, does the
water system have an agreement with the landowner concerning land
use? If the water system does not have an agreement, what is the plan to
acquire control of the land use within the watershed?
The water system should gain the highest degree of control possible of the
watershed utilizing the means available. The typical means to secure
watershed control is to either purchase the land or obtain an agreement with
the landowner on the allowable use of the land. Purchasing the land is the
most costly means for a water system to achieve control of the watershed.
Depending on the resources of the water system, it may take a long time to
obtain complete control of the watershed. Therefore, the water system should
have a plan and schedule for acquiring the highest control of the watershed
possible (if not the entire watershed, at least the critical parts).
3. Are all activities within the watershed identified and located? If so, have
there been any changes since the last sanitary survey?
The source(s) of contaminants in drinking water will be either naturally
occurring or man-made. The water system needs to identify and locate the
activities within the source watershed that are potential contaminant source(s).
Based on the type and location of the activities in the watershed, the water
system can develop a plan to mitigate the sources of contamination of the
drinking water supply.
4. What are the practices used to mitigate critical activities within the
watershed that may degrade water quality? How are these practices
monitored? Should there be any changes to the existing practices?
With the activities in the watershed known, the water system can develop a
plan to mitigate the occurrence of contaminants. As with any plan, a means
must be developed to measure the effectiveness of the plan through routine
monitoring and evaluation.
3.7.2 Wellhead Protection Program
A Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP) is designed to protect the quality of a water
system's ground water source by monitoring and minimizing the impact of the activities in
EPA Guidance Manual 3-5 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
the source recharge area as well as the portion of the aquifer that supplies the system. This
program applies to ground water and the associated recharge area. The main components of
a WHPP are delineating the wellhead protection area (WHPA), identifying and locating all
potential sources of contaminants that could impact the well, and developing and
implementing a strategy to manage the WHPA and protect the source from contamination.
Since the WHPP has elements and requirements similar to the watershed management
program, discussion of these elements and requirements will not be repeated here.
Due to the similarity of the wellhead protection program and the watershed management
program, the suggested assessment criteria would be the same. However, the methods used
to delineate the wellhead protection area for the wellhead protection program and the
watershed management program may be different and should be evaluated. For example,
recorded sanitary control easements can be used to help prevent contamination in a WHPA.
The easements specify that sanitary hazards cannot be located within a specified distance
(e.g., 150 feet) of a well.
3.1.3 Source Vulnerability Assessment
A vulnerability assessment is used to determine the likelihood that potential contaminant
sources in the watershed or drinking water protection area will degrade the public water
system's source water quality. The 1996 Amendments to the SDWA require that states
determine susceptibility of all their public water systems to contamination. A susceptibility
determination will include consideration of several factors: hydrogeologic or hydrologic
sensitivity, contaminant source characteristics (e.g., persistence and mobility, toxicity,
volume of discharge), contaminant source management, and well or intake integrity. A
completed Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP) susceptibility determination may
suffice as the source vulnerability assessment for a sanitary survey, and may be integrated
with vulnerability assessments performed under monitoring waiver programs, pesticide
management plans, or other programs.
Suggested assessment criteria for assessment of source vulnerability include:
1. What is the sensitivity of the source water protection area (SWPA)? Has
it's hydrogeologic/hydrologic sensitivity been adequately assessed?
This refers to the transport of contamination from any point within an SWPA to a
well or intake. Higher sensitivity ratings apply to geologic settings through which
contamination can move more quickly and lower sensitivity ratings apply to settings
through which contamination should move more slowly (i.e., sensitivity, like
susceptibility, is local and relative). Sensitivity does not address the question of
whether contamination or potential sources of contamination are present in the
SWPA. Specific factors that should be included in a sensitivity assessment are:
Surface water:
Intake environment: Intakes in turbid water or near shore are more sensitive than
intakes away from shore in clear water.
April 1999 3-6 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Slopes: Water fed from steep slopes is more sensitive than water fed from shallow
slopes.
Plant coverage: Water fed from land with no vegetation is more sensitive than
water fed from land with thick vegetation.
Soil permeability: Water fed from paved surfaces is more sensitive than water fed
from highly permeable top soils.
Ground -water under the direct influence of surface -water:
Saturated zone: Aquifers close to the surface are likely to be more sensitive than
aquifers further beneath the surface.
Well screen: Shallow well screens are more sensitive than deep well screens.
Unsaturated zone: Aquifers overlain by thin unsaturated zones are more sensitive
than those overlain by thick zones.
Confining layer: Aquifers overlain by no confining layers are more sensitive than
aquifers overlain by thick layers.
Conduits: Aquifers with many conduits to or near the saturated zone are more
sensitive than those with no conduits.
2. What is the integrity of wells, intakes, and conveyances?
Source water structures, such as the well casing, joints, screened sequences, padding
at the wellhead, conveyance structures, and equipment to move water from the well
or intake to the distribution system should be assessed for integrity. Integrity means
the quality of design, construction, maintenance, and the state of repair of the
infrastructure. Factors that should be included in an integrity assessment are:
Design: Does the infrastructure design meet current state code? Is the infrastructure
design appropriate for the hydrogeologic setting and pumping rate?
Construction: Is there a well log and does it adequately document how the well was
. built? Are the materials and equipment that were used appropriate for the
hydrogeologic setting and pumping rate? . . -. ' .
Maintenance: Has there been an operative maintenance schedule in place since
construction? Is the maintenance schedule appropriate for the design and
construction of the specific infrastructure?
State of repair: Has the infrastructure been operating reliably? If not, why not?
EPA Guidance Manual 3-7 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3. Are potential sources of contamination identified and managed?
Potential sources of contamination (PSCs) may be point source or nonpoint source
and federally regulated, state regulated, locally regulated, or unregulated. A PSC
may be a facility or activity, including or excluding human involvement. PSCs may
or may not use infrastructure or management practices to prevent, reduce, or
mitigate the likelihood of contaminant release into the SWPA and those efforts may
or may not be effective. Factors that should be included in a PSC assessment are:
Acute health effects: Sources of acute contamination may present greater public
health risk than sources of chronic contamination.
Distance to well or intake: PSCs located closed to drinking water wells or intakes
usually present greater risk than PSCs further away.
Point/Nonpoint source: Point sources usually have greater disaster potential than
nonpoint sources, but are also more easily managed.
Federal/State regulation: PSCs under federal or state regulatory programs are likely
to be better managed than unregulated PSCs.
Containment infrastructure: Are there physical barriers to contaminant release?
Containment practices: Are the standard operating practices designed to prevent
contaminant release?
Contingency plans: Are there contingency plans for accidental release and are
operations personnel familiar with them?
3.1.4 Source Water Quality
Impurities can be found in any natural water source. Surface water can pick up impurities,
including chemical and biological contaminants, as it comes in contact with soil, rock, and
vegetation. The dissolution of minerals from the soil and rock is very common for ground
waters.
EPA has established maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for impurities that must be
removed from or inactivated in raw water before the water can be classified as potable. The
contaminants can be removed or inactivated naturally or by treatment. For ground water,
many of the particles and microorganisms originally found in surface water are removed as
it seeps into the ground and through the aquifer, due to the natural filtration effect as water
passes through soils, and the potentially long travel times in the aquifer.
Surface waters are very different from ground water. Surface waters require a high degree
of treatment to remove impurities and contaminants from natural and man-made sources.
Some impurities in the water, such as large suspended solids, are easily removed. Smaller
particles, including many pathogens, are more difficult to remove. Some pathogens, such as
April 1999 3-8 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Giardia and Cfyptosporidium, also resist inactivation by chlorine. A discussion of water
treatment systems is found later in this chapter (see Section 3.2).
The type of surface water source (i.e., lake, stream, etc.) is an important factor that can
affect raw water quality. A stream with a large watershed in which a land use is
predominantly farming, may experience large swings in raw water turbidity, particularly
after a rainfall event. If the source is a lake or reservoir with the same general watershed
characteristics, the potential for large raw water turbidity swings is greatly reduced, due to
the dilution and settling that occur in a reservoir.
There are many potential raw water quality problems for a surface water source, including:
Zebra mussels and Asiatic clams - can clog intakes reducing capacity;
Algae - can cause taste and odor problems;
Pathogens - can cause intestinal illnesses and other diseases;
Turbidity -can be difficult to remove depending on the size and concentration
of particles;
Natural organic matter - difficult to remove and can form carcinogenic
compounds in combination with certain disinfectants;
SOCs (synthetic organic compounds) and lOCs (inorganic compounds) of
anthropogenic origin - can cause adverse health effects and affect treatment
decisions; and
Iron and manganese - can cause discoloration and staining problems.
These are just a few physical, chemical, and biological! elements found in a surface water
that make treatment (filtration and disinfection) necessary to ensure a safe supply of potable
water.
Historical information should be gathered from the operators. The inspector also needs
records concerning the fluctuations of raw water quality for use prior to the survey and
during the onsite inspection. The steps taken by the water system to mitigate significant
changes should be evaluated to determine their effectiveness. Additional steps may be
needed to further reduce water quality fluctuations if the mitigating measures do not
sufficiently protect water quality.
The following assessment criteria are applicable to the inspection of source water quality:
1. What is the quality of the source? Is the source water quality monitored
by the system? What are the ranges of the required water quality
parameters?
The quality of the water at its source will prescribe the treatment needed to
produce safe, potable water. In particular, the historical range of constituents
in the source water will dictate the level of treatment required. For example,
the pH of a particular source water is typically 7.2, but it ranges from 6.5 to
EPA Guidance Manual " 3-9 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
8.0. If the pH of the potable water leaving the plant is less than 7.0, it is acidic
and can be corrosive, which may result in increased levels of lead and copper
in the consumer's water. Therefore, treatment should be provided to raise the
pH of the water leaving the plant to an acceptable level and to assure that the
water is noncorrosive. The water system should regularly monitor the quality
of the source to identify any changes that may necessitate changes in the level
of treatment required. The inspector should review the system's source water
monitoring records to assess whether the source water quality is sufficient and
does not pose significant sanitary risks.
Another example is the source water microbial quality, as represented by
measurement of the indicator total coliform bacteria. The persistent presence
of total coliform in source water requires removal and/or disinfection to the
levels specified by regulations. In general, all regulated contaminants should
be monitored, as specified, to determine treatment levels.
2. Is there an emergency spill response plan for events that are man-made
which may affect water quality?
The source watershed may have crossing roadways and pipelines that carry
hazardous chemicals. If a truck on the roadway had an accident or the
pipeline develops a leak, a hazardous chemical could spill into the source
water. If the plant operator is unaware of the accident, the hazardous chemical
could pass through the water treatment plant and out into the distribution
system. Therefore, a plan should be developed to respond to these types of
situations. At the least, the plan should include notification of all water
systems in the watershed of the chemical spilled as well as a listing of the
options and alternatives for either treating the chemical at the water plant or
using a temporary source until the threat is over.
3. Is the area around the intake restricted in accordance with primacy
agency rules?
Typically, the intake for a water treatment plant is unmanned and may be
visited once a shift or once per day. Therefore, there is no continuous means
to observe all the activities around the intake. Restricting access to the area
around the intake with fencing, signs, and buoys will limit the possibility of
sabotage or accidental contamination.
4. Are there any sources of pollution at or near the intake? If so, what is the
water system doing to mitigate the sources of pollution?
There are many sources of contaminants that can affect the raw water quality.
Man-made sources would include publicly owned treatment works, industrial
treatment works, private onsite septic systems, pesticide runoff from farming,
fecal contamination from confined animal feeding operations, marinas, etc.
Natural sources of contamination may include birds and hoofed mammals.
Each source could release contaminants that end up in the source water and
April 1999 3-10 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
affect the potable water delivered to the consumer. If the contaminant source
is near the intake, there is little or no time for the water system to respond to
the accidental release of a contaminant. 1'herefore, the water system should
know what pollution sources are close to their intake and what contaminant(s)
could be released. If possible, the water system should try to either eliminate
or significantly reduce the chance(s) of a contaminant release from each
source.
5. Have there been any significant fluctuations in water quality? If so, what
was the cause and how is the water system preventing future
fluctuations? If improvements are in place to mitigate the fluctuations,
how well are they performing? Are any further improvements needed?
Rapid, significant changes to any water quality parameter will impact the
ability of a water treatment plant to produce a safe, potable water. For
example, if the raw water turbidity, which normally is 50 NTU, were to
increase to over 500 NTU in a few hours, the efficiency of all treatment
processes could be significantly impacted to the point that the quality of water
produced is seriously compromised. In particular, the disinfection process
could be compromised due to the interference caused by the high solids
loading. Therefore, water systems need to review the historical raw water
quality data to learn whether there have been instances of rapid, significant
water quality fluctuations and investigate the cause of significant fluctuations.
When the cause is identified, the water system should identify a means to
mitigate future fluctuations. Once mitigation measures are in place, the water
system should regularly evaluate the performance of the improvements to
determine whether or not the raw water quality fluctuations are under control.
A system's monitoring program can help the water system recognize any
deterioration of water quality over time that may eventually make it necessary
for the system to explore new sources. The inspector should review the
system's source water monitoring records to assess whether there are any
trends of deteriorating quality and if the water system has adequately
addressed the problems. Inspectors can also compare raw water turbidities to
finished water turbidities to assess whether changes in raw water quality are
affecting finished water quality. If raw water quality changes are measurably
affecting finished water quality, the inspector should ask the operator(s) about
process control decisions being made and evaluate whether the operator(s) are
making adequate process changes to address raw water quality changes.
3.7.5 Source Water Quantity
One of the most important requirements for any water system is the ability to meet the water
quantity demands of customers at all times. This requirement means that an adequate
quantity of source water should be available to meet the customers' needs. It is important to
determine whether the water system has an adequate source of supply, because prolonged
interruptions or reductions in the source water supply may cause low pressures or water
EPA Guidance Manual 3^11 ~ APril 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
outages in the distribution system that pose a public health hazard. When service pressure
is insufficient, other liquids are much more likely to enter the system through cross-
connections and contaminate the water supply.
In many places, particularly in arid and heavily populated areas, water conservation is
necessary. Water systems should have a water conservation plan that includes short- and
long-term goals, education plans, water rationing procedures in case of drought, and water
conservation information available to the public. An aggressive water conservation plan
can be a cost-effective alternative to the expansion of water production facilities.
Suggested assessment criteria for evaluating the adequacy of the source water supply are:
1. What is the water quantity required to meet the needs of the water
system?
The water system must be able to supply an adequate quantity of potable water
to meet the highest anticipated demand of the customers. If not, then areas of
the distribution system may experience little or no pressure due to the lack of
water. With the loss of pressure, the contamination potential of the system is
heightened significantly.
2. What is the available water quantity of the source?
The quantity of source water available must be sufficient to meet the highest
anticipated demand of the water system. Li addition, the water system needs
to plan for the continued growth of its service area and look ahead to obtaining
an adequate quantity of water to meet those future needs. If operating records
show decreasing water quantity over time, the system should be investigating
additional supply.
3. Is the source adequate to meet the current and future expected needs of
the water system, even during times of drought? If not, what other
sources are being investigated to meet the needs? Has the water system
developed and implemented a water conservation plan?
Knowing the maximum water demand of the system and the quantity available
from the source, a quick determination can be made of the system's ability to
meet the present and future needs of its customers. The inspector can verify that
an adequate supply is available by checking to see if the supply source has ever
gone dry or if water ever had to be rationed because of a shortage of source
water. A water system may have developed a water conservation plan as part of
its overall water system master plan and may already be implementing the water
conservation plan regardless of the adequacy of source water quantity.
Implementation of a good water conservation plan can be a cost-effective
alternative to the expansion of water production facilities as a result of increased
demand. If the source water supply appears to be inadequate, the water system
should be in the process of implementing further water conservation measures
and/or obtaining an additional supply.
APril1999 3-12 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
4. Does the system have a meter to monitor production? Does the system
measure usage by consumers?
The system needs to have meters in place to monitor overall production and
water usage in the system to determine if supply is adequately meeting customer
demand. Data from meters can be used to identify and track trends in both water
supply and usage so that any potential future shortages can be noticed earlier and
additional supplies obtained.
3.1.6 Location of Source Facilities
The location of source water supply facilities is an important factor in determining the
ability of the water system to meet the customer needs at all times. For instance, the
facilities should not be located in the flood plain, because the operation of the water system
could be seriously impaired by flooding of the structure(s) and equipment necessary to
supply source water. Source water quality also can be significantly impacted by location. If
the intake is located on a river instead of a reservoir, it is reasonable to expect significant
quality fluctuations over time. When locating the facilities on a reservoir, the prevailing
wind direction may cause surface debris to be blown against the intake, which could cause
mechanical failures if not accounted for in the design.
The following assessment criteria are suggested for the location of source water facilities:
1. What is the flood level in the area of the source facility? What is the level
of the floor for the source facility? Cam the source facility be flooded?
The source water supply facilities should be able to operate at all times to
produce safe, potable water to meet the customers' needs, regardless of the
surrounding conditions, either man-made or natural. The source facility
should be able to supply water to maintain an adequate pressure in the
distribution system for safety purposes, which would provide water for fire
fighting, pressure to keep contaminants out, and meet the basic consumer
necessities. If the source facility is flooded, the ability to supply water to
satisfy these demands may be compromised. Therefore, the flood level and
floor elevations should be checked to determine whether or not the facility can
be flooded.
2. Has the source facility ever been flooded? If so, was the operation of the
source facility impaired? If the source facility has been flooded and
operation not impaired, what is the access to the source facility during a
flood?
Depending on the design of the facility, portions of the plant could have been
flooded, yet it was still able to produce potable water. In this situation, access
to the source facility needs to be maintained to allow for the ingress/egress of
personnel and equipment as needed.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-13 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3. What measures have been taken to prevent contamination of the raw
water at the source facility during a flood event?
Flooding is a natural source of contaminants in the water supply source.
Surface runoff, which is a major contributor to flooding, will transport dirt,
oil, pesticides, fertilizers, and other contaminants that might be found in the
watershed. Since flooding will introduce contaminants into the water supply
source, the water system needs a means to mitigate the contamination of the
raw water. For instance, some water systems in areas that have raw water
sources subject to flooding have constructed raw water storage facilities
onsite, so that no water needs to be taken from the water source during a flood
event.
3.1.7 Capacity of Source Facilities
The initial step of the onsite visit should be determining the required capacity of the source
facilities. The required capacity should be at least equal to the maximum daily demand of
the water system over the previous several years or as determined by the rules and
regulations of the state primacy agency. Reviewing the operating records of the plant
should provide the maximum daily demand. The maximum daily demand typically occurs
during the summer time, often due primarily to extensive lawn watering activities.
However, there have been situations where the maximum daily demand occurred during
hard freezes in the winter, when customers left faucets running to prevent their water pipes
from freezing. Operating records for the last few years should be checked to determine the
historical maximum daily demand.
The state primacy agency may have rules and regulations that specify the capacity
requirements for the source facilities. The rules may require that capacity be based on
design factors and the numbers of customers or connections served by the water system.
The inspector should determine the required capacity for the source facilities before
beginning the onsite portion of the survey.
The pumps and associated facilities at the source are critical components of the water
supply system. The capacity of the source facilities (i.e., pumps, piping, metering, etc.) that
deliver the source water to the treatment facilities or distribution system needs to be
sufficient to deliver the quantity of water required to meet the treatment demands or those of
the customers.
The existing capacity of the various units in the source facility can be checked to verify the
adequacy of the units to meet the required capacity of the water system. The capacity of
raw water supply pumps and transfer pumps are usually evaluated with the largest unit out
of service since it is reasonable to assume that one of the pumps may be inoperable due to
repair or maintenance when peak demand conditions occur. This is sometimes referred to
as "firm" pumping capacity. For example, the "firm" capacity of a booster pump station
with two 20-gpm pumps and one 30-gpm pump is 40 gpm. (Pump capacity is discussed
further in Section 3.5.2.)
April 1999 3-14 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
The following are suggested assessment criteria to determine the adequacy of the source
facility capacity:
1. What is the design capacity of the source water facilities? What is the
historical maximum daily demand of the water system? What is the
storage capacity of the system? Given service connections or population,
are they reasonable?
The historic maximum daily demand of the water system can be found in the
operating records of the facility. The source water supply capacity, the
treatment plant capacity, and the treated water storage capacity of the water
system can be deterrriined from design and construction documents. Using
this capacity information, the historic maximum daily demand, and
information on population increase and decrease trends, the inspector can
draw conclusions as to whether the source water supply facilities are capable
of meeting the maximum daily demand of the water system, or whether the
facilities need to be upgraded or expanded.
2. If the state primacy agency has specific unit capacity requirements, does
the system meet the requirements?
Some state primacy agencies have set minimum requirements for the
capacities of source water supply pumps, based on historical water use data for
the area, industry standards, and generally recommended engineering practices
(GREPs). The state primacy agency criteria is usually established at levels
adequate to ensure that capacity is available to meet any and all demands of
the system's customers for normal as well as emergency use. Typically, the
capacity requirement is based on the number of connections served and fire
fighting demand (e.g., raw water pumping capacity of 0.6 gpm per connection
served). With the number of connections served by the system, the state
required capacity of the facility can be determined.
3. Is the system structure silting up? Is the sump of the source water supply
pumps silting up? Are there any dead fish or wildlife animals floating?
Is there plant or manmade debris floating?
Silting and the accumulation of floating debris at the intake may negatively
affect the source water supply by reducing pumping capacities, degrading raw
water quality, or preventing variable level capability.
4. Are the source water supply facilities capable of meeting the required
capacity with the largest unit (e.g., raw water pump) out of service?
Since the equipment used in a treatment plant is mechanical, it will be
necessary to take individual units out of service periodically for maintenance,
repair, or replacement. During this time period, the facility should be able to
satisfy the maximum daily demand of the system. To ensure that adequate
capacity is available at all times, the capacity of the source water supply
facilities should be determined with the largest unit out of service.
EPA Guidance Manual 3^15 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water land GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
5. Can the operating characteristics of the existing units be checked? If so,
does the system check them periodically? How does the existing
operational point compare to the original operational characteristics of
the unit? Should the capacity of the unit be derated? If so, what is the
new capacity?
As with most mechanical equipment, the equipment in a facility will degrade
over time due to usage. For instance, the capacity of a raw water pump may
decrease over time from the original nameplate capacity, due to wear of the
impellers. Periodically, the equipment should be checked to compare the
present to original capacity. A meter at the source facility provides a means to
check the capacity of individual units and the capacity of all units operating at
one time. The system should read the meter regularly under normal operating
conditions, to determine volumes, rates, and current capacity. The results for
a unit should then be compared to the original operating characteristics to
determine the current operating performance. This check provides a means of
determining the degree of wear of a unit. The capacity of a unit may have to
be derated if the present operating capacity is significantly less than the
original. If a unit's capacity is derated, the overall capacity of the facility may
be reduced and the new capacity may be less than required. If the present
capacity is less than the original, the equipment can either be repaired to
obtain the original capacity or the actual capacity can be used in all further
capacity determinations.
3.1.8 Design of Source Facilities
This section is divided into five subsections addressing different raw water sources, because
each source has unique design characteristics. These different sources are grouped as
ground water facilities; surface water facilities; infiltration galleries; springs; and
catchments and cisterns.
Ground Water Supply Facilities
Ground water is water withdrawn from underground aquifers. To get the ground water to
the distribution system, a well is drilled and a pump installed below the water level. A
major concern in the design of a well is preventing contaminants from entering the aquifer.
The major components of a typical ground water well are shown in Figure 3-1.
April 1999 3-16 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
SANITARY WELL SEAL I
1 CONCRETE j '
IWATER TAB
WATER BEAR ING SAND > ***
CEMENT GROUT W-'"K
FORMATION SEAL 13
SUBMERSIBLE PUMP |
PUMP MOTOR |
...<> ... ...... ij.. ....... ,,..,.r,^.
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO Center, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-1. Major Components of a Typical Ground Water Well
EPA Guidance Manual 3-17
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water SystemsrSurface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Because only the casing is above ground, it is not possible to visually inspect a ground
water supply well to verify that the proper design and construction methods were followed
for components below ground. The original well construction records (e.g., driller's log,
material settling data) and records of after-construction modifications to the well, if
available, should be used to verify that the well was properly constructed. The results of
inspections and repair work performed by qualified technicians may provide additional
information on the construction of the well. The inspector should verify that design and
construction methods meet applicable state requirements for wells.
A well is started by drilling a hole in the ground into a water-bearing aquifer. The drilled
hole is supported by solid casing installed to just below the water table. Screen material is
installed below the casing to allow water into the casing while preventing the migration of
sand and silt into the bottom of the well. The screen should be constructed of corrosion
resistant material that is both strong and hydraulically efficient. A pump (usually
submersible) and discharge line are lowered down the casing into the water.
The annular space between the drilled hole and the casing is filled with bentonite to prevent
surface water and undesirable ground water from getting into the well and contaminating
the aquifer. Grout or bentonite clay are used to fill the annular space. The well also needs
to be sealed at the surface to prevent surface contamination from entering the well. This
seal is usually a concrete pad poured around the casing and sloping away from the well, and
a wellhead cover or a cap with a sanitary seal.
The following are suggested assessment criteria for a groundwater supply well:
1. What is the depth of the well? Is the well encased the full length? If not,
how long is the casing? Is the annular space around the well casing filled
with grout or bentonite clay?
A well provides a direct conduit from the ground surface to the aquifer from
which water is taken. If the well is not constructed properly, surface runoff
and shallower aquifers can contaminate the aquifer chosen as the water source.
Well casing is a very important part of proper well construction. The
encasement of a well acts as a barrier to surface water and contamination from
other aquifers. The encasement should be constructed of either steel or
plastic, depending on the depth of the well and local regulations, and adhere to
AWWA and NSF standards. The encasement should extend up a minimum of
18 inches above the natural ground level or finished floor elevation. The
encasement should pass through all undesirable water bearing strata and extend
down at least to the depth of the shallowest water bearing strata to be developed.
However, the encasement will not completely fill the hole drilled for the well.
The annular space around the casing needs to be filled with a material, such as
bentonite or grout, that will prevent the leakage of water from the surface and
intervening water-bearing layers down the outside of the casing into the
aquifer. The bentonite or grout should be pumped to ensure that the annular
space is completely filled.
April 1999 3-18 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
2. What is the screen constructed of? What is the depth of the screen?
The water-bearing aquifer will typically consist of sand and gravel. A screen
allows the maximum amount of water to flow into the well and prevents
abrasive sand and gravel from reaching the pump. The screen should be
constructed of a material that is strong and will not degrade over time due to
exposure to water and surrounding environmental conditions. The material
generally chosen for the screen is stainless steel. The screen should be
checked periodically for corrosion and deterioration, especially if there is a
reduction in pumping volumes.
3. Is the well properly sealed at the surface? Does the casing extend at least
18 inches above the well slab, floor, or ground surface? Does the well
vent terminate above the maximum flood level with a turned down
gooseneck and corrosion resistant bug screen?
As noted above, surface runoff can migrate down the annular space along the
outside of the well casing and contaminate the aquifer. Therefore, all sources
of leakage should be plugged to prevent contamination. The most visible
point of leakage is the encasement at the surface. The construction of the well
above the surface should prevent leakage down the outside of the well casing
as well as through the casing cap, which is located on top of the casing. A
concrete slab extending 2 to 4 feet around and sloping away from the well
casing provides an effective seal of the casing. By extending the casing at
least 18 inches above the well slab, surface runoff should not be able to enter
the casing. The well casing cap has to be a watertight sanitary seal to prevent
water from entering through it. In addition, the casing vent through the cap
should extend above flood level to preclude surface runoff from entering the
well directly and the end of the vent should be terminated with a down turned
gooseneck and screen to prevent rain and bugs from entering.
4. Is there an acceptable tap for raw water sampling?
The discharge from the well should have a sample tap with a smooth nozzle to
allow for sampling before the addition of any chemicals or disinfectants. A
sample of the raw water will allow the water system to test for any
contaminants that might be present or any changes in water quality.
5. Is the wellhead protected from vandalism and accidents?
There are numerous ways that the water supply for a system can be
contaminated, including vandalism. Due to the location of the well, the
wellhead may be vandalized, introducing contaminants down the well casing.
If the wellhead is located near a street or highway, the wellhead could be
damaged by a traffic accident. The location of the wellhead will dictate the
measures required to protect it from vandalism or physical damage. For
instance, a security fence and structurally sound buildings with locked doors
would protect the wellhead from intentional vandalism or bollards would
protect it from traffic accidents.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-19 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDl
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
6. What is the general condition of the piping and valving, the site, and the
electrical system? Do they appear to be well maintained? Does the
electrical system have lightning protection? Can the pump be maintained
easily and the water for the system continually supplied?
As the source for the water system, the well should be in good operational
condition to ensure that a dependable supply of high quality source water will
be available at all times. Good operational condition means that the piping is
not leaking or corroded, the valves and controls are operable, the electrical
system is protected from the elements and is not corroded, the well site is
graded to prevent ponding of surface water and to direct drainage away from
the wellhead, and the housing and fencing is properly maintained. Valves and
meters need to be fully functional and well-maintained to keep out
contamination. Personnel should have sufficient access to these valves for
cleaning. The electrical system should be protected from lightning since the
sudden electrical surge caused by lightning striking the wellhead or nearby
may cause the electrical components to burn out. If the electrical components
of the well are not functional, then the well will not operate. The inspector
should check for lightning protection and backup power supplies
7. Has the source been evaluated for GWUDI? If the well is under the
direct influence of surface water, is proper treatment provided (filtration,
disinfection)?
A ground water well may be under the direct influence of surface water.
GWUDI of surface water has increased sanitary risks because of the additional
opportunities for contamination to enter the water supply. A water system
should evaluate its ground water supply to determine if it is GWUDI of
surface water and, if so, apply appropriate treatment at the plant. The
inspector needs to determine if a ground water supply is GWUDI in order to
evaluate if appropriate treatment is provided.
Surface Water Supply Facilities
The design of a surface water source facility should provide some flexibility to
accommodate fluctuating water quality. The location and position of the intake point in a
river or reservoir can greatly affect the quality of water coming into the intake. Intake
points should be located a sufficient distance (preferably upstream) from potential sources
of contaminants. Water quality can vary with depth, and the elevation of a water surface
changes over time. Intakes should be located at more than one depth so that the operator
can draw water from the intake offering the best water quality (based on monitoring of
water quality at different depths) and can withdraw water during times when the water level
is very low. Figure 3-2 depicts the design of a surface water intake which can accommodate
water quality variations with multiple level withdrawals.
There are several design methods that provide some flexibility to accommodate fluctuating
water quality. The most common method for a surface source is to provide multiple levels
of withdrawal. For instance, at a surface source, if the turbidity at a water depth of 20 feet
April 1999 3-20 EPA Guidance; Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
INTAKE FACILITIES
Bar screen winch
Discharge
Sheet piling
Elevation
Traveling screen
Winch
Bar screen
Sluice gate
Finish grade
Section
(Source: AWWA andASCE, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-2. Surface Water Intake with Multiple Level Withdrawals
EPA Guidance Manual 3-21
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
is higher than at a depth of 5 feet, the design of the intake should provide the flexibility to
withdraw at the 5 foot depth, which is the better quality level. The design of the source
facility should be checked to determine whether water can be withdrawn at the lowest
recorded or projected water level, and an appropriate range of levels. Water systems may
also use bar screens and grates at their surface water intakes to prevent large debris from
entering. Large debris, if allowed to enter, can damage supply pumps.
All mechanical equipment has to be maintained, either on a preventative basis or in an
emergency. The design of the source facility should allow for the removal from service of a
unit for maintenance. Typically, valves are provided on the discharge of pumps to take the
unit out of service for maintenance and allow the facility to remain operational. Lockable
breakers on the electrical service to the unit should also be provided to prevent the starting
of the unit while it is out of service. Because all mechanical equipment has to be
periodically maintained, it is very important that a means be provided to allow for
maintenance while the facility remains operational at all times to meet the needs of
customers. The onsite inspection of the source facility should check the design or features
of the source facility to verify that it meets the needs of the water system and satisfies the
regulatory requirements, if necessary.
The following assessment criteria are appropriate for a surface water supply facility:
1. Is the source water quality the best possible? Can the best quality of
water be withdrawn? If so, how? Is there an area around the source
facility that is restricted? How is the area marked? Is the existing
marking adequate? Are there any nearby sources of contamination
evident? If so, what is being done to protect the source water?
The system should have the ability to withdraw water from several different
depths within the reservoir, so that the operators can adjust the intake depth to
obtain the best raw water quality. A single, fixed level intake point may be
acceptable if historical records on the quality and use of source water indicate
that there is no need for variable level capability. There should be no evidence
of potential sources of contaminants such as septic systems, pit latrines, or fuel
storage tanks in the area around the intake structure. Where contaminants are
present, there should be spill containment or other measures in place to
prevent the contamination from reaching the intake. There should be no
debris or refuse accumulated around the intake structure. The area
surrounding the intake should be clearly marked with signs, and if appropriate,
buoys. Fencing may also be necessary to prevent unauthorized access to the
surface water intake and supply facilities.
2. What conditions cause fluctuations in the raw water quality?
Raw water quality may vary for surface water systems as a result of a number
of factors, such as rainfall, snow melt, temperature, and changes in the
watershed. The inspector should ask the system operators what factors cause
changes in raw water quality for their system and if there are any steps that the
system takes to minimize the impact.
April 1999 3-22 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3. Can a unit be taken out of service for maintenance and the facility remain
operational? If so, how? Can the unit Ibe locked out at the electrical
service? If not, what is the method for preventing the starting of the unit
during maintenance?
The ability to maintain the intake structure and raw water pumps is important
to'the water system's ability to provide a safe and reliable water supply. The
system should have the ability to maintain an intake or raw water pump
without having to take the entire water system offline.
4. Can water be withdrawn during a prolonged drought? What is the
minimum projected water level? What is the level of the lowest
withdrawal point?
The system operators should be able to show how they can adjust the intake
depth during periods when the level of the surface water source is low.
Infiltration Galleries
An infiltration gallery is one means of using the natural filtration benefits of the ground to
reduce water quality variances. The infiltration gallery, shown in Figure 3-3, consists of a
perforated pipe in a gravel or sand bedding constructed along or beneath the source.
Typically, sand backfill is placed over the bedding to improve the filtration of the natural
soils in which the gallery is constructed. It is important that the embedment and backfill of
the infiltration pipe be protected so that it is not washed out. The perforated pipe is
connected to a well or caisson along the shore of the source. Raw water pumps lift the
water from the well to the treatment facility. The wellhouse should be located at an
elevation above the highest flood level of the source.
Infiltration galleries are often under the direct influence of surface water and therefor are
frequently classified as GWUDI. The water system needs to determine if an infiltration
gallery is classified as GWUDI and is considered to be a surface water source under the
definition used by its state. If so, it should be treated as a surface water source.
The design and construction of an infiltration gallery is similar to a ground water well,
therefore the assessment criteria for wells applies to an infiltration gallery; however, there
are a few differences. The following additional assessment criteria are appropriate for an
infiltration gallery:
1. Is the water system experiencing any significant fluctuations in water
quality? If so, when and why?
Fluctuations in water quality from an infiltration gallery may indicate the
overlying sand or other bedding material has washed out, and the water is not
being filtered as it flows from the surface to the collector well. The system
may need to excavate the infiltration gallery and replace the washed bedding.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-23 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
ฉArasmith Consulting Resource
(Source: UFTREEO Center, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-3. Infiltration Gallery
April 1999
3-24 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
2. Is the infiltration gallery still providing an adequate supply of water? If
not, when and why was the supply inadequate? When was the
infiltration gallery last inspected? Was there any damage to the gallery
pipe, bedding, and backfill? Does it appear that the backfill and bedding,
if visible, were clogged with silt? If so, how was it changed or cleaned?
The sand overlaying the infiltration collector pipes may become clogged with
silt or other fine sediments, reducing the rate at which water can flow into the
collector pipes. The system may need to excavate and replace the bedding.
3. Has the source been evaluated for GWUDI? If the source is under the
direct influence of surface water, is proper treatment provided (filtration,
disinfection)?
Many infiltration galleries in certain geographic areas are under the direct
influence of surface water. GWUDI of surface water has increased sanitary
risks because of the additional opportunities for contamination to enter the water
supply.
Springs
Springs occur where the natural flow of ground water rises to the surface. There are two
types of springs, gravity and artesian. Gravity springs discharge from unconfined aquifers,
which are water-bearing aquifers that rest on an impervious stratum and outcrop to the
surface. Artesian springs discharge from artesian (confined) aquifers, which are aquifers
that have both an upper and lower layer of impermeable material that forms a natural barrier
of protection against contaminants. Artesian springs are under pressure because of the
confining strata between which the water-bearing aquifer lies. Because of the upper
confining layers, the water in the aquifer is at a pressure greater than the atmospheric
pressure. An artesian spring occurs where the artesian aquifer either is cracked by a fault
allowing the pressured water to escape or outcrops at a low elevation. The general geologic
formations for each type of aquifer and spring are shown in Figure 3-4. (UFTREEO
Center, 1998)
Springs may be considered either surface water or ground water sources, depending on their
characteristics and on the way a state classifies springs. The water system needs to
determine if the spring is under the direct influence of surface water and if it would be
classified as a surface water source under the definition used by its state. If so, it should be '
treated as a surface water source.
When a spring is chosen for a water supply, the water system should determine that the
water quality is acceptable, the quantity of water available is adequate to meet the needs of
the water system, and the spring is protected from contamination. The quantity of water
available from a spring can vary, significantly due to changes in ground water storage.
Depending on the type of spring, changes in ground water storage can come from seasonal
variations such as dry periods and withdrawals of nearby wells. Special steps should be
EPA Guidance Manual 3-25 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of,Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
taken to prevent contamination of the spring during construction of the improvements
necessary to supply the source water.
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO Center, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-4. Geological Formation for Springs
Many of the collection system improvements for a spring are similar to that for a well or an
infiltration gallery (see above subsections), depending on the type of spring. If the spring is
artesian, a vertical well is drilled into the aquifer (either directly at the spring or near the
spring) and constructed in the same manner as a ground water well. Water rises in the well
due to the pressure of the artesian spring, so unlike ground water wells, a pump may not be
needed to raise the water in the well. However, pumps may be used to deliver the water to
the treatment plant. If the spring is gravity driven, then a horizontal well (similar to an
infiltration gallery) is constructed to collect the spring water before it exits at the surface.
Since water from a gravity spring outcrops to the surface by gravity, pumps may only be
needed to feed the water to the treatment plant, instead of the pumps used to lift water from
the infiltration gallery well.
Due to the similarity of the spring water collection system to a ground water well or an
infiltration gallery, the assessment criteria for those facilities apply to the collection systems
April 1999
3-26 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
for springs; however, there are some differences. The following additional assessment
criteria are appropriate for springs:
1. Is the spring area protected from contact with animals and vandalism?
Protective devices, such as good fences and warning signs, deter human and
animal activities that might disturb the spring area.
2. Is the spring box or storage tank watertight, with a lockable, watertight,
overlapping lid or cover? Does the sprimgbox have a screened overflow? Is
there a drain with a screen and shutoff valve? Is the supply intake
properly located and screened?
The springbox or storage tank and cover need to be watertight to prevent
undesirable water from entering. The cover should also be lockable to prevent
the access of unauthorized parties. Since most springs never stop producing
water, an overflow is needed to ensure that water pressure does not build up and
damage the springbox. Springboxes need a drain to turn out the water in case
the source water quality degrades. The end of the drain should have a screen to
prevent the entrance of animals. The intake to the water system from the tank or
springbox should be located about 6 inches above the bottom and screened to
minimize the amount of sludge that is drawn into the intake from the chamber
(UFTREEO Center, 1998).
3. Is there a diversion ditch around the upper end of the spring area? Is there
an impervious barrier over the spring area to keep out rainwater and
surface contamination?
A diversion ditch keeps rainwater from flowing over the spring area and
infiltrating the ground, and should be located at the uphill end of the site. A
good impervious barrier, such as clay or a plastic liner, can help ensure high
quality water by preventing potential contaminants from entering the collection
facilities.
4. Does the spring meet requirements for setbacks from sanitary hazards?
Springs should meet appropriate state requirements for setback distances from
sanitary hazards.
Catchments and Cisterns
In some areas, catchments and cisterns are used to collect rain water from the roofs of
structures. Sometimes, the quantity and quality of the collected rain water may be doubtful,
but it may be the best (or only) source available for individuals or small communities
(UFTREEO, 1998). The biggest factor affecting the quality of the water collected is the
type of material used on the roofs, and the condition of the gutter system. The important
factors for quantity are the collection and storage areas, annual rainfall, and per capita use.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-27 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Particular attention should be paid to the material and condition of the roof and gutters
when reviewing the design of the catchment system (see Figure 3-5 for the major
components). The roof and gutter system should be constructed of weather resistant
material, such as metal or plastic. Debris from trees and brush should not be allowed to
collect on the roof or accumulate in the gutter system.
DOWNSPOUT * --
FROM ROOF
) MANHOLE COVER |
MAXIMUM WATER LEVEL
SCREENED DRAIN |
V
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO Center, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-5. Catchment and Cistern System Components
Rain water flows off the roof into the gutters and then to a central collection point, a tank
that is commonly known as a cistern. A diversion box should be provided at this central
point to divert the first water that runs off the roof. This first flush typically contains the
debris and bird droppings found on the roof and in the gutters at the time of the rain and
should not be allowed to flow into the cistern. After the diversion of the first water, the
diversion box is switched to allow the rain water to flow through a screen into the cistern.
The screen is needed to collect the remaining debris.
Roof structures are often accessible to rats, raccoons, opossums, birds, and other animals
and therefore are vulnerable to contamination from animal populations that carry protozoan
cysts pathogenic to humans. As a result, there may be significant potential sanitary risks
associated with the use of catchments and cisterns as public water supply sources without
April 1999
3-28 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
proper treatment (e.g., at least disinfection to treat for potential bacterial and viral
contamination).
The cistern should be constructed of non-toxic materials that make it watertight. The access
cover to the cistern should be at least 2 inches above the surface, heavy enough to prevent
removal by children, and lockable. The piping for the cistern should include a drain for
cleaning, an overflow to allow water to escape the tank, and an intake to the system pump.
The drain and overflow should be screened on the end to prevent insects and animals from
getting into the cistern. A free-flowing drain line with an isolation valve should be located
at the bottom of the cistern. The intake to the system should be installed at least six inches
above the floor of the cistern with a screen on it to prevent any debris that may have settled
from entering the system.
To assess catchment and cistern designs, the following criteria are appropriate:
1. Is the water supply adequate to meet the needs of the community? If not,
what other sources are available?
The cistern should be capable of meeting the system's demand for water even
during periods of drought or alternate sources should be provided. Inadequate
capacity could lead to customers utilizing unsafe sources of water.
2. What is the condition of the roof and the gutters? If signs of
deterioration are evident, when will the system be renovated?
The condition of the roof and gutters can have an impact upon the quality of
the water collected in the cistern. The roof and gutter should be constructed of
weather proofed materials and should not have the potential to leach
contaminants into the water supply. There should be no accumulated debris
on the roof or in the gutter, which could be washed into the cistern.
3. Is there a diversion box? Is the diversion operable?
The first flush of runoff typically contains the highest level of debris and other
potential source of pollutants. A diversion box prevents the first flush from
entering the catchment. The first flush tank should be emptied before the next
rain.
4. Is the cistern properly constructed? Does the water quality appear
acceptable in the cistern (no floating debris, etc.)?
The cistern should be watertight. There should be an adequate cover for the
cistern, which is secure. There should no way for contaminants on the surface
to enter the cistern.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-29 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
5. Are there screens at the entrance to the cistern, at the drain overflow and
intake to the system? Are the screens in good condition?
There should be a drain pipe to allow for cleaning of the cistern and an
overflow pipe. Both the drain and overflow pipes should be screened to
prevent animals or insects from entering the cistern.
3.1.9 Condition of Source Facilities
The physical condition of the source facility can be a good indicator to the inspector of how
often the facility is visited and how well it is maintained. Regardless of the location, all
critical facilities should be visited at least once a day to determine that all equipment is
operating correctly. If the grass around the facility is knee high, with no apparent trails
through the grass, a reasonable assumption can be made that the facility is not visited daily
(or maybe even monthly). Another indication of the general visitation schedule by
operation personnel is the amount of spider webs in the corners or dirt on the floor.
The overall condition of the equipment will provide some insight into the water system's
philosophy towards preventative maintenance. If the equipment appears to be in good
condition with little rusting, then the system places value on preventative maintenance.
However, if the equipment does not appear to be in good condition (e.g., zinc fittings
painted over), then the system either places little value on preventative maintenance, may
have little money allocated for maintenance, or has an inadequate staffing level to perform
maintenance.
Suggested assessment criteria for the physical condition of the source facility include:
1. How often is the facility visited?
Source facilities should be checked by system personnel at least once a day.
2. Does the facility appear to be well maintained - grass mowed, equipment
painted, facilities kept clean, etc.?
The appearance of the facility does not directly impact the quality of the water,
but it does provide an indication of the overall amount of maintenance which
the facility receives.
3. Is the facility required by the state or local government to have a rodent
and pest control permit? Does the facility have one? Are there any
visible places where wildlife can enter the facility and take shelter
(including rodents, birds, and snakes)?
The inspector should evaluate the appropriateness of any rodent/pest control
measures. The inspector should observe whether there are any signs of the
existence of wildlife inside the facility. While at the facility, the inspector
should look for any signs of earlier flooding in the facility or water marks on
the walls that may be signs of equipment malfunctioning.
April 1999 3-30 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3.1.10 Transmission of Source Water
Untreated water travels from the source to the treatment plant through a transmission
system of pipes. Some source water facilities are at a considerable distance from treatment
facilities. The transmission lines present a potential opportunity for liquids and materials to
both enter and leave the system. If the raw water is used before it receives treatment, it
presents a sanitary risk and may be unsafe. If the transmission lines are not in good
condition, they may allow contaminants to enter the raw water supply or may cause the
supply to be interrupted. Transmission lines need to be assessed for sanitary risks during
the sanitary survey. The inspector should travel along the raw water transmission lines and
speak with the operators to verify information already obtained from maps and other records
about the location of transmission lines, air release valves, pressure release valves, drain
valves, and other pertinent information.
Suggested assessment criteria for the raw water transmission lines include:
1. Do the transmission lines deliver all the raw water directly to the
treatment plant?
The transmission lines should not contain connections directly to any
customers or to the distribution system. All raw water should be delivered to
the treatment plant and should not be able to bypass the plant. The
transmission pipes should not contain any valves that could be activated to
permit bypassing. The inspector should check for any connections that may
deliver untreated water to customers. If there are any connections to
customers directly from the transmission lines, the inspector should check if
adequate treatment is being provided. If not, the inspector should inform the
system that the connections present a serious sanitary risk and need to be
removed.
2. Are the transmission lines reliable for providing a continuous supply of
raw water to the treatment plant?
If the system relies on a single transmission line, a failure of this line could
leave the system and consumers without water. If transmission pipes are in
poor condition due to age, deterioration, or natural events (e.g., weather
conditions, earthquakes), the inspector should assess the potential for failure
and subsequent interruptions to the water supply.
3.1.11 Priority Criteria
The following criteria related to the source water element of the sanitary survey are
considered high priority based on their potential for impacting public health:
Source Water Quality - The quality of the raw water source can have a
significant impact on treatability, due to rapid fluctuations in the physical,
chemical, and biological characteristics of the source water (Section 3.1.4).
EPA Guidance Manual 3-31 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water aind GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Source Water Quantity - The quantity of water available should be checked
to determine that there is a long-term supply available (Section 3.1.5).
Location of Source Facilities - The location of the raw water facilities can
impact the operation of the water system and can affect how much water
quality varies over time, particularly due to nearby sources of contamination
and natural causes such as flooding (Section 3.1.6).
Capacity of Source Facilities - The capacity of the source facilities should
exceed the potential demands even when equipment is down for maintenance
(Section 3.1.7).
Condition of Source Facilities - If the physical condition of the facility is
poor, this can be an indication of inadequate preventative maintenance by the
system and can have a negative impact on system reliability (Section 3.1.9).
Transmission of Source Water - All raw water needs to be properly treated
before use. If the transmissions lines can bypass the treatment plant or there
are connections directly to consumers from the transmission line, a serious
sanitary risk exists (Section 3.1.10).
3.2 Treatment
The type of treatment processes and facilities used to achieve safe drinking water are
dictated primarily by the quality of the source water and the regulatory requirements that
must be met. In general, most surface water sources require complete conventional
treatment which includes coagulation/flocculation, sedimentation/clarification, and
filtration processes to physically remove pathogens and other particulates, and
disinfection to inactivate any pathogens that are not physically removed. The physical
facilities at a conventional surface water treatment plant typically include chemical feed
equipment, rapid mixing basins, fldcculation basins, sedimentation/clarification basins,
filters, and treated water storage facilities. The chemical feed facilities usually include
storage and feed equipment for coagulants, disinfectants, and stabilizers.
In some cases, specific source water conditions may require supplemental treatment
processes and facilities. For example, aeration is used to remove undesirable gases such
as radon and VOCs from source water. Carbon adsorption (GAC) is used to control taste
and odor problems and to remove organic contaminants including VOCs, pesticides,
color- and turbidity-causing compounds and some inorganic contaminants such as radon
and some heavy metals. Chemical oxidation is used to facilitate precipitation and
improve the filtration process. Softening is used to reduce scale forming tendencies. In
the case of high quality source water, complete surface water treatment may not be
necessary. For example, the treatment facilities for a GWUDI may consist only of direct
filtration and disinfection.
The sanitary survey inspector should evaluate all water treatment processes in use at the
water system. This evaluation should consider the design, operation, maintenance, and
management of the water treatment plant to identify existing or potential sanitary risks.
April 1999 3-32 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING
Water treatment facilities are the primary means of preventing unacceptable drinking
water quality for public consumption. The treatment facilities and processes should be
capable of removing or inactivating physical, chemical, and biological impurities in the
source water. The new regulatory requirements related to the IESWTR and disinfection
byproduct control place additional demands on the treatment facilities. The treatment
facilities and processes should be evaluated to determine their ability to meet these
regulatory requirements and to provide an adequate supply of safe drinking water at all
times, including periods of high water demand and poor source water quality.
A sanitary survey of a treatment facility should:
Analyze all the distinct parts of the treatment process, including but not
, limited to coagulation/flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, disinfection,
chemical feed systems, hydraulics, controls, and wastewater management;
Review source water quality data that may impact the treatment process, such
as turbidity, pH, alkalinity, and water temperature;
Identify features that may pose a sanitary risk, such as cross connections in the
plant; and
Review the criteria, procedures, and documentation used to comply with
regulatory requirements - adequate disinfection based on CT study, individual
filter turbidities, finished turbidities, post backwash turbidity profiles, etc.
The inspector will need to review the design criteria, plant records, and compliance
strategies in addition to performing the actual inspection of the facility. The following
sections discuss specific portions of the treatment facility to be evaluated during an
inspection. ......
3.2.1 Location of Treatment Facilities
'':. . . ', Z '-."I.
Theoretically and preferably, all water treatment plants should be located above 100-year/
flood levels. However, in some locations this is not the case, particularly for some old
treatment facilities. Also all treatment plants and their raw water sources should be located
at a safe distance from potential sources of contamination. The sanitary survey inspector
should evaluate the location of the treatment facilities with respect to any state regulations
regarding potential flooding and required distances from potential sanitary hazards. Onsite,
the sanitary survey inspector should confirm the location and elevation of the treatment .
facilities using a topographic map. The inspector should ask about the activities carried out
in nearby facilities and buildings. The inspector should also ask the plant operator(s) about
any old water marks evident on the outside walls of any building within the facility and
about underground storage and farm tanks in the area and how long they have been there.
Suggested criteria for assessing the location of treatment facilities:
1. Is the treatment plant located at a level below the 100-year flood line?
: A treatment plant located in a flood plain should have measures in place to .
avoid a shutdown during flood events. ^
EPA Guidance Manual 3-33 April1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
2. Are there any sources of contamination in the vicinity of the treatment
plant?
Treatment plants located near farm industries, chemical and petroleum
industries, open mine pits, downstream from a wastewater discharge point, or
near or in an unsewered area may have a higher risk of having a contaminant
end up in the water than treatment plants located far away from contamination
sources.
3.2.2 Treatment Plant Schematic/Layout Map
A schematic or layout map of the public water supply treatment plant will enable the
inspector to obtain a quick understanding of the treatment type(s), what water quality
problems the plant was designed to treat, and how the plant is laid out. If possible, before
the site visit, the inspector should obtain a schematic or layout drawings of the treatment
plant. An example of a layout map of a water treatment plant is shown in Figure 3-6. The
layout map should show the major treatment processes and should be drawn in enough
detail to facilitate the inspector's understanding.
For identification purposes, the name and identification number of the public water system,
as well as the date of the sketch, should be included on the schematic. The dated
schematics will help future inspectors identify water system changes. The schematic should
be current and reflect any changes that have been made since initial construction of the
system and since the last sanitary survey.
Suggested criteria for assessing treatment plant schematic or layout drawing(s) are:
1. Does the drawing(s) shows the name of the facility and date of the last
modification made to the drawing(s)? Are the drawings up-to-date?
This will help future inspectors know between which two sanitary surveys
modifications took place. Taken together, a chronological set of schematics
will help document a system's history.
2. Does the schematic or layout map(s) contain the proper information (e.g.,
a legend that explains key symbols used in the drawing(s), a numerical or
a graph scale on the layout map)?
With the aid of a legend, the inspector will get a better idea about the location
of principal treatment units and appurtenant equipment. The drawing with its
legend will provide the inspector with information useful for determining
where to start and end the inspection, as well as areas that the inspector should
focus on and inspect in particular detail.
April 1999 3-34 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
03
u
E
EPA Guidance Manual 3-35
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3. Does the schematic or layout map(s) identify treatment type(s)?
The identification of treatment type(s) will give the inspector an indication
about what the treatment plant was designed for and whether bypassing or
bringing certain treatment units on-line in response to raw water quality
changes is appropriate. A list of the types of treatment plants and information
specific treatment processes and facilities are included in Section 3.2.4
Treatment Processes and Facilities.
4. Are all treatment units shown on the schematic or layout map(s)? Is
there a treatment unit (including chemical injection points) that appears
to be out of place?
Examples of out-of-place treatment are alum added at a clearwell and
disinfectant only added ahead of a GAC filter. Treatment plant schematics
and layout maps may not reflect the actual treatment plant configuration.
Some design errors are corrected during construction and are not reflected in
the layout drawings. In addition, construction errors or drafting errors can
should verify whether any treatment that appears to be out-of-place on the
drawings is out-of-place in the actual plant.
3.2.3 Capacity of Treatment Facilities
One of the initial steps of the onsite visit should be determining the required capacity of the
treatment facilities. The required capacity should be at least equal to the maximum daily
demand of the water system over the previous several years or as determined by the rules
and regulations of the state primacy agency. Reviewing the operating records of the plant
should provide the maximum daily demand. Generally, the maximum daily demand occurs
during the summer time. However, there have been situations where the maximum daily
demand occurred during hard freezes in the winter, when customers left faucets running to
prevent their water pipes from freezing. Operating records for the last few years should be
checked to determine the historic maximum daily demand.
The state primacy agency may have rules and regulations that specify the capacity
requirements for source water supply facilities and individual treatment units. The existing
treatment facilities should be evaluated to determine if the capacity requirements are met.
The capacity of sedimentation basins is usually evaluated based on surface overflow rate
and hydraulic detention time. The capacity of filter units is usually evaluated based on the
hydraulic loading rate. The inspector should identify the component of the treatment
process that most limits the production capacity of the plant (i.e., the unit that reaches
maximum capacity first and thus prevents production of treated water at a higher rate).
The following are suggested assessment criteria to determine the adequacy of the treatment
facility capacity:
1. What is the design capacity of the treatment facilities? What is the
historical maximum daily demand of the water system? What is the
April 1999 3-36 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
storage capacity of the system? Given service connections or population,
are treatment facilities reasonable?
The historical maximum daily demand of the system can be found in the
operating records of the facility. From design and construction documents, the
system capacity can be determined. From the design capacity and maximum
daily demand and population increase or decrease trends, the inspector can
determine whether the source water supply facilities are close to meeting its
design capacity and whether expansion plans or upgrades need to be
established.
Based on storage capacity and the hourly consumption rate record over
24 hours during the day when maximum daily demand occurs, the inspector
can draw conclusions on whether the source water capacity can meet the
maximum daily demand.
2. If the state primacy agency has specific treatment unit capacity
requirements, does the system meet the requirements?
Some state primacy agencies have set minimum requirements for the
capacities of major treatment units, based on historical data for the area,
industry standards, and GREPs. The state primacy agency criteria is usually
established at levels adequate to ensure that capacity is available to meet any
and all demands of the system's customers for normal as well as emergency
use. Typically, the capacity requirement is based on the number of
connections served and fire fighting demand (e.g., raw water pumping
capacity of 0.6 gpm per connection served). With the number of connections
served by the system, the state required capacity of the facility can be
determined.
3. Are treatment facilities capable of meeting the required capacity with the
largest unit out of service?
Since the equipment used in a treatment plant is mechanical, it will be
necessary to take individual units out of service periodically for maintenance,
repair, or replacement. During this time period, the facility should be able to
satisfy the maximum daily demand of the system. To ensure that adequate
capacity is available at all times, the capacity of any major treatment process
should be determined with the largest unit out of service.
4. Can the treatment process be interrupted by power outages, etc.? What
backup or standby provisions are available? If a generator is provided .
for emergency power, how often is the generator used? Can the operator
demonstrate that the backup systems are operational?
Backup power generators should be checked on a weekly basis. They need to
be exercised under load, rather than simply having the power turned on and
off. Backup power generators should have sufficient power to run all essential
treatment processes.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-37 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
5. Can the operating characteristics of the existing units be checked? If so,
does the system check them periodically? How does the existing
operational point compare to the original operational characteristics of
the unit? Should the capacity of the unit be derated? If so, what is the
new capacity?
As with most mechanical equipment, the equipment in a facility will degrade
over time due to usage. For instance, the capacity of a raw water pump may
decrease over time from the original nameplate capacity, due to wear of the
impellers. Periodically, the equipment should be checked to compare the
present to original capacity. A meter at the treatment unit provides a means to
check the capacity of individual units and the capacity of all units operating at
one time. The system should read the meter regularly under normal operating
conditions, to determine volumes, rates, and current capacity. The results for
a unit should then be compared to the original operating characteristics to
determine the current operating performance. This check provides a means of
determining the degree of wear of a unit. The capacity of a unit may have to
be derated (lowered) if the present operating capacity is significantly less than
the original. If a unit's capacity is derated, the overall capacity of the facility
may be reduced and the new capacity may be less than required. If the present
capacity is less than the original, the equipment can either be repaired to
obtain the original capacity or the actual capacity can be used in all further
capacity determinations.
3.2.4 Treatment Processes and Facilities
The specific treatment processes and facilities at a surface water treatment plant and a
GWUDI of surface water treatment plant depend on the quality of the source water and
the regulatory requirements that must be met. The various combinations of these
processes and facilities are sometimes classified based on the overall treatment objective
of the plant as follows:
Conventional Filtration - consists of facilities for rapid mixing, flocculation,
sedimentation, filtration, and clearwell. Typically has chemical addition
points to provide for coagulation, oxidation, pH adjustment, fluoridation,
and disinfection. Also should include facilities for residuals (e.g.,
wastewater and sludge) management (e.g. treatment, disposal).
Direct Filtration - consists of facilities for rapid mixing, flocculation,
filtration, and clearwell storage. Typically has chemical addition points to
provide for coagulation, oxidation, pH adjustment, fluoridation, and
disinfection. Also, should include facilities for residuals management.
In-Line Filtration - consists of facilities for rapid mixing, filtration, and
clearwell storage. Typically has chemical addition points provide for
oxidation, pH adjustment, fluoridation, and disinfection. Also, should
include facilities for residuals management.
April 1999 3-38 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING
'' Slow Sand Filtration consists of a slow sand filter and clearwell storage .
Typically has chemical addition points to provide for oxidation, pH
adjustment, fluoridation, and disinfection.
Single Stage Softening consists of facilities for rapid mixing,
flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and clearwell storage. Typically has
chemical addition points to provide for coagulation (including the addition
of chemicals such as lime and soda ash), oxidation, pH adjustment
(including the addition of chemicals such as sodium hydroxide to increase
pH and carbon dioxide for recarbonation), fluoridation, and disinfection.
Also should include facilities for residuals management.
Two Stage Softening - consists of facilities for lime rapid mixing,
flocculation, sedimentation, lime rapid mixing, flocculation,
sedimentation, filtration, and clearwell storage. Typically has chemical
addition points to provide for coagulation (including the addition of
chemicals such as lime and soda ash), oxidation, pH adjustment (including
the addition of chemicals such as sodium hydroxide to increase pH and
carbon dioxide for recarbonation), fluoridation, and disinfection. Also
should include facilities for residuals management.
Conventional Filtration/Softening - consists of facilities for rapid mixing,
flocculation, sedimentation, lime rapid mixing, flocculation,
sedimentation, filtration, and clearwell storage. Typically has chemical
addition points to provide for coagulation, oxidation, pH adjustment
(including carbon dioxide addition), lime addition, fluoridation, and
disinfection. Also, should include facilities for residuals management.
Split and Complex Treatment Trains - treatment plants with parallel
treatment trains that may consist of identical or different treatment units.
Typical examples would be where the influent is split directly or through
an equalization basin into two parallel trains, with one treatment train
consisting of one process (such as conventional coagulation,
sedimentation, and dual media media filtration), and the other treatment
train consisting of a different process (such as a upflow clarification and
deep bed GAC filtration). Other complex treatment trains may contain
aeration units and/ or membrane filtration units. In addition, the treatment
plant should include facilities for residuals managment.
Membrane Filtration - typically consists of pressure-driven membranes.
These technologies are employed in drinking water treatment facilities to
remove various contaminants. Micro-filtration membranes are used to
filter out particulates includmg,pathogenic cysts. Ultrafiltration
membranes are used to remove specific dissolved organics such as
disinfection byproduct precursors and to remove particulates. Nano-
filtration is used to remove calcium and magnesium ions (hardness) and
disinfection byproducts precursors. It is also used to remove microbial
contamination including viruses. Reverse osmosis (RO) membranes are
typically used to remove organic and inorganic contamination.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-39 . April 1999
Cbnducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Greensand Filtration - consists of a pumping station, a continuous or
intermittent potassium permanganate chemical feed system, the greensand
filter itself, and a disinfection unit following the filtration process.
Typically employed in ground water systems with iron problems.
Simple Aeration Plant - consists of facilities for aeration, followed by
disinfection treatment units. These units are found in ground water
systems, including some ground water under the direct influence of
(GWUDI) surface water systems.
Disinfection Treatment - consists of a disinfection unit. Surface water,
GWUDI of surface water, and ground water systems employ this type of
treatment.
The treatment processes and facilities being used at a treatment plant should be evaluated
with respect to the regulatory requirements of the state primacy agency. If the required
treatment processes are not in place, then the files and information gathered before
beginning the survey should be checked for waivers and/or exceptions granted by the state
primacy agency, to determine if the existing treatment facilities are acceptable. A more
detailed discussion of specific treatment processes and facilities found at surface water
treatment plants is included below. The inspector should make certain that individual unit
treatment processes are being operated within their design specifications.
3.2.4.1 Presedimentation
Presedimentation basins are typically used at treatment plants with raw water sources that
are highly turbid. In such cases, the presedimentation process allows the removal of
larger suspended matter and provides a more uniform quality of raw water.
Presedimentation basins also provide an important buffer in the event that the primary
source of supply is temporarily impacted by a chemical spill or other source of
contamination. The presedimentation process is sometimes supplemented with aeration
equipment to help control taste and odor problems.
Presedimentation basins are typically designed with large storage volumes that can meet
the design capacity of the treatment plant for several days or weeks. In cold regions,
these basins are usually designed with depths of greater than 15 feet and have additional
capacity to account for surface freezing. In very hot climates, the basins are designed to
account for excessive evaporation and some evapotranspiration.
Suggested criteria for assessing presedimentation facilities include:
1. Is the total capacity of the presedimentation basins large enough to
accomplish the purpose of reducing turbidity?
The main function of the presedimentation basin is to reduce turbidity by
causing elements such as silt, clay, and other collodial material to settle out of
the water to the bottom of the basin. The inspector should review and
compare the turbidity levels of water drawn from the inlet and the outlet of the
presettlement basin(s) to conclude if it is functioning adequately.
April 1999 3-40 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
2. How often are the presedimentation basins cleaned?
The inspector should look at the records and ask the treatment plants
operator(s) about the frequency of cleaning the presedimentation basins and
how it is done.
3. Do waterfowl cause a problem during certain periods and how does the
plant operator(s) deal with this problem?
Waterfowl take refuge in ponds and settled water basins like presedimentation
basins. In some areas they rest in large numbers on the water surface where
they feed and excrete, posing a serious source of microbial and organic
contamination.
3.2.4.2 Flow Control and Metering Systems
Two types of flow measurement are encountered in a water treatment plant: open channel
flow measurement and closed pipe flow measurements. There are various types of flow
control and metering devices. Open channel flow measurement includes Parsall flume and
weir flow measurement. How measurement devices for full flow closed pipes are diverse.
These include turbine meters, positive displacement meters, metering pumps,
electromagnetic flow meters, ultrasonic flow meters, drag-force flow meters, and variable
pressure-drop flowmeter such as the Venturi type tube flow meter (Doebelin, 1983).
Suggested criteria for assessing flow control and metering systems are:
1. Are flow measurement devices installed at source water inlet and finished
water outlet? Are they functioning? Are they calibrated to assure
accuracy?
The sanitary survey inspector should take note of any out of service on-line
flow measurement meter. The inspector should also note any missing flow
measurement devices. This is important because flow rate is an important
factor in determining required chemical additions. Having inaccurate flow
measurement will result in under or over dosing of chemicals that might cause
serious sanitary risks to water consumers.
2. Are there adequate flow measurement devices thoughout the treatment
process?
Flow meters should be installed at least at points where filter backwash is
recycled, where a split in the treatment train occurs, and before and after major
treatment units such as a clearwell.
3.2.4.3 Rapid Mix
In a typical water treatment plant, the coagulant chemicals are introduced into the raw water
ahead of or directly in the rapid or flash mix unit. The purpose of the rapid mix unit is to
provide a thorough and complete mixing of the raw water and coagulant chemicals. Mixing
can be achieved by the use of mechanical mixers, diffusers or baffles in a basin(s), or a
EPA Guidance Manual 3-41 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
static mixer in the raw water line. Figure 3-7 shows three different configurations for rapid
mix units.
Diligent operation and process control are important for good performance of rapid mix
units. One of the biggest problems with rapid mix units is providing enough energy to
completely mix the coagulant chemicals with the particulates in raw water.
tK-UNE STATIC MIXER
1
L
D-
j
V
-a
ซ->.
jt
L
D-
f
j
7
-D
MECHANICAL
D
D--D
0-0
D--D
MECHANICAL
Figure 3-7. Schematic Drawings of Types of Rapid Mix Unit Configurations
One means of estimating the mixing energy used for the rapid mix is calculating the
velocity gradient, G. The velocity gradient is a function of the energy used (water
horsepower) and the volume of the basin.
The formula for velocity gradient is as follows:
G=
in which
G = Velocity gradient, in feet per second per foot (fps/ft) or sec"
p = Power to the water, ft-lb/sec
April 1999
3-42 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING'THE SURVEY
V = Volume of basin, in cubic feet
jj, = Viscosity (0.273 x 10"4 lb-sec/ft2 at 50 ฐF)
The G for the rapid mix process should range from 700 to 1,000 fps/ft, depending on the
detention time of the basin (Reynolds, 1982).
The design detention time in a typical mechanical rapid mix unit ranges from 15 to 60
seconds. Recent developments in treatment technology are focused on providing more
mixing energy with less detention time. For instance, the static in-line mixer has a very
short detention time, but imparts tremendous mixing energy into the water.
Plants should have more than one rapid mix unit at the treatment plant. With two or more
units, depending on the design flow, one unit can be removed from service for maintenance
and the plant can remain in operation. If the plant has to be shutdown to perform
maintenance (e.g., if there is only one rapid mix unit), maintenance may be performed less
often and the condition of the unit may suffer. Based on generally recommended
engineering practices and the Ten State Standards of 1997 (GLUMRB, 1997), there should
be at least two rapid mix units if the design flow of the plant is greater than three mgd.
Suggested assessment criteria for the rapid mix process include:
1. Does the rapid mix unit visually appear adequate?
The inspector should look for signs of equipment deterioration that might
negatively affect the treatment process arid the sanitary condition. Examples
of inadequate equipment conditions include rusting on the inside and/or the
outside of the mixer. Rust areas are signs of potential or imminent equipment
break down and a source of concern, because they are potential breeding
grounds to many microorganisms that might end up in the drinking water
distribution network.
The inspector should also look for signs of corrosion if oxidants are injected
into the raw water just before the rapid mixing process. The inspector should
note any signs of leaks around chemical injection points and should note if
early signs of leaks exist. The inspector should also look for signs of calcium
buildup where water softening is practiced. Excessive calcium buildup can
adversely impact both the effectiveness and efficiency of the mixing unit.
The inspector should look for signs of cracks or breaks in the hopper of dry
feed rapid mixers. If liquid coagulants, coagulant aids or oxidants are used,
the inspector should inspect liquid lines for signs of clogging. The inspector
also should ask about the preventive maintenance program and the schedule.
The inspector needs to examine the last entries in the repair log as to when the
last preventative maintenance of the rapid mixer occurred and when
unscheduled repairs had to be made and under what circumstances. This will
give the inspector an idea about whether more frequent inspection and
preventive maintenance ought to occur.
EPA Guidance Manual : 3^43 " APril 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
The inspector should look at the general sanitary condition of the housing of
the rapid mix unit. Moldy, dusty, and dirty walls and floors are signs of
unsanitary conditions. The inspector should note the existence of wildlife
taking shelter inside and even outside the housing unit and should note if there
is a possibility that a wild animal or its feathers, hair, or droppings may end up
inside the rapid mixing unit.
2. Are coagulant chemicals being fed continuously during treatment plant
operations?
Intermittent chemical feed can lead to uneven treatment of the whole volume
of water entering the treatment plant. The inspector should look for signs of
intermittent chemical feed and should note any discussions with the plant
operator about the causes of intermittent chemical feed and potential solutions
to this problem. The inspector should determine if the water system has a
mechanism for monitoring coagulant feed and providing an alarm if any
interruptions in coagulant feed occur.
3. Does the plant have multiple mix units? How often is maintenance done?
Rapid mixing units should be kept clean, well maintained, and ready for use.
They should be rotated in service with the other mixing units. The inspector
should note whether these idle units are put in service routinely following a
rotation schedule or only when the operational unit is out of service.
4. Is the mechanical equipment working? Are there any hydraulic
inadequacies?
Hydraulic inadequacies such as overflowing of the rapid mixing unit or rise of
water level in the unit to the point where it splatters are signs of improper
operation, clogging of water inlet and/or outlet, or improper design.
The sanitary surveyor should ask that idle units be run during his visit even for
a short time to ensure that the mechanical equipment is working. The
inspector should note if all the mixing units are well lubricated (e.g., operation
is smooth and vibration is minimal) and appear to be well maintained. The
surveyor should note whether moving parts of mixing units are causing
unusual noises. The surveyor should conduct visual inspection of the mixing
blades and note signs of chipped, broken, or missing blades. He should also
note if clumps of coagulants are attached to the mixer shaft or blade surfaces.
Coagulant clumps on the mixer blades or shaft will reduce the efficiency of
the mixer and hence will result in a lower velocity gradient and impair the
desired uniform mixing of coagulants with influent water. The inspector
should look for any visual signs of inadequate mixing, such as dead zones and
low mixing velocity.
April 1999 3.44 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
5. Is the rate of mixing adjustable, so that the correct mixing can be
provided at all flows? If so, can the operator adjust the rate of mixing?
Mixing units with adjustable mixing rates can be used with different types of
coagulants and chemicals. Flow-paced adjustable mixing rates ensure that
adequate energy is being delivered during different flow conditions,
particularly at the design flow rate.
6. What is the design G? Is it within the generally accepted range? What is
the detention time? Is it within the generally accepted range?
Knowing the design G value and the detention time at which the unit was
designed, the inspector should make sure that the velocity gradient G and the
minimum detention time are met if the system operates at design flow. During
low flow periods, the inspector needs to make sure that all the mixer blades
are fully immersed in water (otherwise inadequate mixing may occur).
The inspector should look further for signs of inadequate rapid mixing at the
influent entry point to the flocculator. Signs such as clumps of dry coagulants
and immediate precipitation may imply that rapid mixing is not occurring at
the desired level and/or the coagulant being used is not of the grade it is
supposed to be, or the coagulant being used is incompatible with the quality of
the water being treated.
7. Have rapid mix units been evaluated for cross-connections?
Cross-connections, particularly from submerged inlets for chemical feeds, are
common. The inspector should check for cross-connections to help ensure the
integrity of the water supply.
3.2.4.4 Chemicals and Chemical Feed Systems
The type of chemicals that are used at a surface water treatment plant and a GWUDI of
surface water treatment plant depend on the specific treatment facilities and objectives. The
two most common chemicals that are used in surface water treatment process are coagulants
and disinfectants. GWUDI of surface water treatment processes are likely to use
disinfectants and coagulants, and many also use lime or soda ash for softening. Coagulants
are used to condition the water for effective particle removal through sedimentation and
filtration. To accomplish this a primary coagulant, such as aluminum sulphate or ferric
sulphate, is added at the rapid mixing basin. Coagulant aids, such as polymers, are
sometimes used to supplement primary coagulants at different points between the rapid
mixing basin and filters. Disinfectants are used to inactivate pathogens that may not be
physically removed during sedimentation and filtration. Chlorine, chloramines, and
chlorine dioxide are the most common disinfectants, although there is growing interest in
ozone and ultraviolet (UV) light. Both the coagulation/flocculation process and the
disinfection process are described in more detail in subsequent sections. Chemicals are also
used at a surface water treatment plant for oxidation, corrosion control, pH adjustment,
softening, taste and odor control, iron and manganese removal, organics and inorganics
removal, and fluoridation.
EPA Guidance Manual 3^45 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Oxidation is used for taste, color, and odor control, iron and manganese removal, sulfur
removal, and removal of synthetic organics like herbicides and pesticides. For water
treatment, the oxidants used include chlorine, chlorine dioxide, permanganate, oxygen, and
ozone. The oxidant used in a particular situation is determined by the contaminants present,
the raw water quality, and local issues (e.g., costs). (AWWA and ASCE, 1998)
Water stabilization is used at many surface water treatment plants to prevent water
conditions that are either corrosive or scale forming. Corrosive water can deteriorate water
system piping and degrade the quality of drinking water delivered to the customer. In most
cases, the corrosive conditions can be corrected by adjusting the pH and alkalinity of the
water with the addition of lime or caustic soda. Corrosive conditions can also be controlled
by adding a corrosion inhibitor to the water. Hard water can cause scale forming problems
due to relatively high levels of dissolved minerals, mainly calcium and magnesium. In these
cases, a softening process involving the addition of lime is used to reduce the scale forming
tendency of the water.
In addition to oxidation, carbon adsorption is also used to remove organics. Organics can
cause taste and odor problems and can contribute to the formation of THMs. Activated
carbon, either in powder or granular form, is used to adsorb the organic substances.
Fluoridation is the addition of fluorideeither sodium fluoride or sodium silicofluoride
(both dry powders) or hydrofluosilicic acid (liquid)to the water supply in order to achieve
the desired level of fluoride in drinking water. Fluoride is generally added to drinking water
to help reduce dental problems in consumers. (UFTREEO Center, 1998)
The systems used for handling, storing, and applying treatment chemicals are dependent on
the chemical characteristics, the quantity used, and control system needed. A typical liquid
chemical feed system would include: (a) a storage tank; (b) a metering pump with a suction
line into the storage tank; (c) a discharge line with a check valve and injector at the
application point; and (d) a flow switch to control the metering pump operation. If the flow
switch is automatic, it must be tied to a flow meter or another control sensor. This type of
liquid chemical feed system is shown in Figure 3-8.
The feed system for a dry chemical is very different from that for a liquid chemical, due to
the difference in physical characteristics of the chemical being fed. A dry feed system
would include: (a) a gravimetric or volumetric feeder to meter the dry chemical; (b) a
mixing tank or solution chamber with a mixer; and (c) a gravity discharge line to the
application point. Typically an open line or channel is used to carry the mixed "liquid"
chemical to the application point for ease of"cleaning and maintenance. The general
equipment arrangement for a dry chemical feed system is shown in Figure 3-9. The sanitary
survey inspector should be aware that some states do not consider the vacuum breaker
shown in Figure 3-9 to be adequate protection. Therefore, the sanitary survey inspector
should consult relevant state regulations on what constitutes acceptable equipment for water
treatment.
April 1999 3-46 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-8. Liquid Chemical Feed System
These chemical feed systems also may include bulk storage facilities that need to be
inspected. Day tanks should be used for liquid chemicals that are bought in large quantities
and stored in bulk tanks. The use of day tanks helps to limit the amount of chemicals that
can enter a water system if pump failure occurs and chemicals siphon into the water supply.
Chemical feed systems should be carefully inspected for potential cross-connections with
potable water. All potable water make-up or delivery lines connected with chemical feed
systems should be equipped with non-return flow valves.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-47
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
VOLUMETRIC
POISE WEIGHT I
MERCURY SWITCH I
J
STATIONARY DECK f~
fUi. , T--^-^M
? 1 | HEXTURE | (( O jjjp
STATIONARY PICK | [ WEIGH PUCKS |
GRAVIMETRIC
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-9. Dry Chemical Feed System
April 1999
3-48 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
The feed system for a gaseous chemical can be either a vacuum or pressure feed system,
depending on the hazardous nature of the gas. For example, a vacuum feed system is used
for chlorine, which is very hazardous, while a pressure feed system is used for ozone and
carbon dioxide. For both systems, there is: (a) a gas storage tank; (b) a line to a feeder with
a pressure regulator; (c) a feeder with a rotameter to measure and control the amount of gas
fed; and (d) a discharge line from the feeder to either an injector for a vacuum system or the
application point for a pressure system. For a vacuum, system, water flows through the
injector creating a vacuum on the gas feed line that causes the gas to flow. The vacuum
system is considered less hazardous than the pressure system, because of the reduced
potential for high volume gas leaks. High capacity feed systems may also use vaporizers.
The general equipment arrangement for a gaseous chemical feed system is shown in
Figure 3-10. All the valves for a system like the one in Figure 3-10 should be non-return
valves to provide protection against backsiphonage and back pressure backflow.
-HKSSUKC CAUtt
(o-ioo
r sen. 10 we
!W CMMCft *ปTฃR
SCH M we (TYJ>)
TO
uccnoM AT r.v
MCCTKMM.H.
HftSSUW. RtCUUUQK
CVLMDCK NOUNTฃ0 (TVP)
C1EC1MMC ซCCM
SCAU (TYPJ
svnv CHMN
valves are non-return valves.
Figure 3-10. Gaseous Chemiical Feed System
Suggested assessment criteria for chemical feed systems include:
EPA Guidance Manual 3-49
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
1. What chemicals are used? Are the chemicals approved for use in
drinking water?
Check for a National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) or Underwriters
Laboratories (UL) determination that chemicals used conform to all applicable
requirements of NSF Standard 60: Drinking Water Chemicals - Health
Effects. Treatment plant operators may be using compounds or chemicals that
are not NSF approved. These plants may have used these chemicals before the
EPA established the Drinking Water Additives program and continued using
them after EPA established that program. Starch is an example of a
compound that was formerly applied as a coagulant in drinking water
treatment and is no longer approved for use in water treatment.
2. Are the chemicals that are used for treating water appropriate for
meeting the water quality goals of the system?
Water systems may purchase and use chemicals that are not appropriate for the
plant or its treatment objectives (e.g., an operator may be convinced by a
chemical company sales person that a particular product is the best and should
be used at the plant, even though it is not appropriate for the specific
application). The inspector should assess whether the chemicals used in
treating the water are appropriate.
3. What chemical amounts are used - average and maximum? Are the
various systems sized to feed more than the maximum amount required?
It is important that the treatment plant have a capacity to apply chemicals
above the current maximum daily use. One hundred and fifty percent of
maximum use is recommended. The treatment plant should always have
excess capacity to deal with unexpected deterioration in raw water quality
resulting from natural and man-made causes, and should maintain excess
chemical feed capacity to respond to a period of unusually high water demand.
4. Where are various chemicals applied?
The inspector should inspect chemical feed points and note where and how the
chemicals are added, whether the feed points are active or standby, whether
the application points are appropriate, and the compatibility of the feed points
with other chemicals used at the plant. The inspector should note whether the
point of application can be used to supply other chemicals with different
chemical and physical characteristics, and make the determination if the feed
points can be used inappropriately. Any signs of previous or current leaks at
the chemical feed points and its equipment should be noted. The inspector
should ask and note down answers as to when any leaks occurred, why they
occurred, and how they were contained.
5. What type of chemical feed equipment is used? Are the materials used
for each chemical feed system compatible with the chemical? What is the
general condition of the chemical feed equipment?
April 1999 3^50 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
The inspector should note the type of chemical feed equipment and its ability
to feed chemicals on a continuous basis. The chemical feed equipment should
be clean and free from dust, oil, dirt, and vapor. Pipes should be free from
signs of cracks and leaks. The equipment should be rust free, and the
inspector should record and inquire about any unusual noise emanating from
any moving parts. The inspector should review the preventive maintenance
program for the chemical feed equipment and check the repair log.
6. How often is the feed rate checked for each chemical? How does the
operator determine the amount of chemicals used on a daily - weekly -
monthly basis? Is a measurement device provided - flow meter or
calibration cylinder for liquid chemicalls and scale for dry chemicals?
Are there provisions to calibrate the chemical feed equipment?
The chlorine feed rate is usually measured by a rotameter, while the feeding
rate of liquid chlorine is measured using a valve meter. All chemical feed
equipment is calibrated at the time of installation, however as equipment ages
and as flow regimes change, the equipment requires re-calibration. In
addition, when replacement parts are installed, and other treatment equipment
is attached to the treatment train, feeding equipment should be re-calibrated.
Therefore, the inspector needs to note if the treatment plant periodically tests
and recalibrates chemical feed equipment and whether re-calibration took
place following changes to the treatment process or maintenance to the
chemical feeding equipment itself. The inspector should inquire about
calibration checks and how they are done, and review any calibration records
for the feed equipment.
7. Is the chemical feed equipment adjustable? Is the control of the chemical
feed equipment manual or automatic? What is the control parameter
(e.g., raw water flow rate) for each chemical feed system? Does the
system use day tanks for liquid chemicals bought in large quantities?
The majority of chemical feed equipment is adjustable. Chemical feed
equipment adjustment can be manual and/or automatic. If the adjustment is
automatic, the inspector should note whether the operator can override the
automatic adjustment in cases of malfunctioning. The method for controlling
chemical feed quantity is important. The inspector should note the conditions
that cause accidental overfeeding of chemicals and the steps that are necessary
to protect against it. The use of day tanks is one method for limiting
accidental overfeeding.
8. Is a standby feeder and/or metering pump provided for each chemical?
Is it operable? Is it large enough to replace the largest unit that might
fail?
According to generally recommended engineering practices and the Ten State
Standards (GLUMRB, 1997), essential equipment, such as chemical feed
EPA Guidance Manual 3-51 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
equipment and feed pumps, should be redundant. Redundant equipment
should be of a capacity equivalent to the largest unit.
9. Is backflow prevention provided on the water lines used for chemical feed
makeup?
All lines supplying water for chemical feed makeup should be equipped with
backflow prevention devices to prevent cross-connections and contamination
of potable water.
10. What type of storage facilities are provided? Is the storage area for each
chemical adequate and safe? Is containment provided for a potential
spill? What provisions are provided for cleanup of a spill? If a drain is
provided, where does it discharge? Are incompatible chemicals stored
together? Are facilities properly labeled?
Chemical storage area capacity should be adequate to allow space for free
access for loading and unloading of chemicals. The bulk storage facility
should have indicators for chemicals storage levels. The storage containers
should have a convenient method for determining the amount of chemical in
each container. The storage facility should have safeguards against accidental
spills, and like every other treatment space, should have a clean water source
under high pressure and a drain for effective cleaning and decontamination. In
the case of some gaseous chemicals, like chlorine, special ventilation
equipment and the availability of OSHA approved breathing apparatus may be
required. Breathing equipment and other personnel safety equipment and gear
should be stored outside the storage area where the equipment can be safely
accessed. Incompatible chemicals should be stored separately. For example,
strong acids should not be stored near chlorites. The chemicals storage and
the storage facility itself should be located so as to not allow a chemical spill
to reach the raw water source, the treated water, or water being treated. In ,
addition, every container in the storage area should be labeled and every
storage area should be labeled to identify what chemicals supposed to be
stored in it.
11. How much storage is provided at average/maximum usage? What is
required by the state primacy agency? If storage provided is less than
required, what is the local resupply availability?
The inspector should be able to assess, from the information provided on
chemical use rates and water demand, whether the chemical storage capacity is
adequate and in compliance with state regulations or with the Ten State
Standards (30 days supply at the average chemical consumption rate)
(GLUMRB, 1997). If the state requires more storage or allows less storage,
the inspector should note the basis for the required storage capacity. Some
water systems are reluctant to store as much as the recommended 30-day
supply of chlorine gas or other highly dangerous chemicals onsite since they
pose a safety risk to operators and the community. If the system keeps less
April 1999 3-52 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
than the required supply onsite, the inspector should document why and ask
the operator about resupply options. The inspector should ask about reliable
sources of chemicals resupply and whether local alternative suppliers are
available.
12. What is the general condition of the building/room housing the chemical
feed equipment? Are dusty and dry chemicals, and feed equipment
housed separately? Is proper and adequate ventilation provided?
The general condition of the building housing the chemicals is an indicator of
the standard of maintenance the operator upholds. Adequate ventilation,
heating, and air conditioning are important in maintaining the sanitary
conditions within the storage facility and the treatment plant as a whole. The
equipment for controlling and removing dust and vapors in the chemical
building/room should be functional and effective.
3.2.4.5 Coagulation/Fiocculation
The coagulation/flocculation process at a surface water treatment plant is essential to
properly condition raw water for effective particle removal through sedimentation and
filtration. Although coagulation/flocculation is sometimes referred to as a two step
process, coagulation is generally understood to begin at the point of coagulant addition
and continue during the flocculation process. Coagulation is initiated by rapidly
dispersing a coagulant, such as aluminum sulphate, in the raw water under high energy
mixing conditions to cause the destabilization and initial contact of small particles
suspended in the raw water. The particles attach to each other, the coagulant, or
coagulant aid to form settleable particles (floe). This is followed by gentle mixing, or
flocculation, to improve the contact of the particles and encourage the destabilized
particles to form into larger, denser solids that are more easily removed during
sedimentation and filtration. The size and quality of the larger floe particles formed in
the final stage of flocculation are indicators of the overall effectiveness of the
coagulation/flocculation process.
The coagulant dose that is required to treat raw water is determined based on various
chemical, physical, and biological tests conducted both onsite and offsite of the treatment
plant. Of particular importance are the onsite jar tests. These tests are conducted to
determine the type and dose of coagulant to be used in response to a change in key raw
water quality parameters such as turbidity, temperature, and alkalinity. The sanitary
survey inspector should ask the operators how often they conduct jar tests and how the
current coagulant dose was determined. If time allows, the inspector should have the
operators perform a jar test during the inspection.
The physical facilities required for coagulation/flocculation include chemical feed
equipment, rapid mixing facilities, and flocculation facilities. Chemical feed equipment
and rapid mixing facilities were covered in previous sections.
There are two basic types of flocculation units - baffled and mechanical. Baffled
EPA Guidance Manual 3-53 April! 999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
flocculation units usually include a system of serpentine channels, ported walls, or
diversion plates that allow gentle hydraulic mixing as the water flows through.
Mechanical flocculation units usually include chambers or basins equipped with
mechanically driven mixing devices. Figure 3-11 shows examples of two mechanical
flocculators - a horizontal paddle flocculator and a vertical paddle flocculator. For the
vertical flocculator, water enters through the ports on the left and then goes into the
compartment on the right side; the exit compartment is not shown.
Diligent operation and process control are important for good performance of the
flocculation process. Adequate mixing energy is needed to promote the collision of
destabilized particles to form floe that will precipitate in the sedimentation basins. Tapered
mixing energy is frequently used to keep large particles in suspension, promote particle
collisions and growth, and prevent shearing of floe. The optimum configuration for tapered
mixing depends upon the type of mixing equipment number of stages, water temperature
and turbidity, and plant flow rate. The velocity gradient, G, provides a means to calculate
the mixing energy used for the flocculation process. For most water treatment plants, the G
for the flocculation process should start at 50 to 100 fps/ft in the first stage of flocculation,
depending on the detention time of the basin, and decrease to 20 to 50 fps/ft in the second or
third stage (JMM, 1985).
Controlling the tip speed on mechanical mixers is another method for minimizing the
shearing of floe during the flocculation process. If the tip speed of the mixer is too high,
then floe particles will be sheared. For most water treatment plants, the peripheral tip speed
of the mixers should be between 0.5 to 2.0 fps (Sanks, 1978). The inspector can roughly
estimate the tip speed by means of a stop watch and observing the distance cut by the tip of
the paddle. This might not be attainable in the first stage because of the poor visibility of
the mixing paddles moving in the very turbid waters.
For most water treatment plants, the design detention time in the flocculation basin ranges
from 20 to 60 minutes (JMM, 1985). The sanitary survey inspector should be aware that
waters with low turbidity require longer detention times than waters with higher turbidity
levels. To reduce attenuation time in the flocculation and sedimentation basins, coagulant
aids and polymers are used.
Another design parameter for flocculators is GT(G times detention Time), which is used as
an indicator of the capability of the flocculation process to cause particle collisions. For
most water treatment plants, the GTfor the flocculation process should range from 30,000
to 120,000, depending on the characteristics of the water (JMM, 1985).
Most plants today have more than one coagulation/flocculation unit at the treatment plant.
With two or more units, one unit can be removed from service for maintenance and the
plant can remain in operation. In general, there should be at least two coagulation/
flocculation units.
April 1999 3-54 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
CMOun
I ป' \ I1
Lป ซ f+Jt
cuwre*
MMAซMiMM^B^^MปMWl^ซiMป*W*MB*M*ปซซ*B*l*"3*l*Mla**ซM^MMMH"^H^^KV^"V^y ^ I
(A) CROSS SECTION - HORIZONTAL SHAFT PADDLE
FLOCCULATORS - FOUR COMPARTMENT
MOTOR WO C3
cow omx 'ff
(B) LONCiTUDlWL SECTION > HORIZONTAI SHAFT PAODlC
FLOCCULATORS - SUBMERGED RIGHT ANCLE GEAR DRIVE
ISC (50
joo ซ w or
OR ZOO ซ 90 <ซ" e
o ป a 3 ซ
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^MM^^^^^Ml tt^^^M
SQUMUCICn Kซl *
(C) TYPICAL SECTION - VERTICAL PADDLE
FLOCCULATDR COMPARTMENT
andASCE, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-11. Mechanical Flocculator Types
EPA Guidance Manual 3-55
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
ApriM999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Suggested assessment criteria for the coagulation/flocculation process include:
1. What type of flocculation facilities are being used? Does the
coagulation/flocculation process visually appear adequate?
The inpector should note the type of flocculation facilities (baffled units or
mechanical mixers). If the water system is using baffled units, the inspector
should identify whether the units have serpentine channels, ported walls, or
diversion plates. The inspector should be able to visually determine good floe
formation prior to sedimentation. Best floe size ranges from 0.1 to 3 mm in
diameter.
2. Is there any evidence of clumps of coagulants in the first compartment of
the flocculator?
The inspector should watch for any clumps being discharged into the
flocculator. Also, if possible, the inspector should look for signs of sediments
in the first compartment of the flocculator.
3. Is the mechanical equipment working? Are there any hydraulic
inadequacies?
All mechanical equipment should be functional. Standby equipment should
always be in a ready-to-operate state. Instrumentation to monitor motor
speeds, flow rates, pH, and temperature also should be functional and
calibrated. Hydraulic inadequacies may be visually detected in the
flocculation, sedimentation, and filtration stages. Indications of hydraulic
inadequacies include visible surges of water through the flocculation basins,
short circuiting of floe particles through the basins, stationary floes in dead
zones, and unusual and buildup of sludge in the basins.
4. Does a preventive maintenance program exist?
Manufacturers and equipment suppliers provide preventive maintenance
schedules. The treatment plant operators should adhere to these schedules.
5. Is the rate of mixing adjustable, so that the correct mixing can be
provided at all flows? If so, can the operator adjust the rate of mixing?
Adjusting flocculator mixing rates can be done either automatically or
manually. Mixing rates can be changed by removing and adding planks onto
the arms of the rotating shaft. The inspector should ask the operator about the
frequency of adjusting mixing rates and how it is done.
6. What is the G, GT, and tip speed? Is it within the generally accepted
range? What is the detention time? Is it within the generally accepted
range?
If available, values for G, detention time, GT, and tip speed need to be
collected for both design values and operation values at the time of the
ApriM999 3-56 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING
sanitary survey. Acceptable G values should range between 100/sec to 20/sec
(JMM, 1985); GT values should range between 20,000 to 120,000 (JMM,
1985); detention time may range between 20 to 60 minutes (JMM, 1985); and
tip speed between 0.5 ft/sec to 2 ft/sec (Sanks, 1978).
3.2.4.6 Sedimentation/Clarification
One of the most important processes in a water treatment facility is the settling of
flocculated particles following coagulation/flocculation, called sedimentation or
clarification. Floe removal occurs during a protracted quiescence period of a continuous
flow in a sedimentation basin or clarifier. Today, essentially all continuous flow
sedimentation basins include continuous sludge removal with mechanical equipment and
the old fill and draw basins are obsolete. Efficient operation of the clarification process
allows the filtration process, which follows, to operate longer between backwashing and
with fewer problems.
Typically, a clarifier will have four zones, each with a characteristic function. The four
zones and their associated functions are:
Inlet zone - A transition zone that converts the influent flow to the uniform,
steady flow desired in the settling zone;
Settling zone - The section of the clarifier in which settling occurs. This zone
should be free of interference from the other zones;
Outlet zone - A transition zone that converts the steady flow from the settling
zone to the effluent flow; and
Sludge zone - The section of the clarifier that the floe particles settle into.
The sludge accumulates in this zone to prevent interference with the removal
of particles in the settling zone.
Clarifiers can be classified based on their configuration and type of flow. Types of clarifiers
include horizontal flow units, inclined flow units, and upflow clarifiers. Horizontal flow
units are generally rectangular or circular in shape, although square tanks are also used.
Water flows through the unit in a horizontal manner, but can follow various types of flow
patterns. These units are considered conventional clarifiers and are the most commonly
used type for drinking water treatment. The various shapes and flows of conventional
clarifiers are shown in Figure 3-12. (AWWA and ASCE, 1998; AWWA, 1990)
Inclined flow units include tube or plate settlers, which are generally mounted in rectangular
or circular basins. These units are high-rate modifications of conventional clarifiers. They
are considered high-rate clarifiers because they can generally be loaded at higher rates than
the conventional clarifiers decscribed above. Tube settlers are designed with several
shallow parallel tubes at an incline and adjacent to one another. Plate settlers consist of
vertically inclined plates onto which solids first settle and then slide down into a basin
below. The designs for both tube and plate settlers increase the surface area and decrease
the distance for particle settling, and also reduce flow through velocity to reduce scouring.
All of these factors enhance solids removal. (AWWA and ASCE, 1998; AWWA, 1990)
EPA Guidance Manual SsT April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
(A) RECTANGULAR SETTLING
TANK - RECTILINEAR FLOW
IttMKI
SOW
(C) PERIPHERAL-FEED SETTLING
TANK - SPIRAL FLOW
(B) CENTER-FEED SETTLING
TANK - SOURCE FLOW
(ฃ) SQUARE SETTLING
TANK - RADIAL FLOW
(D) PERIFERAL-FEED SETTLING
TANK - RADIAL FLOW
(Source: AWWA andASCE, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-12. Different Clarifier Shapes
Upflow clarifiers are units that generally have chemical mixing, flocculation, and
sedimentation in a single tank. Some units may have a separate rapid mixer, rather than
feeding chemicals directly to the clarifier inlet pipe for mixing within the unit. Upflow
clarifiers include solids-contact units such as sludge-blanket clarifiers and slurry
recirculation clarifiers, which are often used for water softening processes. These units are
designed to provide more efficient flocculation, greater particle contact, more uniform flow,
and less short-circuiting. Because of these factors solids-contact units can often handle
three or four times the hydraulic loading of conventional clarifiers. (AWWA and ASCE,
1998; AWWA, 1990)
April 1999
3-58 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Clarifier characteristics which significantly impact floe settling efficiency include the tank
surface area (dependent on overflow rate), depth (dependent on detention time), and the
velocity of the flow through the clarifier, which is dependent on the cross-sectional area and
configuration of the basin. The weir loading rate at the effluent launderers is also important
to prevent the breakup of any floe particles that may reach the launderers.
The surface overflow rate should be equal to the settling velocity of the floe particles
entering the basin. The detention time should be adequate for the removal of all solids. The
velocity through the basin should be uniform over the cross-section of the basin. The
effluent launderer overflow rate should be small. The values for the various design factors
should be conservative to allow for site specific circumstances. General design value'
ranges are shown in Table 3-1.
Special consideration should be given to the inlet and outlet flow conditions in evaluating
the performance of clarifiers. The inlet flow should be distributed uniformly between
sedimentation basins and the flow to each basin should be distributed uniformly over the
full cross section of the individual basin. In general, the performance of the basin is
controlled more by the inlet condition than the outlet condition.
Table 3-1. Clarifier Design Factors
/^%. * j^^ ;Sarface Overflow Rate (gpin/ft2) *//
Alum floe
Lime softening
Tube settlers (overall basin rate)
Plate settlers (overall basin rate)
Upflow units
Lime softening/Upflow units
Detention Time (hour)
Velocity (fpm)
0.4-
fl 4
\/*"T
1.0-
2.0-
0.7-
0.7-
1.5-
1.0-
^
0.7
1.4
3.0
6.0
1.8
2.2
4
3.0
(Modified from A WWA and ASCE, 1998)
To evaluate the performance of the clarification process, the best criteria is the turbidity of
the settled water leaving the clarifiers. In general, the turbidity of the water leaving a
clarifier should be no greater than 10 times the acceptable turbidity level of the finished
(i.e., filtered) water. Filters are assumed to remove at least 90% of the remaining particles
in the water. Some states require that settled water turbidity be less than 5 NTU. For
optimized turbidity removal goals, settled water with a turbidity of less than 2 NTU is
expected when the average raw water turbidity is greater than 10 NTU, and 1 NTU when
average raw water turbidity is less than 10 NTU. Under the Comprehensive Performance
Evaluation (CPE) process EPA has established an optimization goal of 2 NTU for water
leaving the sedimentation basin.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-59
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Sludge accumulation in the clarifier has to be removed to maintain the clarification process
at peak efficiency. Sludge should be removed on a continuous or time-controlled basis. In
plants with a low solids loading, sludge is typically removed from the basin intermittently
for 5 to 15 minutes every hour, which is called a time-controlled basis. For those plants
with a high solids loading, sludge is typically removed continuously.
Similar to the previous treatment processes, many plants have more than one clarifier/
sedimentation basin at the treatment plant. With two or more units, depending on the
projected water demands, one unit can be removed from service for maintenance and the
plant can remain in operation. There should be at least two clarification units. If a plant has
only one unit, then maintenance of that unit may suffer, because the plant has to be
shutdown to perform maintenance.
Suggested assessment criteria for the clarification process include:
1. What type of sedimentation/clarification process and facilities are being
used? Does the sedimentation/clarification process visually appear
adequate?
The inspector should determine what type of process and facilities (e.g., cross
flow sedimentation basin, radial flow sedimentation basin, upflow solids
contact clarifier) are used and whether they appear adequate. Near the outlet
of the sedimentation basin, water should be visibly clear.
2. Is the flow distributed evenly to all basins? Is the inlet flow distributed
uniformly over the full cross section?
The inspector should look for signs of bridging or short circuiting and should
look for signs of floes breaking up at the sedimentation basin inlet. The
inspector should inspect the mechanism through which the flow is evenly
distributed among the multiple basins. Uneven flow distribution may result in
the basins receiving disproportionately high flows and this may cause less than
optimum sedimentation.
3. Does the plant have multiple units with some that are not in use? Are the
idle basins in a condition to be used if needed?
Not all sedimentation units are used during low demand. Standby
sedimentation basins should be inspected for their readiness to be used. The
inspector should check the condition of any empty basin for cracks,
cleanliness, and paint condition, and should note whether plants, moss, or
other botanical forms are growing inside the basin. The inspector should also
note whether the in-service sedimentation basins contain any larvae, toads, or
fish.
April 1999 3-60 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
4. Is the mechanical equipment working? Are there any hydraulic
inadequacies?
Sludge removal equipment should be functional. Manual controls for
overriding automatic controls should be inspected and tested. A turbulent
flow regime is an obvious sign of hydraulic inadequacies. Turbid water at the
basin outlet during high flow conditions may indicate hydraulic overloading.
5. What is the surface overflow rate, detention time, and the velocity flow?
Is it within the generally accepted range?
The inspector should record the plant flow rate and confirm the basin
dimensions during the inspection. From this information, the inspector may
calculate the surface overflow rate, detention time, and velocity flow. If the
values of these parameters are outside the generally acceptable range, the
inspector should try with the help of the operator to determine if there is a
specific reason or reasons for operating at the calculated parameters. Poorly
maintained weirs may cause short circuiting that might affect both the
overflow rate and the sedimentation process.
6. Does there appear to be too much sludge in the basin(s)? Is it impacting
settled water performance? How is sludge removed from the clarifier(s)?
How often is sludge removed?
Too much sludge in the sedimentation basin is an indication of inadequate
sludge removal rate. An indication of inadequate sludge removal is when the
settled material appears to be in a colloidal suspension with upward movement
occurring. Excessive sludge accumulations in a clarifier may interfere with
the solids removal process and lead to anaerobic conditions in the basin. The
inspector should record the frequency of sludge removal during the period of
inspection and should ask about seasonal fluctuations and extreme operational
conditions.
7. What is the settled water turbidity? Does it meet the general criteria?
Settled water turbidity should not exceed a level of 5 NTU. This is assuming
that filtration will drop this turbidity level to less than 0.5 NTU. If the settled
water NTU levels are higher than 5 NTU, the inspector should pay closer
attention to the subsequent treatment barriers. For optimized turbidity
removal goals, settled water with a turbidity of less than 2 NTU is expected
when the average raw water turbidity is greater than 10 NTU, and 1 NTU
when average raw water turbidity is less than 10 NTU. The CPE process uses
2 NTU as an optimization goal for water leaving the sedimentation process.
For further information on turbidity levels, see EPA's Handbook: Optimizing
Water Treatment Plant Performance Using the Composite Correction
Program (EPA, 1998b).
EPA Guidance Manual 3-61 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3.2.4.7 Filtration
The filtration process is the final barrier for physical removal of particles at a surface
water treatment plant. Without it, the suspended particles that remain in the water
following the sedimentation/clarification process would be delivered to the customers.
Depending on the quality of the source water, these particles may include pathogens that
are resistant to disinfection and significantly increase the risk of waterborne disease. To
minimize this risk, water from the sedimentation/clarification process should to be passed
through a properly designed and operated filtration system. Filtration in a water treatment
plant is an adaption of the natural process that occurs as water moves through granular
soils. Over time, filtration enhancements for solids removal have been developed to
include the use of coagulants, and various types of filter media, underdrain design, and
backwashing techniques.
Filtration systems are divided into two general categories - gravity and pressure. Pressure
filters are typically used at small water treatment plants. These filters usually consist of a
pressure vessel or tank that contains a porous filter media, an underdrain system, and
piping for inlet and outlet flow and backwash. Pumping facilities are used to force settled
water through the media in the pressure filter and into a clearwell. A major disadvantage
of pressure filters is that the media cannot be visually observed during backwash or easily
inspected for the formation of mudballs.
Gravity filters are the most common filtration system found at surface water treatment
plants. These units differ significantly from pressure filters in that the media and
underdrain system are contained in a filter box that is open to the atmosphere, and water
flows through the media by gravity. There are two types of flow control systems for
gravity filters - constant rate and declining rate. Constant rate filters are generally
equipped with an effluent rate-of-flow controller that includes a flow measuring device
and an automatically adjusting valve. A constant filtration rate can also be accomplished
by splitting the influent flow to each filter. Constant rate filters can be further divided
into those that operate under a relatively fixed water level common to all the filters, and
those that operate under rising water levels that vary in each filter depending on the filter
headloss.
A declining rate filter, on the other hand, usually includes submerged inlets that allow
diversion of influent flow from a dirty filter to a clean filter. There are no effluent rate-
of-flow controllers, although an orifice plate is sometimes used to establish a maximum
filtration rate for a clean filter. Declining rate filters start with a high filtration rate that
declines as the filter begins to plug with filtered solids. Although the initial filtration rate
of the declining rate filter is usually higher than that of a constant rate filter, the overall
production rate of a constant rate filter will usually be greater assuming the filter run of
the two filters is the same.
Filter media systems are usually identified according to the number of media layers (e.g.
single, dual, or multiple media) and the type of media (e.g. sand, anthracite). Single or
mono media filters usually consist of sand, although anthracite and GAC beds are also
used. When single media sand filters were first developed, they were referred to as rapid
April 1999 3-62 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING
sand filters to distinguish them from the older slow sand filtration systems that were
common at the time. Filtration rates have increased even more with the development of
dual and multiple media filtration systems. Dual media is the most common and consists
of a layer of anthracite over a layer of sand. Multiple media usually includes anthracite
and sand layers over a third layer of denser material such as garnet.
Media depths vary with the type of filter and media. Total media depths of 30 to 36 inches
are typical with a minimum depth of 24 inches. Single media filters that utilize anthracite
or GAC may have deeper beds of 48 inches. Typical maximum filtration rates for the more
common filters and media types are shown in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2. Typical Maximum Filtration Rates
<->*'*'" ^^ ' ~t ^ ,
- ^ ซ Filter/Media Type
Pressure - All media types
Gravity - Rapid Sand/Constant Rate
Gravity - Rapid Sand/ Declining Rate
Gravity - Dual or Multiple Media/Constant Rate
Gravity - Dual or Multiple Media/Declining Rate
Filtration Rate (gpm/ft2)
2
2
3
5
6.5
(Source: TNRCC, 1997)
A variety of underdrain systems are used to support the filter media, allow collection of
the filtered water, and distribute backwash supply water. The most common underdrain
systems include perforated laterals, perforated support blocks, and false floors with
nozzles. In cases where the underdrain openings are larger than the media to be
supported, a layer of graded gravel is installed between the underdrain system and the
media. Some underdrain systems include features that allow for air scour as well as the
distribution of washwater during backwash.
The filtration units should include the features and controls necessary to assure proper
monitoring and operation of the filter. The specific features and controls will depend on
the type of filter and how the filtration rate is controlled. Loss-of-head gauges are used to
provide the difference between influent and effluent pressure or head, so that the
condition of the filter media can be monitored. Rate-of-flow controllers or flow limiting
devices are used to control the filtration rate and prevent surges through the media that
may cause particle breakthough. On-line turbidimeters on the filter effluent lines are used
along with loss-of-head data to monitor the condition of the media and determine when
the filter should be backwashed.
Filtration units should also be equipped with facilities to clean the filter media when it
becomes dirty. The typical approach to cleaning or backwashing a dirty filter is to force
potable water back up through the media at a high rate causing the media to expand 20 to
30 percent. As the media expands, the particles adhering to the media grains are flushed
out of the filter to waste. The facilities and equipment that are used to clean filters
EPA Guidance Manual 3-63
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
include backwash supply pumps or elevated washwater tanks, surface wash or air scour
equipment, associated piping and controls, and wastewater management/disposal
facilities.
The operational procedures that are used to backwash a filter depend on the design of the
filter, the condition of the filter media, and the temperature of the backwash supply water.
If a plant has a dual or multiple media filter, the media should be restratified before the
completion of the backwash. In order to restratify these types of media correctly,
backwash practices using surface wash or simultaneous air-water application should be
followed by a backwash. A multiple media filter, for example, may restrict the use of
surface wash or air scour to the beginning of the backwash cycle in order to assure proper
restratification of the media layers. If the filter media is a mono media type, then no
restratification is needed and the backwash method is not restricted (AWWA and ASCE,
1998). In addition, higher washwater temperatures result in lower water viscosities, so
higher washwater supply rates may be required in the summer than in the winter to
achieve the same bed expansion.
An effective backwash procedure usually includes the following steps: adjusting the raw
water flow rate (to prevent hydraulic surges in the remaining filters), gradually increasing
the washwater supply rate, restricting surface wash or air scour to the beginning of the
backwash cycle (to allow proper media restratification and minimize media loss),
maintaining the maximum washwater flow rate until the water on the top of the filter is
visibly clear, gradually decreasing the washwater flow rate, observing idle time before
reactivating the filter, and gradually increasing the filtration rate when the clean filter is
reactivated. Table 3-3 includes more specific information on filter backwash procedures.
Operators should be following the backwashing method described in the written
operational procedures for the specific filter. In all cases, the filter backwash procedure
that is used should provide effective cleaning of the media, protect the structural integrity
of the media and underdrain system, and minimize post backwash turbidity spikes in the
filtered water. The backwash water should be evenly distributed throughout the filter
during a backwash. The turbidity of the backwash waste should be measured during the
inspection to determine if the length of the backwash is adequate.
The criteria that are used to initiate a filter backwash impact the effectiveness of the
backwash, the condition of the media, and the filtered water quality. In the past, filter run
time and headless have been used as the primary criteria for backwashing a filter. Filter
run times range from 12 to 72 hours with 24 hours being typical. A filter headless of 8 to
10 feet has also been used as a trigger for filter backwash. More recently, and with the
increasing use of individual filter turbidimeters, the turbidity of the water leaving the
filter has become the overriding criteria for initiating backwash. Some plants use an
individual filter turbidity goal of 0.1 NTU as a trigger for backwash before target levels
for loss-of-head or filter run time have been reached (AWWA and ASCE, 1998).
An increasing number of facilities are adding filter aids and using filter-to-waste piping to
improve the effectiveness of the filtration process. The filter aids usually consist of a
polymer or coagulant that is added in small dosages to the settled water prior to the filters.
April 1999 3-64 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Filter aids can also be added to the backwash supply water at the end of the backwash
process to help minimize particle breakthrough when the filter is restarted. Filter-to-
waste is used at many facilities to eliminate problems with post-backwash turbidity
spikes, but requires the installation of special piping that is not possible at all plants.
Table 3-3. Recommended Backwash Rates
Backwash Method
Upflow Water Wash ( 1 step)
Upflow Low Rate Water Wash with
Initial Air Scour (2 steps)
(1) Air Scour
(2) Low Rate Water Wash
Upflow High Rate Water Wash with
Initial Air Scour (2 steps)
(1) Air Scour
(2) High Rate Water Wash
Concurrent Upflow Water Wash and
Air Scour (2 steps)
(1) Concurrent Air and Water First
(2) Water Wash only
Upflow Water Wash with Surface
Wash (3 steps)
(1) Surface Wash only
(2) Low Rate Water Wash*
(3) High Rate Water Wash*
*with concurrent surface wash
Water Wash
Bate
(gpm/ft2)
15-23
5-7.5
15-23
6.3-7.5
6.3-15
0.5-2.0
5-7.5
15-23
Water Wash
Duration
(minutes)'
3-15
3-5
3-5
5-10
5-10
1-3
5-10
1-5
, Air Scour
Rate
(scfm/ft2)
-
1-2
2-5
6-8
-
' Air Scour
' Duration
(minutes)
3-5
3-5
5-10
(Source: AWWA andASCE, 1998)
In addition to the conventional filtration systems described above, several other filtration
technologies are used in the water treatment industry. Some are older systems, such as
slow sand filtration and diatomaceous earth filtration. One of the more recent
technologies that is receiving increased attention is membrane filtration. These filtration
units use pressure driven membranes to achieve levels of particulate and contaminant
removal that are not possible with conventional filtration systems. Micro-filtration
membranes are used to filter out particulates including pathogenic cysts. Ultrafiltration
membranes are used to remove specific dissolved organics such as disinfection byproduct
precursors and to remove particulates. Nano-filtration is used to remove calcium and
magnesium ions (hardness) and disinfection byproducts precursors. It is also used to
remove microbial contamination including viruses. Reverse osmosis (RO) membranes
are typical used to remove organic and inorganic contamination. Typically RO
membranes are used to purify raw waters containing high levels of total dissolved solids
EPA Guidance Manual 3-65
Cpndupting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
such as brackish water and sea water. All membrane technologies require some kind of
pretreatment. Pre-screens are commonly used with micro- and ultra-filtration. Cartridge
filters are commonly used with nano-filtration and RO membranes. Typically ultra- and
micro-filtration units consist of a number of modules mounted on skids. Nano-filtration
and RO units consist of a number of elements housed in pressure vessels which in turn
are mounted in trains.
Suggested assessment criteria for filtration include:
1. What type of filtration system is being used (gravity or pressure; constant
or declining rate) and what kind of media has been installed (mono
media, dual media, or multi media)?
What is the maximum filtration rate at design capacity with one filter out
of service? Is it at or less than the maximum water demand?
Overflowing filters are a sign of inadequate hydraulic conditions. If the
maximum water demand is at or higher than design capacity, then the
system should have expansion or water conservation plans prepared.
If a pressure filtration system is installed, then the following should be
checked:
When was the last internal inspection of the filters performed? Is the
inspection frequency in accordance with local/state requirements? Were
the media and depth, internal piping, and interior surface of the pressure
vessel checked? Can the operator provide copy of the inspection report?
Were there any deficiencies noted in the inspection report? If so, have the
deficiencies been corrected?
Manufacturers, equipment suppliers, and many states require periodic
inspection of pressure filters. Many operators will not be able to inspect
the intervals of the pressure filter, but should be monitoring whether the
filter is functioning properly or not. The litmus test for any filter during
the sanitary survey visit is to observe whether the turbidity of the finished
water is acceptable and that the drop in turbidity level between the influent
to the filter and the effluent is at least 90 percent. This can be easily
determined using an accurate turbidimeter. If operationally possible at the
time of inspection, the inspector should ask that the filter be operated at
peak hourly rate and design flow rate. Otherwise, the inspector should ask
the operator how the filters performed the last time the peak hourly flow
rate and design flow rate occurred at the plant.
Ask the operator to backwash a filter. What are the means and method for
backwashing a filter? Is the correct backwash procedure followed based
on the filter media type and appurtenances? What is the high rate
backwash flow? Is it adequate?
April 1999 3-66 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
It is useful to observe the backwash operation to determine if proper
backwash procedures are followed. The inspector should note how the
wastewater from backwash operations is managed or disposed of.
What is the turbidity of the backwash waste?
The turbidity of the backwash waste should be measured by the inspector
during the inspection to determine if the backwash length is adequate. The
turbidity of backwash waste at the end of the backwash process should be
very close to the turbidity of the water used in the backwash.
What is the turbidity level of the effluent water following the backwash?
The inspector should measure the turbidity of the filter effluent water to
determine if the filter is functioning as it is supposed to after backwashing.
In addition to turbidity, underdrain flow rate should be measured. A post-
backwash turbidity profile using on-line turbidity meter is important in
indicating filter performance. In addition to turbidity measurements, the
filter effluent flow rate should also be recorded from the filter control
panel of from a flow meter, if available.
If & gravity filtration system is installed, then the following should be
checked:
An inspection 6f the filters should be completed. Note that it may not be
possible to check on all filters in a plant; therefore, the inspector should
determine which filter or two should be checked based on the available on-
line instrumentation and discussions with the operator(s).
After completely draining the filter(s) that will be checked and
backwashed, the inspector should visually check the filter.
Is there any visible indication of problems on the surface of the filter?
Visible evidence of problems would be paniculate matter remaining on the
surface; mudballs, mounding, cracks, holes, depressions in the media
surface; and an uneven media surface.
Are there any pressure relief vents from the underdrain through the filter
media? What are the construction means and method of the vent system?
What is the condition of the piping? Is protection from insects and
animals entering the vent provided? Can the vent be flooded by water
filtered, unflitered, or other?
The inspector should look for signs of poor sanitation in the underdrain
area (filter piping gallery). These include the presence of mold, smut on
the walls and floors, and insect and animal droppings.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-67 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
e
Obtain information on the subsurface condition of the filter media and
underdrain system based on depth measurements and limited excavations.
What are the type, depth, and condition of the filter media? Is the support
gravel level?
Depth measurements using a steel rod provide information on the depth of
the filter media and the levelness of the underdrain support system.
Limited excavations provide information on the subsurface condition of
the media, and in the case of dual or multiple media, provide information
on the stratification of the media layers. The inspector should note
problems such as mudballs or support gravel within the media, improper
stratification of media layers, inadequate media depth, and significant
variations in the elevation of the support gravel. A core sample of the
filter media can also be used to evaluate subsurface media conditions, but
usually does not provide as much information as depth measurements and
limited excavation. Additional information on the collection and
interpretation of core samples of filter media can be found in EPA's
manual addressing CPEs (comprehensive performance evaluations) (EPA,
1998b).
Written inspection procedures and training should be provided to
inspectors who are expected to perform subsurface media evaluations to
assure the personal safety of the inspector and to minimize the potential
for damage to the filter media and underdrain system. The media in some
filters (such as constant rate, rising level filter banks) are deep enough to
be designated as confined spaces and pose special safety hazards. There
are other safety issues such as the slippery surfaces down in the filter unit.
In some cases, there are also structural concerns related to walking on the
media surface or in the backwash troughs. The results of a recent
inspection conducted by a qualified filter contractor may provide the
necessary information without the inspector having to perform a
subsurface media evaluation.
After completing the inspection of the filter, the inspector should ask the
operator to prepare the filter for backwashing. What are the means and
method for backwashing? Is the correct backwash procedure followed
based on the filter media type and appurtenances? What is the high rate
backwash flow? Is it adequate?
Note the means and method used. Filtered water (not settled water) should
be used to flood the media before backwashing. All air should be
expunged from the underdrain and media by this flooding before
backwashing the filter.
The inspector should also note if the correct backwash procedure is
followed based on the filter media type and appurtenances, and the high
April 1999 3-68 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING
rate backwash flow. The inspector should note if the high rate backwash
flow is adequate, and if there is even distribution of water/air across the
filter. Any boiling of the media and any explosions of the media due to
trapped air should be noted. When refilling the drained filter, the media
should be slowly flooded with backwash supply water to protect against
damage that can be caused by entrapped air in the media and underdrain
system.
Backwash troughs should be inspected for levelness. In addition, surface
wash arms and nozzles should be operational and functioning
appropriately.
What is the turbidity of the backwash waste?
The turbidity of the backwash waste should be measured by the inspector
during the inspection to determine if the backwash length is adequate. The
turbidity of backwash waste at the end of the backwash process should be
very close to the turbidity of the water used in the backwash.
What is the turbidity level of the effluent water following the backwash?
The inspector should measure the turbidity of the filter effluent water to
determine if the filter is functioning as it is supposed to after backwashing.
In addition to turbidity, underdrain flow rate should be measured. A post-
backwash turbidity profile using on-line turbidity meter is important in
indicating filter performance. In addition to turbidity measurements, the
filter effluent flow rate should also be recorded from the filter control
panel of from a flow meter, if available.
2. Is the monitoring instrumentation (loss-of-head, effluent flow rate, and
filtered water turbidity) working for all filters? What condition is the
instrumentation in?
The monitoring instruments should be present and functional. The inspector
should ask the plant operator about the frequency of monitoring equipment
calibration and should note if the calibration frequency and procedures are in
accordance with manufacturers' recommendations and state regulatory
requirements.
3. What criteria are used by operators to determine when a filter requires
backwashing? Do all operators of the treatment plant use the same
criteria? Are filters ever stopped, then started-up again without
backwashing them first? Are filters ever "bumped" to extend filter runs?
The inspector should note how the operators determine the need to backwash
the filter. It is important to note whether the backwash is triggered by
measuring head loss or rise of water levels in the filters, by an increase in
turbidity levels in the finished water, or other reasons that might be as simple
as an automated preset-backwash timing based on manufacturer or salesman
EPA Guidance Manual 3-69 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
recommendation. The inspector also should note if all operators at the plant
adhere to the same criteria. Some operators "bump" their filters to extend the
length of the filter run. Bumping is done by opening the backwash valve
during the filter run to dislodge trapped solids. This is a bad practice that
results in an immediate increase in filtered water turbidity.
4. What equipment is included in the backwash system? What is the
capacity of this system? Is there a backup backwash system? What is its
capacity? Is it operable? Is there a means of measuring the backwash
flow rate? Is it working? What is its condition? When was the
flowmeter calibrated last? Can the backwash flow be varied to allow for
varying conditions? If so, can the operator adjust the rate of flow?
Backwash pumping system and piping capacity should be recorded. The
inspector should make sure that the pipes and valves of the backwash system
are properly color coded, the backwash flow meter is functional, and the last
calibration date is available. The inspector should note if the backwash flow
rate has been adjusted and for what reason.
5. Are newly backwashed filters brought back into service at low rates that
are gradually increased (ramped-up) in order to minimize post-backwash
turbidity spikes? Are operating filter flow rates reduced when another
filter is backwashed?
Newly backwashed filters should be brought back online at a low loading rate
and then the loading rate gradually increased to the pre-wash loading rate
levels. This practice will prevent compaction of the filter media and will allow
the filterable material to attach to the filter media. The practice of gradual
increase in filter loading rate reduces the levels of post-backwash filter
effluent turbidity spikes.
6. What is the condition of the piping in the filter gallery? Is it color coded
for the use or service in accordance with local/state requirements? Are
there any cross-connections?
All pipes in the filter gallery should be color coded and marked in accordance
with local and state regulations.
7. Is there a floor drain to remove all leaking water from the filter gallery
floor?
The inspector should note any leaks from valves and pipes and check the floor
drain to determine if it is partially or totally clogged. The inspector should
also determine the point of discharge for the floor drain and any other drains
in the filter gallery. Some plants are designed with the clearwell located
underneath the filter gallery. Drains should not discharge to the clearwell and
drain piping should not pass through the clearwell.
April 1999 3-70 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3.2.4.8 Disinfection
The practice of disinfection has proven to be one of the most important advances in
reducing the incidence of waterborne disease. In this regard, disinfection is an essential
component of the surface water and GWUDI of surface water treatment process to assure
the destruction or inactivation of disease causing organisms that may not be physically
removed during sedimentation and filtration. Two sets of regulations affect the type of
disinfectants that are used and where they are applied in the treatment process. First, the
disinfection process should assure specific reductions of Giardia and viruses required by
the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR). Second, the disinfection process is restricted
by regulations limiting the formation of certain disinfection byproducts (DBFs). With the
enacment of the Stage 1 DBF Rule in December 1998, any public water system that treats
its water with a chemical disinfectant must meet MCLs or treatment techniques for
several disinfectant residuals (chloramines, chlorine dioxide, chlorine) and their
byproducts [TTHMs (total trihalomethanes), haloacetic acids (HAAS), chlorite, bromatej.
It is important that the inspector evaluate whether the disinfection system is adequate to
ensure compliance with current drinking water standards.
Although the primary purpose of disinfection is to inactivate disease-causing organisms
that may not be physically removed during sedimentation and filtration, the disinfection
process often provides other benefits related to improved coagulation, oxidation and
precipitation and/or filtration of iron and manganese and hydrogen sulfide compounds,
taste and odor control, algae control, and a measurable disinfectant residual in the
distribution system. These benefits depend on the type of disinfectant being used and the
point at which it is being applied in the treatment process. Types of disinfectants include
chlorine, chloramines, chlorine dioxide, ozone, and ultraviolet (UV) light.
Chlorine is the most widely used disinfectant for drinking water because of its proven
effectiveness, low capital and operating costs, and established history in the water
industry. Free chlorine provides a high level of disinfection at the treatment plant and a
measurable residual in the distribution system. Unfortunately, free chlorine also
combines with organic precursors that may be present in the source water to form DBFs,
such as trihalomethanes (THMs). As a result, many treatment plants use chlorine in
combination with ammonia to establish a chloramine residual and minimize THM
formation. A chloramine residual is a weaker disinfectant than free chlorine, but is more
durable and easier to maintain in the distribution system. At plants where THMs are not
currently regulated, chlorine is often added at the raw water pump station or the rapid
mixing basin to establish a free chlorine residual through the entire treatment process.
This approach provides a high level of disinfection, improves the coagulation process,
and minimizes algae growth in the treatment units. However, it may also result in high
THM levels.
Chlorine dioxide is being used as an alternative to chlorine at a growing number of
treatment plants. Even at low concentrations, chlorine dioxide provides both a high level
of disinfection at the treatment plant and a measurable disinfectant residual in the
distribution system. Chlorine dioxide residuals rapidly dissipate in sunlight and often
EPA Guidance Manual 3-71 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
cannot be maintained through the sedimentation process. Chlorine dioxide does not form
the same DBFs associated with the use of chlorine, but does form chlorite which is
regulated under new disinfection byproduct regulations.
Ozone is another disinfectant that is used as an alternative to chlorine. Ozone provides a
high level of disinfection, does not form chlorinated byproducts, and improves the
coagulation process. It is also very effective in controlling taste and odor problems.
Ozone is usually added at the beginning of the treatment process. It dissipates rapidly and
does not provide a suitable disinfectant residual in the distribution system. The expense
and complexity of ozonation facilities have prevented serious consideration of the process
at many small and medium size treatment plants.
Ultraviolet (UV) light treatment, at sufficient intensity and appropriate wavelength and
exposure time, is an effective disinfection agent for drinking water. The process involves
the direct exposure of the water stream to UV light. UV systems come in two types,
closed and open, with closed systems more commonly used in potable and sterile water
applications. The effectiveness of UV disinfection depends on the intensity of the
radiation, proper wavelength, exposure time, water quality, flow rate, type and source of
the microorganisms (natural or culture), and the distance from the light source to the
targeted microorganisms (EPA, 1996). UV disinfection is more suitable and effective for
clean water sources with little suspended matter. Therefore, water often should be
pretreated (e.g., for iron and manganese removal) before reaching the UV light
disinfection unit. U V disinfection does not provide a disinfectant residual in the
distribution system.
Disinfectants are added at a particular point in the process for specific reasons. When a
disinfectant such as chlorine or chloramine is used, the disinfectant usually is added at
two general areas in the treatment process. The first area is at the rapid mix and prior to
filtration, which is called pre-disinfection. The second area is after filtration and before
the distribution system, and is called post-disinfection. A disinfectant may be added to
either location, or both. However, pre-disinfection may cause DBFs at levels that might
cause adverse health effects. It is important to establish the need and the expected results
when evaluating the disinfectant addition location. For example, pre-chlorination assists
in iron and manganese removal by facilitating precipitation prior to filtration. If the only
disinfectant addition point is at the post-disinfection zone, then the iron and manganese
particulates would enter the distribution system, leading to customer complaints and
concerns about water quality. Since pH must sometimes be increased to effectively
precipitate manganese, disinfection credit may be impacted.
The effectiveness of the disinfection process in inactivating disease causing organisms is
measured by compliance with the disinfection requirements in the SWTR. With the
enactment of the SWTR, surface water treatment plants were required to demonstrate the
removal and/or inactivation of 3-log Giardia and 4-log viruses. If the quality of the water
leaving the plant meets the minimum requirements of the SWTR, then the facility with
conventional filtration is credited with removing 2-log Giardia and 2-log viruses. A well-
operated and maintained treatment plant with a conventional filtration process can receive a
April 1999 3-72 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
2.5-log removal for Giardia and 3-log removal for viruses. The remainder should be
inactivated (killed) by the disinfection process. To provide a reasonable means for
demonstrating that the required level of inactivation is obtained, the CT concept was
developed. C7"is residual disinfectant concentration (in mg/L) times the water contact
(detention) time (in minutes). The detention time used is Tio, which is the detention time at
which 90 percent of the design flow passing through a basin is retained.
The CT values for different disinfectants at various water quality conditions are provided in
the SWTR guidance manual (EPA, 1991). There are two different approaches in the SWTR
for demonstrating compliance with the disinfection requirements. The first method is to
demonstrate that the facility has maintained a minimum disinfectant residual through the
disinfection zone (i.e., between the disinfectant injection point and the residual
measurement point), based on the projected worse case water quality conditions at the
facility. The second approach is to compare the actual CTto the required CT using actual
conditions (flow, temperature, water quality, etc.) for that day. To determine the actual CT
required to inactivate Giardia and/or viruses for a given day, the disinfectant residual
concentration and the detention time of the water Tio must be known.
The concentration of the residual disinfectant is determined by measuring the concentration
of the treated sample. The detention time is measured, either using a tracer study or by
estimating using baffling conditions. The SWTR Guidance Manual provides full details on
how to conduct both measurements, how to calculate the actual CT for various
disinfectants, and how to look up the required CT for different levels of Giardia and virus
inactivation. Inspectors should evaluate whether the plant is operating within the operating
parameters for its CT requirements.
The SWTR also requires that the disinfectant residual entering the distribution system be at
least 0.2 mg/L and that there be a detectable residual in all parts of the distribution system
(specific requirements are given in 40 CFR 141.72 and the assessment criteria below).
Therefore, a higher residual may be necessary at the entrance to the distribution system to
assure that an acceptable residual is maintained throughout the distribution system. A state
may have a more stringent requirement. Some states have minimum requirements for
disinfection residuals at the far end of distribution systems, in addition to the minimum
residuals at the entrance to the distribution system.
The general assessment criteria for the disinfection process equipment were presented
earlier in this section and will not be repeated here. The assessment criteria listed here will
be strictly related to the disinfection process. Suggested assessment criteria for the
disinfection process include:
1. What type of disinfection process and i'acilites are used at the treatment
plant? Does the operator understand the disinfection process?
The operators should be knowledgable about the disinfection process and
facilities used at the treatment plant so that the disinfection process can be
properly managed and adequate disinfection treatment provided. The
capabilities of the operators concerning the disinfection process should be
EPA Guidance Manual 3-73 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
explored with questions. When the operator is not knowledgeable about the
process and equipment, equipment failures and problems in the effectiveness
of the process may not be resolved in a timely manner. Operator training in
the use and maintenance of disinfection equipment is important. Since an
operator's lack of knowledge in this area can pose a serious sanitary risk, it
may be considered a significant deficiency.
2. How was TIO determined - calculated or field tracer study? How was CT
determined at this facility? How many inactivation logs are required?
What are the disinfection zones in the plant? How is compliance with this
requirement demonstrated - minimum disinfectant residual level or
calculated? Is continuous disinfectant monitoring being done? Are
adequate records kept showing compliance with the CT requirement?
Plant operators should be able to calculate the sum of the actual CT for each
disinfection segment under actual operating conditions (i.e., SCxTio). The
operator should be able to tell the inspector if the TIO values are based on
tracer studies or on the use of the baffling conditions as directed by the state or
SWTR guidance manual. Generally, TIO is calculated using (peak hourly
rate/volume) x baffling factor. The state provides credit removal to plants
with filtration processes. Determining residual free chlorine should be done in
the lab using one of the EPA-approved methods for analysis. However, the
inspector should use an accurate field kit for on-the-spot measurement of free
chlorine and total chlorine residuals. The sanitary survey inspector should
refer to EPA's guidance manuals on alternative disinfectants and oxidants
(EPA, 1999a), and disinfection benchmarking (EPA, 1999b) for evaluating CT
credit for disinfectants other than chlorine. The inspector should make sure
that water quality parameter measuring equipment (including temperature and
pH meters) are operational, well-maintained, and properly calibrated.
3. What is the chlorine residual leaving the treatment plant? Does it meet
SWTR requirements? What is the chlorine residual at the first customer
and throughout the distribution system? Does the residual provide
adequate protection out in the distribution system? Do disinfectant
residuals meet state requirements?
The SWTR requires that finished water leaving the treatment plant have a
chlorine residual that is not less than 0.2 mg/L for more than four hours. The
SWTR also requires the presence of detectable residual in the distribution
system, specifically that the chlorine residual cannot be undetectable for more
than 5% of the samples each month for any two consecutive months (40 CFR
141.72). The residual leaving the plant may need to be higher than 0.2 mg/L
to ensure that an adequate minimum residual is maintained out in the
distribution system. The state may have more stringent requirements.
April 1999 3-74 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3.2.4.9 Waste Streams
Waste streams (primarily backwash water) from a water treatment plant have been
historically discharged either to a receiving stream or the nearest sanitary sewer. More
facilities are recycling all waste streams to conserve water as much as possible. In such
cases, the recycled waste streams are returned to the head of the plant. The method of
returning this flow can have a significant impact on the treatment plant performance. One
of the major concerns with recycled waste streams is the concentration of microbials,
particularly protozoa such as Cryptosporidium and Giardia. The inspector should check if
the water system's practices for recycling backwash water are in accordance with applicable
federal and state requirements.
Wastewater from the filter backwash process is usually pumped from a holding pond(s)
back to the raw water line coming into the plant. It is important that the recycled stream
enter far enough upstream of the treatment process to allow for proper monitoring of raw
water quality prior to chemical addition. In some cases, the pumping rate to return the
waste streams as quickly as possible is fairly high (> 25 percent of treatment rate). In
others, the pumping rate is low (< 10 percent of treatment rate). A variable pumping rate
(approximately 5 percent of treatment rate) that provides a continuous flow based on the
treatment rate of the plant is preferable. If the recycle return rate is high (compared to the
treatment rate), hydraulic surges within the facility may result causing a significant
disruption of the treatment process and ultimately leading to a degradation of the finished
water quality. The recycle return rate should be low compared to actual treatment rate to
minimize hydraulic surges.
Another concern of recycling the waste streams is the additional solids added to the existing
raw water. In some plants, the additional solids are needed to enhance the coagulation and
sedimentation process. In others, the additional solids would upset the treatment process,
because the feed rates for the coagulant chemicals may not be set right to accommodate the
higher loading. Solids may not settle in the clarifiers if the coagulant chemical dosages are
not set properly. Therefore, the coagulant chemical dosages should be adjusted to consider
the solids from the recycle stream. Finished water used in backwashing tends to have a
lower pH (0.5-1 unit), a higher temperature (0.5-1 ฐC), and a lower alkalinity than raw
water. The coagulation/flocculation dosages need to be adjusted to account for these
changes in pH, temperature, and alkalinity.
Suggested assessment criteria for recycling of waste streams include:
1. How are wastewater from the backwash process and sludge from the
sedimentation process managed? Is filter backwash water wasted or
recycled? Are all discharge and disposal activities in accordance with
applicable requirements?
It is important to note the conditions under which wastewater and sludge are
discharged or disposed of. The inspector should also note if the waste stream
is disposed of into a sewer line, french drain, or pond. It is also important to
note whether the backwash water is wasted or recycled. The inspector should
determine if the plant has an NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge
EPA Guidance Manual 3-75 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Elimination System) permit to dispose of backwash waters into surface water.
Additional information on addressing wastestreams can be found in
Technology Transfer Handbook-Management of Water Treatment Plant
Residuals (EPA, ASCE, and AWWA, 1996).
2. If recycled, does backwash water receive any treatment to decrease
pathogen densities?
i
Many water plants use settling ponds in series and add oxidants and
disinfectants to recycled waste streams to reduce pathogen population and to
improve coagulation.
3. Do the recycle pumps operate manually or automatically? What is the
recycling rate of the waste streams? How does this compare to the
normal treatment rate (percentage basis)? Is it constant or variable flow?
To avoid disrupting the hydraulic regime of the treatment plant, waste stream
holding tanks are used. The inspector should note the volume of the holding
tank and the volume of the waste stream being recycled and the portion that is
being wasted.
4. How much solids are in the recycled waste streams? How does this
compare to the solids in the raw water?
The solids content of the recycled waste stream is important in determining
the coagulant dose needed. The plant should use jar tests to determine the
necessary coagulant dose.
5. Are the coagulant dosages adjusted to accommodate the recycle flows? If
so, how? Are any jar tests performed to determine the impact of the
recycle stream and what changes to the coagulant dosages are needed?
When a plant recycles its waste stream, very often coagulant dose is reduced.
However, in some cases different coagulant is used or a coagulant aid should
be added to the process. Jar tests are crucial in determining coagulation needs
(both quantity and quality).
3.2.4.10 In-Plant Cross-Connection Control
Cross-connections are links between a potable and a non-potable water supply and/or waste
water or chemical supply line, through which contaminating materials may enter a potable
water supply. Cross-connections present a serious sanitary risk to a drinking water supply
since they can be the source of contamination of drinking water, leading to illness and
disease. At a cross-connection, contaminants can enter the potable water when the pressure
of the contaminated, non-potable stream is greater than the pressure of the potable water.
This situation causes backflow to occur. There are two types of backflow: back pressure
backflow and backsiphonage backflow:
April 1999 3-76 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Back pressure backflow is the flow of non-potable, contaminated water
toward a potable water supply because the contaminated water has a greater
pressure.
Backsiphonage backflow occurs when there is a vacuum in the distribution
pipes of a water system, causing untreated, non-potable water to be sucked out
toward the potable water. (EPA, 1989)
The potential for cross-connections is very high within water treatment facilities. Typical
examples of cross-connections at a water treatment plant are described below and are shown
in Figure 3-13. For example, the check valve near the boiler in Figure 3-13 does not
provide adequate protection since the potable water is not protected against backflow from
the chemical feed line. Back pressure backflow is a potential problem in buildings where
there are two or more piping systems that are not fully separated. A common situation for a
back pressure cross-connection is when the potable water supply for the plant is tied into the
water supply for the chemical feed system. Water containing chemicals under a higher
pressure may backflow into the high water demands that result in a backflow of untreated
water into the distribution system. This is one reason that it is important for a system to
maintain adequate pressure in its distribution system.
A backsiphoning scenario that is found throughout many water treatment plants is the
carrier water supply for a coagulant chemical that may be connected to the plant water
system. A high service pump discharging into the distribution system may cause a negative
pressure and result in backsiphoning of some of the chemicals into the potable supply.
Common cross-connections occur within the plant from high pressure hose bibs without
vacuum breakers. Since negative pressures can also occur within the plant as a result of
using high-pressure hoses supplied by the plumbing system, all hose bibs at the plant
(particularly those that might hang down into chemical tanks or treatment basins) should be
equipped with vacuum breakers. An example of a back pressure cross-connection is a hot
water boiler connected to the plant water system. If the boiler creates a pressure that is
greater than the system pressure, backflow can occur. Other examples of in-plant cross-
connections include unprotected connections between filtered and nonpotable water in the
filter piping gallery and the potable water lines that are used to provide makeup water and
carrier water for chemical feed equipment. A very common cross-connection at surface
water systems is backflow from the raw water source into the clearwell through a split feed
(pre- and post-chlorination) chlorination system.
When surveying the plant; it is important to determine the source of water for all areas
(chemical, water flush for pump bearings, etc.) that could potentially contaminate the
potable water supply. The water system should eliminate potential cross-connections with
an air gap or the appropriate backflow prevention device (see Figure 3-15). If the plant has
a single plant water supply connection, installing a backflow prevention device on this line
at the connection to the potable water supply will solve the problem. If the piping is such
that a single device will not solve the problem, then a control device will have to be
installed at all uses that pose a potential cross-connection.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-77 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
SAFETY
SHOWER
ACID
CHEMICAL!
FEED I
SCALE I
IBITOR)!
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-13. Examples of In-Plant Cross-Connect ions
April 1999
3-78 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Suggested assessment criteria for cross-connection control in-plant include:
1. Does the water system have a cross connection control plan for the plant?
Is the program active and effective in controlling cross connections?
Treatment plants should have a cross connection control plan for the plant.
The, plan should include testing various cross connection prevention devices
for proper functioning. All pipes in the treatment plant should be color coded.
Hookups to various types of pipes should be different. For example, a hose
that is used to clean the grounds using clear water should not fit on the outlets
of a coagulant or waste pipeline. All pipes should be labeled as coagulant
line, clear waterline, waste line, gas line, etc. Also, flow direction should be
marked on these pipes.
2. What are the water uses in the plant? Where does the supply for these
uses come from? Are proper backflow prevention devices installed to
protect potable water at the plant?
All water uses in the plant should be verified. All potable water lines should
be equipped with the necessary air gaps or proper backflow prevention devices
to assure protection against the backflow or backsiphonage of contaminants.
All hose bibs should have a vacuum breaker installed that cannot be easily
removed.
3. Are the appropriate backflow preventers used for all existing cross
connections?
The inspector should have a copy of EPA's Cross-Connection Control
Manual (EPA, 1989) or any equivalent state manual for verification of which
devices ought to be used to prevent backflow.
3.2.5 Priority Criteria
The following criteria related to the water treatment element of the sanitary survey are
considered high priority based on their potential for impacting public health:
Capacity of Treatment Facilities - The capacity of major treatment
processes needs to be sufficient to produce enough finished water to meet
customer demands (Section 3.2.3).
Rapid Mix, Chemicals and Chemical Feed Systems, and
Coagulation/Flocculation - The proper rase of coagulant chemicals can aid
the sedimentation/clarification and filtration processes (Sections 3.2.4.3-
3.2.4.5).
Sedimentation/Clarification - The clarification process allows the
particulates to precipitate and be removed by sedimentation (Section 3.2.4.6).
EPA Guidance Manual 3-79 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface .Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Filtration - Filtration is the last physical barrier for the removal of
participates, organic and inorganic contaminants, and pathogens in the water
(Section 3.2.4.7).
Disinfection - Disinfection has proven to be the one treatment process that
has had the most significant impact on public health due to the inactivation of
pathogens (Section 3.2.4.8).
Waste Streams- Recycled waste streams may have a high concentration of
microbials and solids and may have a lower pH, higher temperature, and lower
alkalinity than raw water. High recycle return rates can cause hydraulic surges
that disrupt treatment processes. Treatment processes need to adequately
account for these factors if waste streams are recycled (Section 3.2.4.9).
In-Plant Cross-Connection Control - Connections between contaminated
and potable water sources at the treatment plant can lead to contaminated
water supplies, if not controlled. Cross-connections can be present in water
treatment plants and are usually made unintentionally or are made because
their hazards are not recognized or are underestimated (Section 3.2.4.10).
Treatment Plant Schematic/Layout Map - Modifications to treatment
processes can have a major impact on water quality and should be clearly
identified on treatment plant schematics and layout maps (Section 3.2.2).
3.3 Distribution Systems
i
The water distribution system is the final link between the water source and the consumer.
The distribution system is the primary means of delivering drinking water produced at the
water treatment facility to the water system's customers. A typical water distribution
system comprises miles of water pipes constructed in a network which includes numerous
valves, fire hydrants, pumps, storage tanks, meters, and other appurtenances.
Water distribution systems are generally considered to be a composite of three basic
elements: treated water storage facilities (ground storage tanks, elevated storage tanks,
standpipes, hydropneumatic tanks), pumping facilities (booster pumps, .piping, control,
pump building, etc.), and the distribution lines (piping, valves, fire hydrants, meters, etc.).
These components should be integrated in order to function as a comprehensive system that
can meet various schedules of demand. A thorough inspection of the water distribution
system is needed to determine whether the distribution system can provide a safe, reliable,
and adequate supply of drinking water to the customers.
The objectives of surveying the water distribution system are to:
Determine the potential for degradation of the water quality in the distribution
system;
Determine the reliability, quality, quantity, and vulnerability of the distribution
system; and
April 1999 3-80 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Ensure that the sampling and monitoring plan(s) for the system conform with
requirements and adequately assess the quality of water in the distribution
system.
To meet these objectives, the inspector will need to review system mapping, design and
construction criteria, system operation and maintenance records, and sampling and
monitoring plan(s) in addition to the actual inspection of the system. The following
sections discuss the specific portions of the water distribution system that need to be
evaluated during an inspection. Finished water storage and pumps/pump facilities are
discussed further in Sections 3.4 and 3.5, respectively.
3.3.1 Distribution Maps and Records
The inspector will need to review the mapping and other records for a distribution system to
assess the components and size of the system to be evaluated. Maintaining accurate
mapping and records of the distribution system is essential for a water utility to repair and
maintain the existing system, as well as to plan for future improvements or expansion. The
mapping should show the location, size, and material of all pipes, valves, and fire hydrants
in the distribution system. The mapping should also show any pressure zone boundaries,
pumping facilities, storage tanks, and interconnections, with other public water systems. A
distribution system map for a small system could just be one map showing all the pertinent
details. For a large system, the mapping could include an overall system map at a large
scale with many smaller-scale, detailed maps showing the location of all utilities (including
water and other utilities also) and valves at street intersections, on roadways, and other
important areas. The maps should be updated regularly to record any changes or additions
to the distribution system.
In addition to the distribution system mapping, an inspector should also review the
historical records for a system. A good record system provides a history of the distribution
system, including normal and emergency operation, maintenance, and repair. The records
should include the standards used for construction, repair, and disinfection of new and
repaired components of the system. Documentation of the inspection, operation, and
maintenance of all valves and fire hydrants as well as leak detection and repairs completed
should be in the record system. Customer complaints and investigation reports with the
findings and actions should also be included in the record system.
Suggested assessment criteria for mapping and records include:
1. Are there maps of the distribution system? Are all major features
shown - line and valve location, size, and material; fire hydrant location;
dead end mains; pressure zone(s) boundary, (if any); ground and elevated
storage tank(s); and booster pump station(s)?
An accurate distribution system map enables systems to locate water mains
and appurtenances for repairs and for maintenance. A distribution system map
also permits the systems to accurately plan for improvements or expansions.
Lack of an accurate map may be an indication that a system does not perform
EPA Guidance Manual 3-81 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
maintenance on its distribution system. Particularly for large systems, the
inspector should check if system problem areas are identified on a system
map.
2. When were the maps last updated? How are changes or additions
reported and the map(s) updated?
The distribution map should be updated to reflect the most recent
modifications to the distribution system. Typically the date of the last revision
to a map is noted in the title block or map key.
I
i
3. Is there a record system? Does it include documentation of operation and
maintenance repairs, leak detection, and construction standards?
Maintenance and repair records for a water distribution system can provide an
indication of the portions of the distribution system which need to be
rehabilitated or modified. The records should include reports upon repairs
made to the distribution system as well as maintenance activities such as water
main flushing. The other reports which should be maintained are the results of
any leak detection and repair activities. A record of distribution system
standards should also be maintained so that they are readily available to
system personnel and contractors. These distribution system standards should
include standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the repair of broken mains,
as well as the standard details and specifications for pipelines and materials
used in the construction of new water mains. The lack of standard operating
procedures or construction specifications may indicate that repairs or
extensions to the distribution system are not being properly completed.
4. Are customer complaints and investigation reports kept? Is there an
apparent/common problem indicated by the customer complaints?
Customer complaints can provide an indication of where water quality may be
suffering. For example, a high number of stagnant water complaints on a dead
end main may indicate the need for increased flushing or looping the main
back into another part of the distribution system. Systems which maintain
records on complaints an analyze them by mapping or other means, are
proactively addressing potential sources of contamination in their distribution
systems.
3.3.2 Field Sampling/Measurements
Some of the most important data collected by the inspector to evaluate the distribution
system for sanitary risks are found in the field. The inspector should take measurements
and samples for analysis at representative locations throughout the system to determine that
an adequate disinfectant residual and pressure are being maintained.
The disinfectant residual should be measured at the points of lowest potential residual (e.g.,
areas of stagnant water) because these areas represent the greatest challenge for maintaining
April1999 3-82 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
a residual. When taking the sample, proper procedures should be followed to prevent
contamination which may influence the final results. If the disinfectant residual is less than
that required, then the cause for the low residual should be investigated and solved quickly.
The low residual could be caused by the disinfectant feed equipment not being properly
adjusted and set. Excessive chlorine demands in the system could also cause low residual
levels, which may indicate a more serious condition. Line breaks or leaks, backflow or
back-siphonage due to low pressures, and biofilm growth may be responsible for the excess
chlorine demands.
Of the conditions identified that could cause an excessive chlorine demand, biofilm growth
is the least serious from a public health standpoint, but biofilm growth is usually the most
difficult to treat. Besides compromising the disinfectant residual, the growth could also
jeopardize routine microbiological samples. Systems that use chloramines as the secondary
disinfectant to maintain the residual in the distribution system are susceptible to biofilm
growth under certain conditions, such as high temperature and high total organic carbon
(TOC) levels. The disinfectant may be consumed by the biofilm growth, leaving the water
unprotected.
When taking the disinfectant residual test, the pressure available at that point in the
distribution system should also be checked. The pressure in a distribution system varies due
to the changes in water demand, changes in pressure head (e.g., as a result of transmitting
water to consumers living on high hills or in deep valleys), and friction losses in the pipe.
As such, there are several pressure zones in a distribution system commonly referred to as
pressure planes. A pressure plane is the portion of a water distribution system served by the
same elevated storage tank or booster station. Additional pressure checks should be
performed at the highest and lowest points of a pressure plane or the distribution system.
The pressure at all points should be at least as high as the normal operating pressure
required by state rules (typically 35 psi). When the pressure is lower than 20 psi, that area
of the distribution system is vulnerable to backflow or back-siphonage of contaminated
water into the system. Excessive pressures (greater than 100 psi) may damage consumer
facilities and plumbing fixtures.
Suggested assessment criteria for data collection include:
1. What are the maximum and minimum residuals at the extremities of the
distribution system or pressure plane? What is the normal residual
range in the distribution system or pressure plane?
The lack of a disinfectant residual in distribution systems which are required
to maintain a residual can be an indication of excessive chlorine demand or
improperly set disinfectant feed rates. Excessive chlorine demand may be
caused by cross connections, backflow into the system, biofilms or line
breaks. Systems with surface water and ground water under the influence of
surface water are required by the SWTR to maintain a minimum disinfectant
residual concentration at the point of entry to the distribution system of
0.2 mg/L (EPA, 1991).
EPA Guidance Manual 3-83 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
2. What are the maximum and minimum pressures at the high and low
points in the distribution system or pressure plane? What is the normal
operating pressure in the distribution system or pressure plane?
A system must maintain positive pressure at all times to prevent contaminants
from being drawn into the water mains from outside sources. The lowest
pressure in the system should be approximately 35 psi (this depends upon
State Standards) and should almost never be lower than 20 psi. Excessively
high pressures can cause damage to the system and may result in high water
use. The inspector should check to see that the system operators check and
record the operating pressure at representative locations throughout the system
(CDOHS and EPA, 1996).
3. How often are pressure readings taken in the distribution system? Are
they representative of the system?
The frequency of pressure readings depends on the size and complexity of the
system. At a minimum, pressure should be checked in the distribution system
when chlorine residual concentrations are checked, and in response to
customer complaints about water pressure, hi addition to checking the
pressure in the area near where the customer complaints were received, the
pressure at the highest point in the distribution system or pressure plane
should also be checked. This high point is where you would expect to find the
lowest water pressure.
3.3.3 Distribution System Design and Maintenance
The integrity of the distribution system should be maintained at the highest level possible to
protect public health. Since almost all of the distribution system components are located
underground, they cannot be easily checked to verify that the system integrity is being
maintained. Therefore, standards and procedures for design, material selection, plumbing
code, operation, and maintenance should help maintain the integrity of the system.
3.3.3.1 Design/Material Standards
The major component of the distribution system is the underground pipe. As the largest
element, a design standard should be established that specifies the minimum requirements
for all water lines. To protect the integrity of the distribution system, these standards should
apply regardless of who pays for or installs the line(s). The design standard should specify
the following items:
Minimum pipe size (typically there should be no lines less than 2 inch);
Minimum line size criteria (either maximum water velocity or number of
connections served for a given line size);
Minimum line size where fire hydrants are to be provided (6 inch is the
minimum);
APril 1999 3-84 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Minimum line size for a specific requirement of the distribution system (e.g.,
transmission line should be at least 12 inches);
Design flow for each type of connection (residential, commercial, industrial,
etc.); ,
Design fire flow for specific areas of development (residential, commercial,
industrial, etc.);
Location of line relative to other utilities (sanitary sewer, in particular) and
right-of-way limits;
Location or spacing of valves;
Direction of valves (right or left opening);
o Type of valves to be used (vacuum/air release, butterfly, or gate valve);
Location or spacing of fire hydrants;
Type of fire hydrants to be used (dry or wet barrel);
Pipe material, including requirements for Internal as well as external
corrosion;
Appurtenances required for flushing of dead-end lines;
Minimum cover or depth of bury requirements;
Pressure testing to determine that there are no leaks in the line;
Construction or installation requirements; and
Location and construction of appurtenances in the floodplain.
Suggested assessment criteria for design/material standard include:
1. What kind of piping materials are in the distribution system?
The kind of pipe used may provide an indication of the condition of the pipe,
and the amount of corrosion which may be occurring in the pipe. Certain
types of pipes such as ductile iron, cast iron, steel, concrete and asbestos
cement are more susceptible to corrosion when exposed to aggressive soils or
water (CDOHS and EPA, 1996). Often times these types of pipes are lined
internally with mortar or bituminous materials and are sometimes protected
externally. Corrosion of pipes may lead to contamination of the drinking
water by leaks or by the corroded pipe material.
2. Does the water system have a construction standard for water mains? If
not, what are the criteria for sizing water line, selecting pipe materials,
installing the lines, etc.?
The use of a construction standard by water systems in the construction of
water mains ensures that the pipes and appurtenances in the distribution
system meet minimum acceptable specifications.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-85 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3. Is the standard or method adequate to protect the integrity of the
distribution system initially, as well as over time?
The construction standards will be protective of the water quality if they are
appropriate for the conditions (e.g., aggressiveness of the soil and water) for
the specific system. They should also ensure that the pipe and other
appurtenances are manufactured in accordance with accepted practices.
4. Are standards actually followed?
Construction standards are only effective if they are followed and enforced.
An inspector should ask how the system ensures compliance with the
standards. Pipes and appurtenances should be inspected by the system prior to
installation. The system should periodically inspect its installation contractors
or crews to ensure that they comply with the standards.
3.3.3.2 Maintenance Procedures
Even if the installation of a new waterline and its appurtenances are completed in
accordance with the design standards, the integrity of the distribution system could be
compromised if it is not properly maintained. Procedures and schedules should be created
for the maintenance of all parts of the distribution system. The maintenance procedures for
piping systems would include line flushing at a regular interval. For valves, verifying
location and regularly exercising the valve between the open and closed positions will help
maintain the valve, and keep it ready for an emergency.
Suggested assessment criteria for maintenance procedures include:
1. Does the water system have a maintenance procedure for all components
of the distribution system? If not, is anything being done to maintain the
system components? What?
A system should have a set of distribution system maintenance procedures to
ensure reliable service, to minimize emergency repairs, and to minimize the
potential introduction of contaminants. The distribution maintenance
procedures should address water main flushing, valve operation and fire
hydrant flushing as described below.
2. Does the system regularly flush the water mains within the distribution
system?
Flushing of water mains removes sediments or other contaminants which can
accumulate in pipes over time, and can lead to taste and odor problems. The
system should develop a schedule for flushing mains before taste and odor
problems develop. Dead end sections of the system may require more
frequent flushing than other portions of the system.
April 1999 3-86 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3. Does the system have a program for inspecting and exercising valves?
The system should have a program for inspecting and maintaining all valves.
Generally, the valves in the system should be operated at least once a year.
The system should have a program under which all valves are opened and
closed (or closed and opened). The system should maintain a record of each
opening and closing which includes the number of turns of the valve and the
date it was exercised. The valve should also be examined to note the
condition of the valve packing stem, stem, stem nut, and gearing (CDOHS and
EPA, 1996). Because large valves that have been in service for many years
may be more prone to breakage, it may be appropriate to exclude them from
the valve exercise program (AWWA, 1999). A system's valve exercising
program should follow AWWA-recommended practices.
4. Does the system regularly inspect and operate its fire hydrants?
The system's maintenance procedures should include a program to inspect and
operate fire hydrants at least two times each year. The hydrants should be
inspected for leaks, and dry barrel hydrants should be checked to ensure the
barrel drains after use. Nozzles and caps should be cleaned and lubricated.
The hydrant should be opened fully and flushed to waste (CDOHS and EPA,
1996).
3.3.3.3 Disinfection of New Water Lines
The distribution system integrity could be compromised if procedures are not followed to
protect it from contamination when installing new lines or repairing existing lines. The
primary barrier to contamination in the distribution system is the initial disinfection of new
or repaired water lines. Following an adopted procedure or standard ensures that the barrier
is created to protect the system. AWWA Standard C-651, which is a recognized, national
standard, specifies the means and methods for using the various forms of chlorine to
disinfect water lines.
Reducing the sources of contamination in the new or repaired pipe will enhance the
effectiveness of the disinfection and flushing process. The first step of the installation
procedure to reduce contamination sources is to keep the pipe as clean as possible before it
is installed and placed into service. Special care should be taken to prevent or minimize the
amount of deleterious material entering the new pipe.
Once the installation is complete, the new water line is filled with water and pressure tested
for leaks. The pressure should be at least one and a half times the maximum operating
pressure of the system. The time period for the test is dependent on the test pressure used.
The higher the test pressure the shorter the time period can be. Typically, the test pressure
is 150 to 200 psi, and the time period is at least 6 hours.
Flushing the line, once it is completely installed and tested, will help remove the dirt and
debris that was not cleaned out during installation. As a general rule, the velocity of the
water during this flushing period should be at least 5 feet per second to scour out the
EPA Guidance Manual 3-87 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
remaining dirt. In addition, the flushing period should last long enough to turn the water in
the pipe over two or three times.
A sufficient amount of the chosen disinfectant is added to the water line that results in a
disinfectant residual 50 to 100 times the normal operating residual. The high level of the
disinfectant inactivates any microbiological contamination that may have occurred in the
pipe. To ensure that the pipe is thoroughly disinfected, the high disinfectant residual water
should remain in the pipe for a designated holding period in accordance with the standards.
After the required holding period, the pipeline should be flushed to remove the water with
the high disinfectant residual, and any debris or harmful matter that might be left in the pipe.
A sample of the water is collected for a bacteriological test after the high disinfectant level
water is purged. One bacteriological sample should be collected for every 1,000 feet of new
pipe laid. The bacteriological test will show if any contamination sources remain in the
pipe. If the tests are negative, then the new water line can be placed into service. If the test
proves positive, then the waterline should be disinfected and flushed until the test is
negative. The procedures for the disinfection of a new water line should include a
contingency if the bacteriological tests are found to be positive for more than two or three
times.
Suggested assessment criteria for disinfection and flushing procedures for new vya'ter lines
include:
1. Does the water system have a procedure for disinfecting and flushing new
water lines? If not, what steps does the system follow when installing new
lines?
Disinfection of newly constructed water mains prior to placing it into service
prevents the introduction of microbial contaminants that may have
accumulated inside the pipe during the construction process. A system should
require disinfection and flushing of its newly constructed mains in accordance
with AWWA Standard 651 or its own equivalent standard.
2. Are there reports or test results which document the flushing and
disinfection of new water mains and the subsequent testing?
A system should maintain records of the disinfection and flushing of new
water mains. The records should include at a minimum the results of the
bacteriological testing done to ensure the new main was disinfected.
3.3.3.4 Disinfection of Repaired Water Lines
The disinfection and flushing procedures for new lines typically cannot be used when
repairing existing water lines, because of the need to minimize the disruption of service to
customers. Repairs can range from the easy, such as installing a repair clamp, to the very
difficult, such as replacing a joint of pipe in a very deep hole where there is a lot of erosion
due to the leaking water. Procedures should cover the extreme as well as all the various
situations in between.
April 1999 3-88 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Leaks or breaks that can be fixed with a repair clamp while the main is in use under normal
operating pressure pose little danger of contamination and require no disinfection of the
line. The repair clamp should be sprayed or swabbed with a chlorinated solution to clean it
before installation. Following these procedures should allow the line to be returned to
service as soon as the leak is repaired.
When there is a leak on an existing water line, the ground in the area will likely be wet. If
there is a sanitary sewer line in the area, the open area could be contaminated by the nearby
sewer. Workers should sprinkle liberal quantities of sodium or calcium hypochlorite around
the open area to reduce the danger of pollution from the sewer line. All fittings, pipe, or
clamps required for the repair should be sprayed or swabbed with a concentrated solution of
chlorine to thoroughly clean them. The distribution system should be thoroughly flushed to
remove any sediments that may have been disturbed.
Wherever possible, the section of the water line where the break or leak is located should be
isolated by closifig distribution valves and turning off atll service connections. After
repairing the line, the section should be flushed and disinfected in accordance with
acceptable procedures or standards, such as AWWA Standard C-651 or the Ten State
Standards (GLUMRB, 1997). The line should then be flushed until all discolored or
chlorinated water is eliminated. If possible, a bacteriological test should be taken to
determine that there is no contamination. For disinfection of main repairs, the use of
sodium or calcium hypochlorite may not always be appropriate. Since granular or tablet
forms of chlorine can be slow to dissolve and main repairs are done as quickly as possible,
careful use is necessary to avoid sending highly chlorinated water out to customers.
Suggested assessment criteria for disinfection and flushing procedures for repairing water
lines include:
1. Does the public water system have a procedure for disinfecting and
flushing repaired water lines? If not, what steps does the system follow
when repairing existing lines?
Disinfection and flushing of repaired water lines is more difficult than for
newly constructed mains but equally important. The system should have in
place standard procedures to minimize the contamination of line during the
repair. The procedures should include sprinkling calcium hypochlorite in the
area surrounding the main break, swabbing the fittings, pipe and clamps with
chlorine and flushing the section of the line to remove sediments.
2. Are there adequate repair materials on hand?
In addition to reviewing the procedures for disinfecting repaired mains, the
inspector should ensure the system has sufficient quantities of disinfectant
powder, repair sleeves, and other materials necessary to implement the
disinfection and repair procedures.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-89 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3. Are there reports or test results which document disinfection of repaired
water mains and any subsequent bacteriological testing?
A system should maintain records of the disinfection and flushing of repaired
water mains. If any bacterialogical testing was done, the system should have a
record of the results. Repairs are often done on an emergency basis and as
quickly as possible, so in some cases there may not be sufficient time for
water quality sampling.
3.3.3.5 Flushing Procedures
Flushing is normally used to clear up colored water or to remove sediment and biofilm in an
existing main and improve the disinfectant residual in dead-end lines. For most distribution
systems, it is only necessary to flush out sediment that may have been deposited in areas
where the water velocity is insufficient to keep it in suspension. Customer complaints about
water quality will provide an indication of the area(s) that need(s) flushing. A good
maintenance procedure would include flushing different areas of the distribution system on
a regular basis to reduce the potential for water quality degradation.
Suggested assessment criteria for flushing procedures include:
1. Does the public water system have a procedure for flushing a portion of
the distribution system on a regular basis?
The system should have procedures to flush water mains in the distribution
system regularly. Flushing of water mains removes sediments or other
contaminants which can accumulate in pipes over time, and can lead to taste
and odor problems. The system should develop a schedule for flushing mains
before taste and odor problems develop. Dead end sections of the system may
require more frequent flushing than other portions of the system. Flushing
procedures should ensure that a minimum flushing velocity of 2.5 feet per
second (CDOHS and EPA, 1996).
2. Are there reports or records which document the portions of the system
which have been flushed and the date of the flushing?
A system should maintain records of the flushing of water mains. The records
should include at a minimum the portion of the system flushed and the date of
the flushing event.
3.3.3.6 Cross-Connection Control
A piping cross-connection is defined as an actual or potential physical connection between a
water system and another water source of unknown or questionable quality. The physical
connection could allow water of a questionable quality to backflow into the water system
either as a result of backpressure or backsiphonage backflow. Backflow is the unwanted
reversal of water. Backpressure backflow refers to the flow of water toward a potable
supply when the contaminated water's pressure is greater than the potable water's pressure.
Backsiphonage backflow is a result of a vacuum in the distribution pipes of a potable water
April 1999 3-90 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
supply. If a negative pressure develops in the distribution system, water can back-siphon.
Therefore, if there is a cross-connection with a questionable source, a potential for
contamination of a water system exists. An example of a cross-connection in the
distribution system is shown in Figure 3-14. (UFTREEO Center, 1998)
In the past, the best means of eliminating cross-connections was constant surveillance and
inspection of new and existing buildings. Presently, most cities have adopted a plumbing
code that requires the builder of a new or remodeled facility or building to eliminate all
cross-connections. In addition, the code usually allows local building officials to inspect the
facility or building to look for cross-connections during construction, and annually
thereafter.
The preferred method for cross-connection control is an air-gap. An air-gap is a separation
between the pipe or fixture supplying the water and the receiving fixture (i.e., at the water
outlet). An air-gap should be twice the diameter of the water outlet pipe (UFTREEO
Center, 1998). Air gaps cannot be installed in pressurized systems. Other backflow
prevention devices are necessary when an air gap cannot be made, or to provide additional
protection.
CONNECTION
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-14. Example of a Distribution System Cross-Connection
EPA Guidance Manual 3-91
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
The most common backflow prevention devices for the control ofeross-connections are
vacuum breakers, double check valve assemblies, and reduced pressure principle (reduced
pressure zone) devices as shown in Figure 3-15. For outside fixtures, such as a hose bib (an
outdoor faucet to which a hose may be connected), the plumbing code may require that
vacuum breakers be installed. Each device has a specific application and protects against a
different type of contamination hazard.
Preuarc-type Vacuum Breaker Installation
Valve 2
Reduced Pressure Zone Backflow PreventerPrinciple of Operation
Test Cock
Normal Direction of Flow
Double Check Valve
Reversed Direction of Flow
: (Source: EPA, 1989a; EPA, 1989)
Figure 3-15. Common Devices for Cross-Connectioin Control
April 1999
3-92 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
A plumbing ordinance requiring the control of cross-connections is the first step of the
process to eliminate the potential contamination of the distribution system. The system
should have a program to inspect or locate actual or potential cross-connections. Backflow
prevention devices should be tested after installation and repair. Testing should be required
and performed by certified testers.
Additional information can be found in the Cross-Connection Control Manual (EPA, 1989)
and from other industry sources such as The Manual of Cross-Connection Control, ninth
edition from the University of Southern California (USC) Foundation and the AWWA M-
14 Manual, Recommended Practice for Backflow.
Suggested assessment criteria for cross-connection control include:
1. Does the water system have a formal program to address cross-
connections? If not, what steps does the system take to eliminate cross-
connections?
A system should have enforceable provisions in the plumbing or building
ordinance which require the builder of a new or remodeled facility to install
backflow prevention devices on all cross connections. The system should set
minimum standards for backflow prevention devices and should actively work
to inform plumbers and mechanical contractors of its cross connection control
policies.
2. Is there an inspection of new construction as well as follow-up
inspections? How often do follow-up inspections occur? Is there a log or
documentation of these inspections?
There system should ensure that inspections are conducted of all new
construction or remodeling projects within its service area to ensure that all
potential cross connections are eliminated by the installation of a backflow
prevention device.
3. Is there a requirement for the annual testing of the installed backflow
prevention devices? What documentation is available? What
qualifications must a tester have? How many certified testers of cross-
connection devices are available?
The inspector should check to see if the system inspects backflow prevention
devices or requires its customers to inspect and maintain backflow prevention
devices.
3.3.3.7 Elimination of Water Loss
Water systems are currently able to, or should be able to, meter all sources and uses of
treated water. The metering of all sources and end users allows the system to account for
the water from production to the end user. This accounting of water provides valuable
information, such as per capita water use, and determination of unaccounted water or water
losses.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-93 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
When a system compares the water pumped into the distribution system from its source(s)
to the water billed to customers, typically the amount billed is less than that pumped. The
difference is the water loss. There are numerous reasons for loss of water in the distribution
system. The two biggest causes of water loss are meter inaccuracy and leaks in the
distribution system. Other sources of losses normally not accounted for by metering is the
water used for fire protection and construction.
Generally, if the water loss for a system is 10 percent or less, then that system is considered
a "tight system," meaning that there are very few sources of water loss that the system can
identify. If the water loss for a system is greater than 10 percent, then a program should be
instituted to eliminate the "excessive loss" of water. A systematic program should be
followed to eliminate the source(s) that are easiest to identify and the least costly to correct.
Evaluation of Service Meters
Normally, the first step of a program to reduce water losses should start by checking the
accuracy of the meters at the source(s) and end user or customer. Checking these meters
will require the use of another calibrated meter with known accuracy, so a comparison can
be made between the two meters.
The main meter at the source(s) should be checked and recalibrated at least annually. The
size of the meter and the amount of water used by a specific customer annually dictates how
often these meters should be checked. Large meters (the definition of large is system
specific) should be checked at least annually, while individual residential meters should be
checked every five to seven years. Typically, a system will establish a program to replace
all residential meters over the five to seven year period suggested, because it is easier to
rebuild these meters in a shop than to recalibrate them in the field.
As the process of recalibrating meters proceeds, the new data obtained about meter accuracy
should be compared to the original water loss data. If recalibrating the meters reduces water
losses sufficiently to designate the distribution system as tight, then the public water system
does not need to continue with its program to reduce water losses. However, all systems
should adopt a goal to continually reduce unaccounted for water.
Detection of Leaks
If the main meter(s) have been checked and recalibrated, but water losses are still too high,
then the system should begin looking for leaks in the distribution system. The first step of a
leak detection procedure should be comparing the water usage for designated areas of the
distribution system. These areas should be defined to allow for the easy determination of
per capita or per connection water usage. If one area has a higher usage than normal and
there is no reasonable explanation for the difference, then this area would be one that should
be checked for leaks.
All customers in the area should be checked to determine that there are no unmetered water
users that may cause the higher than expected water usage. If all customers are metered,
then the distribution system should be checked for leaks. It is expected that the water from
a leaking pipe will rise to the surface providing an easy means of locating the leak. Because
Aprii 1999 3-94 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
this type of leak is easily located and corrected, it is not counted in the leaks that cause a
significant water loss.
The leaks that account for most of the water loss in a distribution system are the ones that
are not easily located by rising to the surface. Different means or methods are needed to
locate these types of leaks. With the technology available, there are numerous methods to
detect leaking pipes in the ground. The most commonly used technology to locate these
leaks is a hydrophone. With this instrument, leaks can be located by the sound of water
rushing out of the pipe. Once located, the leaks can be fixed as they are found.
Suggested assessment criteria for the elimination of water losses in the distribution system
include:
1. Is all source water metered at the point of entry into the distribution
system? Are all customers metered? How often are the meters checked
and recalibrated, if necessary?
The system should have meters at all points at which water is supposed to
enter and exit the distribution system. This includes all water supplies and all
customers. These meters should be read by the system on a regular basis. The
system should also check and calibrate meters to ensure the data collected is
accurate.
2. Is the water loss for the system calculated?
The system should take the water meter readings and calculate the average
volume of water pumped into the distribution system by the water sources and
the average volume of water withdrawn from the distribution system. The
difference between these two average values is the water loss within the
distribution system.
3. Is the water loss for the system greater or less than 10 percent? If greater
than 10 percent, what is the system doing to reduce its water losses?
There will always be a certain amount of water loss within a system due to the
un-metered withdrawal of water from the system for activities such as water
main flushing, fire hydrant testing and fire fighting activities. However,
experience with well operated systems indicates that these losses should not
exceed 10 percent of the total amount of water supplied to the system.
Systems with greater than 10 percent loss should undertake a leak detection
and repair program.
3.3.4 Priority Criteria
The following criteria related to the distribution systems element are considered high
priority based on their potential for impacting public health:
EPA Guidance Manual 3-95 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Field Sampling/Measurements - Adequate disinfection residuals and water
pressures in the distribution system are essential for preventing contamination
of finished water as it is delivered to consumers (Section 3.3.2);
Disinfection of Repaired Water Lines - If the water distribution system is
not properly cleaned and disinfected, system personnel cannot prevent the
contamination from spreading to the consumer (Section 3.3.3.4).
Disinfection of New Water Lines - If the water distribution system is not
properly cleaned and disinfected, system personnel cannot prevent the
contamination from spreading to the consumer (Section 3.3.3.3).
Cross-Connection Control - Connections between contaminated and potable
water sources, if not controlled, can lead to contamination of entire water
system (Section 3.3.3.6).
Elimination of Water Loss - Excessive leakage can lower water pressure in
the distribution system and increase the opportunity for contamination
(Section 3.3.3.7).
Distribution Maps and Records - Modifications to the distribution system
can impact water quality and should be identified clearly on distribution
system maps (Section 3.3.1).
3.4 Finished Water Storage
i
Prior to the field inspection, the inspector should obtain the information available on the
storage facilities for the subject water system from the state's files or the last sanitary
survey. The information on storage facilities should include the type of storage (ground,
elevated, or hydropneumatic) included in the system, and the volume and location of each
storage tank.
Finished or treated water storage facilities provide the following benefits to the operation of
a distribution system:
Allow treatment facilities to operate at or near uniform rates, even though the
demands of the system may greatly fluctuate;
Supply the peak and emergency needs of the system;
Maintain an adequate pressure in the system, when designed for that purpose;
Provide extended contact or detention time for disinfection;
Allow for the sedimentation of settleable particles that may have passed
through the treatment facility; and
Serve as reservoirs for the blending and mixing of water from different
sources that may have varying water qualities.
The objectives of surveying the finished water storage facilities are to:
April 1999 3-96 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Review the design and major components of storage to determine reliability,
adequacy, quantity, and vulnerability;
Evaluate the operation and maintenance and safety practices to determine that
storage facilities are reliable; and
Recognize any sanitary risks attributable to storage facilities (UFTREEO
Center, 1998).
To accomplish these objectives, the inspector needs to review the information available
from state files for the system's finished water storage facilities. In the field, the inspector
should perform an inspection to verify the information and to determine that the finished
water storage facilities are adequate and in acceptable condition. To verify some of the
storage tank information and adequately assess facility conditions, the inspector may need to
climb storage tanks as part of the inspection (particularly if the water system uses elevated
tanks and standpipes). Since this can pose safety hazards (e.g., slipping, wasps), inspectors
who are expected to climb storage tanks as part of the tank inspection should receive written
inspection procedures and training in appropriate safety procedures (e.g., use of safety belts
and cables). In some cases, the results of a recent inspection done by a qualified tank
contractor may provide the inspector with any necessary information without climbing the
tank. Some states do not allow their staff to climb water towers, so inspectors may need to
rely on information from tank contractor inspections, ground level observations, and
conversation with water system operators to verify file information and assess the adequacy
and condition of storage facilities. .
3.4.1 Type of Storage
The inspector should determine the types of storage facilities in the system. Storage
facilities are designed to provide for the (1) storage of treated water (ground storage) that
can be pumped into the distribution system or (2) maintenance of an adequate service
pressure (elevated, hydropneumatic, or ground storage that is built at a location to act as
elevated storage). Storage facilities may be closed tanks or reservoirs.
The first treated water storage tank in a water system is typically the clearwell, located at the
treatment plant. The clearwell provides both a treated water reserve for delivery to the
distribution system and additional detention time for more effective disinfection. These
tanks are sometimes located partially or completely below grade to allow gravity flow from
the filters to the clearwell. While this approach reduces operational costs by avoiding
additipnal pumping facilities, those portions of the tank that are below grade cannot be
easily inspected and the tank may be vulnerable to seepage from shallow ground water.
Depending on the complexity and size of the distribution system, the next storage tank will
probably be designed to provide pressure maintenance for the distribution system. If the
system serves a small number of customers, a pressurized tank called a hydropneumatic
tank (controlled by both water and air pressures) will most likely be used to maintain the
system pressure, because it is cheaper to build than an elevated tank. For larger systems, an
elevated tank, which is a tank constructed on structural supports, would be used to maintain
an adequate pressure as long as the height is adequate. Different sections of the distribution
EPA Guidance Manual 3-97 ApriM999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
system are maintained at different pressures (commonly referred to as pressure planes),
depending on the water demand and pressure head requirements. For the largest systems, or
a system with significant topographical variation such that pressure planes are required, a
ground storage tank could be used to provide the system pressure maintenance for a lower
area or pressure plane and act as storage for an upper plane. Figures 3-16 and 3-17 depict
the various types of storage facilities and pressure maintenance facilities, commonly used in
a water system.
i ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO Center, 1988; Used with permission)
Figure 3-16. Types of Storage Facilities
April 1999
3-98 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO Center, 1988; Used with permission)
Figure 3-17. Typical Hydropneumatic Tank Installation
Suggested assessment criteria for the type of storage facilities include:
1. Are the storage facilities covered or otherwise protected?
The IESWTR prohibits the development of new uncovered finished water
reservoirs, so any storage facilities constructed after IESWTR promulgation
must be covered. EPA recommends that any uncovered finished water storage
facilities in existence at the time of IESWTR promulgation either be covered
or eliminated from use. Covers prevent airborne contamination from insects,
birds, and mammals, and also prevent algal contamination. Covers must be
watertight to prevent contamination from entering. Where covering or
eliminating uncovered reservoirs is not possible, there are measures that a
water system should take to prevent contamination. Development and
implementation of these measures is covered in EPA's Uncovered Finished
Water Reservoirs Guidance Manual (EPA, 1999d).
2. Where do the overflow pipes end? Do they discharge to a splash pad? Are
they equipped with hinged and weighted flaps?
Overflows should not be discharged to the ground or to any storm or sewer
line. The overflow line should drain 12 to 24 inches above the ground to an
open basin or splash pad. A splash pad prevents erosion of the area below the
line and around the tank supports or foundation. Overflow pipes should be
equipped with a hinged and weighted flap to prevent the entrance of small
mammals, birds, insects, and contaminants.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-99
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3. Do the air and roof vents have a screen? Are they protected from rain?
i
A fine mesh screen prevents the entrance of birds, insects, and small debris into
the tank. However, a fine screen must be designed to fail in the event of
clogging, to prevent the tank from imploding in the event the clogged screen
causes a vacuum effect. Vents should be covered or face downward to protect
the tank from rain.
3.4.2 Location of Storage
The inspector should determine the location of storage facilities to assess their potential to
compromise the integrity of the delivery system. The surrounding area needs to be
inspected for sources of potential contamination and sources that may cause physical
damage to the tanks. The location and size of the storage tanks can be obtained from the
distribution system maps discussed previously. In addition, the tank location should be
shown on a United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographical quadrangle map so that
coordinates can be determined and placed in the state's Geographic Information System
(GB) to be used for identifying potential sanitary hazards that might be located nearby.
If the state does not have a GIS, the inspector should use the topographical map during the
site visit to assess the potential impacts of nearby sanitary hazards. The inspector should
discuss the characteristics of the surrounding area with the operator to find out if there have
been any changes since the last survey that may pose a sanitary hazard or if there are any
questions or concerns about the site itself. The location of the tank on the site should be
assessed relative to trees and buildings that could fall on the tank and cause damage. In
addition, it is important to assess the general maintenance of the site (e.g., grass mowed and
free of trash and debris).
Suggested assessment criteria for the location of storage facilities include:
1. Are there any potential sanitary hazards in the area? If so, what and
where are the hazards? Are the hazards close enough to be of concern to
the storage facilities?
These hazards include sewage treatment facilities, septic tanks, and absorption
systems, sanitary landfills, fuel tanks, industrial pollutant discharges, livestock,
surface runoff and poor drainage. Identification of the hazards in relation to the
location of the storage tanks or reservoir is important in determining the
potential threat to public health. These hazards could contribute to pollutant
seepage into the storage tank. Surface runoff and underground drainage should
be away from the structure.
2. Are there any physical features on or around the site that could damage
the tank?
Trees or other natural features around the tank should not be situated near
enough to damage the tank if they fall or are moved by forces of nature.
April 1999 3-100 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3. Is the site well maintained?
A well-maintained site, with proper grading to facilitate drainage and free of
debris and other potential contaminants, prevents damage to the tank.
3.4.3 Capacity of Storage Tanks
Storage tank capacities should be adequate to meet the water demands of the system, should
meet applicable state requirements and industry standards, and be consistent with accepted
engineering practice. For example, the total capacity of both ground and elevated storage
tanks could be based on a recommended level of 200 gallons per connection. For elevated
storage tanks alone, a recommended capacity of 100 gallons per connection is often used.
For systems using hydropneumatic tanks instead of elevated tanks, recommended capacities
are 20 gallons per connection with ground storage and 50 gallons per connection without
ground storage. Capacities for pumps and pumping equipment associated with storage
tanks are discussed in Section 3.5.
Suggested assessment criteria for the capacity of storage tanks include:
1. Is the storage capacity adequate?
It is important to determine whether the type of storage facilities provided are
sufficient for the distribution system. If a large system uses a hydropneumatic
tank, for example, the storage may not be sufficient for the pressure head
requirements of the distribution system. Water facilities should have at least
one day of reserve capacity to allow for power outages and fire control.
Facilities without backup storage may lose system pressure in the event of a
power surge.
2. In case of elevated storage tanks, are tanks properly sized and elevated to
assure adequate pressures throughout the distribution system?
The water tank should be properly sized and elevated to produce pressures of
at least 35 psi at the lowest operating level of the tank. Operating pressures in
the distribution system should not be allowed to exceed 100 psi.
3.4.4 Design of Storage Tanks
The inspector should examine the design criteria of the storage tanks to assess their
potential to meet the water demands of the distribution system and retain structural integrity.
Design and construction standards need to be appropriate for the intended use of a storage
tank.
3.4.4.1 Storage Tank Components
The series of standards used to design tanks with all the necessary components identified is
the AWWA D-100 series. The construction material for the tank should also be examined
for structural integrity as well as for any sanitary hazards. For example, opportunistic
pathogens, such as Klebsiella can grow to high levels in wooden storage tanks. Figure 3-18
EPA Guidance Manual 3-101 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
provides a schematic of the various components of a storage tank. The following is a listing
of the minimum criteria for a treated water storage tank, whether it is a ground or elevated
storage tank:
! '
i
Roof sloped to prevent standing water;
No leakage through the roof;
A lockable access hatch on the roof, with a raised curb;
Vent on the roof with openings that face downward, with a fine corrosion
resistant screen;
Water level measurement device;
i , , -
Overflow that terminates above ground with a hinged and weighted flap on the
end;
Inlet and outlet piping located to ensure proper circulation of water;
Drain to remove accumulated silt from the bottom of the tank;
Access openings on the side (at least 2);
Access ladder with proper safety equipment;
Valves on inlet and outlet for isolation;
Bypass around the tank for maintenance;
Control system to maintain water level in tank; and
Alarm system for high/low water levels.
Suggested assessment criteria for the minimum design components for storage tanks
include:
1. Does the tank have all the minimum components listed above? Are these
components in good condition?
1 ' ' :
The inspection items listed above are important for maintaining the structural integrity of
the tank, thereby minimizing contamination of the water.
April 1999 3-102 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
DRAIN
(FLUSH WITH FLOOR)
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-18. Components of a Storage Tank
3.4.4.2 Hydropneumatic Tank Components
Hydropneumatic tanks are specially designed storage tanks which provide pressure
maintenance for the system. Hydropneumatic tanks are not storage tanks, technically
speaking, but are pressure maintenance facilities. It is important that an auxiliary power
source such as a backup generator of separate power supply be provided to ensure that the
hydropneumatic tank and associated service pumps continue to operate in the event that the
primary power source fails. The minimum design components for this type of tank are
significantly different than a ground or elevated storage tank. Figure 3-17 provides a typical
hydropneumatic tank installation. Hydropneumatic tank systems can use any of several
types of pressure storage tanks. Figure 3-19 depicts the various types of pressure tanks
available. While hydropneumatic tanks can be either horizontal or vertical, most that are
used in public water systems are horizontal.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-103
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO, 1998; Used with permission)
\
Figure 3-19. Types of Pressure tanks
For a hydropneumatic or pressure tank, the design criteria should include the following:
Tank is located completely above ground
Tank meets ASME standards with a ASME name plate attached
Access port for periodic inspections
Pressure relief device with a pressure gauge
Control system to maintain proper air/water ratio
Air injection lines equipped with filters to remove contaminants from the air
line
i
Sight glass to determine water level for proper air/water ratio
Slow closing valves and time delay pump controls to prevent water hammer.
Suggested assessment criteria for the minimum design components for hydropneumatic
tanks include:
1. Does the tank have all the minimum components as required? Are these
components hi good condition? Is the tank capacity adequate?
The inspection items listed above are important for maintaining the structural
integrity of the tank, thereby minimizing contamination of the water.
3.4.5 Painting of Storage Tanks
The inspector should assess the painting of storage tanks to determine the potential for lead
to enter the water. Historically, the best type of coating for a tank included lead, because it
adhered very well to the metal substrate forming a bond that was hard to break. In addition,
April 1999
3-104 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
coal tar coatings were applied to the inside of many older elevated storage tanks. Currently,
lead may not be used in any paint system that comes in contact with potable water. The
paint used on storage tanks must be approved for potable water use and must be certified to
conform with ANSFNSF Standard 61 and applied by an accredited organization. Paint
coating systems are important for assuring that the interior and exterior surfaces of the tank,
as well as the tank appurtenances, are adequately protected from corrosion and structural
damage.
Suggested assessment criteria for the painting of storage tanks include:
1. When was the last time the tank was repainted? What type of paint was
used? Was it a lead-based paint? Was the paint in conformance with
ANSI/NSF Standard 61 for potable waiter use?
Paint used for surfaces in contact with potable water should be approved under
ANSI/NSF standards. Lead-based paints are prohibited for use with potable
water and other unauthorized paints or coatings can create water quality
problems and cause organic or inorganic contamination of the stored water that
might cause adverse health effects (EPA, 1989a).
2. Is the paint in good condition?
Chipping, cracking, or fading of the paint coating on the tank surfaces and
appurtenances indicates the potential for contamination, corrosion, and
structural damage.
3.4.6 Cleaning and Maintenance of Tanks
The inspector should assess the frequency of general cleaning and inspection of the tanks.
On a daily basis, the operator should be checking the general condition and operating level
of the tank. On a weekly basis, the sanitary and structural condition of the basic tank
components should be checked in more detail. (In the case of elevated storage tanks, some
inspection activities may have to be done as part of the annual inspection.) On an annual
basis, the entire tank and all appurtenances should be thoroughly inspected by qualified
personnel and the results documented in a written report.
Suggested assessment criteria for the cleaning and maintenance of tanks include:
1. Does the tank appear structurally sound?
The inspector should look for signs of cracks, leaks, rust, corrosion, failure in
steel supports, and other indicators that the tank has not been properly
maintained and may not be structurally sound.
2. How often are inspection and cleaning performed? How often does the
water system have its storage tanks inspected by a qualified contractor?
The operator should inspect tanks on a daily basis. As noted above, basic tank
components should be checked in more detail each week, and the entire tank
EPA Guidance Manual 3-105 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water.Systems-Surface Water smd GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
and appurtenances checked annually. In addition to general inspections, a
thorough structural and coating inspection should be done by qualified
personnel at least every five years (UFTREEO Center, 1998).
3. How is the water supply continued when the storage tank is out of service
for maintenance?
The inspector should ensure that the system has a plan for maintaining the
distribution system pressure when the tank needs to be removed for
maintenance.
4. When interior maintenance has been performed, are storage tanks
disinfected before being used?
i
Storage tanks should be disinfected to ensure water quality before being
returned to service.
3.4.7 Site Security
i
The inspector should assess the site security of the water system to determine the potential
for intruder access. Any potable water storage tank should be enclosed by an intruder-
resistant fence with lockable access gates. In addition, all access hatches should be locked.
To be intruder-resistant, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
recommends that the fence around the storage tank be at least six feet tall with three strands
of barbed wire extending outward at a 45" angle, and be constructed of wood, masonry,
concrete, or metal.
Suggested assessment criteria for site security include:
1. Is the fence surrounding the tank site intruder-resistant?
Site security should be part of the operational monitoring program of the plant.
The inspector should determine if the tank or plant fence is in good condition,
specifically that the fence is structurally sound and not sagging. There should
not be any gaps between the ground and the bottom of the fence and the fence
gates should be securely locked when the plant is not attended. The inspector
should note any evidence of unauthorized access and vandalism, which tend to
be a more common problem at elevated storage tank sites.
2. Are access hatches locked?
Hatches should have a watertight cover and be locked with a sturdy device that
cannot be easily clipped or opened.
3.4.8 Priority Criteria
The following criteria of the finished water storage element are considered high priority
based on their potential for impacting public health:
April 1999 3-106 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Capacity of Storage Tanks - The storage facilities should be adequately
sized to meet minimum acceptable capacity requirements and the maximum
daily demand of the system (Section 3.4.3).
Design of Storage Tanks - The proper components should be provided for
storage facilities to allow for proper operation (Section 3.4.4).
Cleaning and Maintenance of Storage Tanks - Storage tanks should be
maintained for storage facilities to allow for proper operation (Section 3.4.6).
Site Security - The facilities should be protected from vandalism to protect
public health (Section 3.4.7).
3.5 Pumps/Pump Facilities and Controls
In a water system, there are many applications that require a pump(s) to move a fluid (water,
chemical, etc.) from one point to another. In addition to transporting water through the
system, pump applications include chemical feed systems, sludge removal, air compression
and sampling (UFTREEO Center, 1998). Normally, there are several types of pumps that
could be used for an application. However, there are usually only one or two types of
pumps that will be the best fit for the intended use. In this section, the prime movers of
water will be discussed. There are numerous applications for other types of pumps in other
sections of this document.
The objectives of surveying the pumps/pump facilities and controls are to:
Review the design, uses, and major components of water supply pumps;
Evaluate the operation and maintenance as well as safety practices to
determine that water supply pumping facilities are reliable; and
Recognize any sanitary risks attributable to water supply pumping facilities
(UFTREEO Center, 1998).
3.5.1 Types of Pumps
Before going into the field, the inspector should obtain the information available on all the
pumping facilities for the water system from the state's files, including the last sanitary
survey. The information on pumping facilities should include the type, location, age and
installation date, and design conditions of the system's pump(s), pumping facilities, and
controls.
In addition, the inspector should review the regulatory requirements for pumps, if any, to
assist in the evaluation of the pumping facilities. The regulatory requirements could
include, but not necessarily be limited to, state rules and regulations, ANSI/NSF Standards
60 and 61, as well as appropriate guidance manuals.
Upon arriving at the facility, the inspector should review the available data on pumps with
system personnel to determine if the information is current. If there have been any changes,
EPA Guidance Manual 3-107 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
the inspector should obtain an updated listing of the pumps used within the system, so that
they may be all inspected during the survey. For most systems, the inspector will either
have a list of pumps or pump data from a previous sanitary survey or have a list supplied by
the system operator. If a system does not have a pump listing, the inspector should work
with the system operator to develop a new listing so that all pumps may be inspected during
the survey.
There are three types of pumps used in a water treatment plant facility. They are: positive
displacement, centrifugal, and ejector.
Positive displacement pumps deliver water at a constant rate regardless of the pressure it
must overcome (USEPA 1991a). Typical positive displacement pumps that can be found in
a treatment plant are:
Helical or Spiral Rotor Pump - This pump consists of a shaft with a spiral
surface which rotates in a rubber sleeve. Water is trapped between the shaft
and the sleeve and is forced to the upper end of the sleeve as the shaft turns.
Regenerative Turbine Pump - This pump contains an impeller or a rotating
wheel with fins or little buckets on its outer edge. The rotating wheel is inside
a stationary enclosure (cast). As the wheel rotates at a high speed, it forces
water through the pump cast (also called raceway) at a pressure that is several
times that which can be generated by centrifugal mechanisms (USEPA,
1991a).
Reciprocating Pump - This pump consists of a piston moving back and forth
in a cylinder. As the cylinder is driven back and water is driven into the
cylinder, the intake valve closes and forces the water through the check valve.
As the cylinder is driven forward, the water is discharged through a discharge
pipe while the check valve is closed (USEPA, 199la).
Positive Displacement Pump - This pump is typically used for online
chemical application (i.e., application of chemicals into pressurized water
line).
Centrifugal pumps are used when an even flow rate is needed to meet the demands placed
on it. The operating curve for a centrifugal pump shows that the pumping rate varies with
the discharge pressure of the water at discharge from the pump (i.e., as the discharge
pressure increases, the rate of pumping decreases).
With a rotating impeller (i.e., rotor blade) driven by a power source, such as a motor, a
centrifugal pump increases the velocity of the water and discharges it into the pump casing.
In the pump casing, the velocity of the water is converted to pressure. Typically, a
centrifugal pump has only one impeller, and it is called a single-stage pump. If more
pressure is needed, multiple impellers or multi-stages are used to generate the necessary
discharge pressure at the pump. Multiple impellers only increase the discharge pressure, not
the pumping rate .(UFTREEO Center, 1998).
April 1999 3-108 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
A centrifugal pump cannot create a negative pressure at the suction inlet to pull water into
the pump, like a self-priming pump. Therefore, the pressure at the impeller must be
positive (i.e., water level is higher than the impeller) in order for the pump to operate.
There are four types of centrifugal pumps that are normally used in a water system for the
niany pumping applications: submersible, vertical (lineshaft) turbine, split case, and end
suction (close coupled). Figure 3-20 shows some of the types as well as the basic
components of a centrifugal pump. The most common application of each pump is
provided in Table 3-4.
The four types of centrifugal pumps are described below:
Vertical Turbine Pump - This is a multistage centrifugal pump. The
pumping unit must be located below the drawdown level of the water source.
A vertical shaft connects the pumping assembly to a drive mechanism located
above the pumping assembly. The discharge casing, pump housing, and inlet
screen are suspended from the pump base at ground surface.
Submersible Pump - This is a centrifugal pump driven by a closely coupled
electric motor constructed for underwater operation as a single unit.
End Suction and Split Case Pumps - These are single-stage pumps. The
end suction pump is a vertically split case pump, while the split case pump is
horizontally split. The advantage of the split case pump over the end suction
pump is that it is easier to open and repair. The advantage of the end suction
pump is its lower cost.
Ejector Pump - This is a type of vacuum pump. In this pump, gas is
removed from a container (e.g., chlorine cylinder) by passing water at a high
velocity through a connecting chamber. The high-velocity water creates a
vacuum that draws the chlorine into the water stream. This type of a pump is
similar to a jet pump; however, in a jet pump, gas (air in water applications)
forces water through a venturi into an area of reduced pressure where a
centrifugal pump sucks the water and jets it into the distribution system
(USEPA, 1991a).
EPA Guidance Manual 3-109 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Horizontal - Close Coupled
Horizontal - Split Case
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-20. Common Centrifugal Pump Types and Components
April 1999
3-110 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Table 3-4. Applications for Centrifugal Pumps
Application
Well Pump
Raw Water Pump
Backwash Pump
Transfer Pump
Finished Water Pump
Booster Pump
Sludge Pump
Backwash Recycle Pump
ICypeofPump ,
Submersible or vertical turbine
Submersible or vertical turbine
Vertical turbine or split case
Vertical turbine, end suction, or split case
Vertical turbine, end suction, or split case
Split case or end suction
End suction
End suction
Suggested assessment criteria for the types of pumps include:
1. What type of pumps are provided for the system?
The inspector should check the types of pumps used by the water system to
ensure they are appropriate for the intended use. Typically, the pump
selection is reviewed by the primacy agency at the time of installation;
however, the inspector should confirm that the pump has not been replaced
with another type of pump without approval from the primacy agency.
2. Does the information in the files reflect the actual type, number, and
capacity of pumps in the system? If not, is there a potential problem?
If the inspector finds that the actual type, number or capacity of the pumps is
different from the design which was approved by the primacy agency, then the
inspector should note the actual configuration for the sanitary survey report.
The operators should be questioned as to why and when the modification to
the pumps took place, and advised to submit the revised plan to the primacy
agency for their review, if necessary.
3.5.2 Capacity of Pumps
The pump capacity or size required is typically dependent on the application or purpose, as
well as vulnerability of the pump(s). Typically, state rules will specify the sizing criteria for
each critical application. For example, Table 3-5 provides the sizing criteria for different
pump applications used by the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
(TNRCC) for many water systems. These criteria are in general agreement with standard
engineering practice.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-111
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Table 3-5. Pump Sizing Criteria
Application
Raw Water Pump
Backwash Pump
Transfer Pump
Finished Water Pump
Booster Pump
Sizing Criteria
0.6 gpm per connection with the largest pump out of service
Dependent on filter size
0.6 gpm per connection with the largest pump out of service
Two or more pumps that have a capacity of 2.0 gpm per connection, or
that have a total capacity of at least 1,000 gpm and the ability to meet peak
hourly demands with the largest pump out of service, whichever is less
Two or more pumps that have a capacity of 2.0 gpm per connection, or
that have a total capacity of at least 1 ,000 gpm and the ability to meet peak
hourly demands with the largest pump out of service, whichever is less
(Source: TNRCC, 1997)
When designing or checking a pumping facility, the maintenance (preventative or
emergency) of the pumps should be anticipated. For instance, a system has two raw water
pumps, and each is sized to pump one-half the capacity of the water treatment facility. If
one pump has to be taken out of service for repairs, then the supply for this system is
reduced substantially. During the summer, when the peak demand typically occurs, this
system may not be able to meet that demand for a time, because of the repairs to the pump.
During this time, the system may experience pressure problems in the distribution system
due to an inadequate supply, which could lead to greater problems, such as backsiphonage.
The number of pumps for any application is an important consideration that cannot be
overlooked. In general, there should be at least two pumps (usually more) for any critical
pumping application to allow for maintenance.
With two or more pumps, how should the capacity of a pump or pumping facility be
determined? The firm capacity of any pumping facility should be determined with the
largest pump out of service to ensure that adequate capacity is available to meet all expected
demand/supply conditions. The firm capacity of a pumping facility is the capacity that is
available at any time assuming any one pump is out of service for maintenance or repairs.
The total capacity of a pumping facility, then is the sum of the capacities of all associated
pumps and is larger than firm capacity.
Suggested assessment criteria for the capacity of pumps include:
1. What are the capacities of the pumps? How many pumps are located at
each facility?
The capacity of a pump is sometimes listed on the motor plate along with the
horsepower, motor speed and other pertinent information. The inspector
should note the capacity or other information provided on each pump and
compare this information to the approved design for the pump station. The
actual capacity of the pump may be less than the rated capacity as a result of
wear or an increase in the operating head. Actual pump capacity can be
April 1999
3-112 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
measured if an accurate flow metering device is installed on the pump
discharge line.
2. What is the firm capacity and the total capacity of each pumping facility?
The inspector should confirm that the firm capacity of the pumping facility, or
the capacity of the facility with its largest pump out of service is consistent
with the minunum capacity approved by the primacy agency.
3. Are the pumps compliant with state rules?
If the inspector finds that the actual type, number or capacity of the pumps is
different from the design which was approved by the primacy agency, then the
inspector should note the actual configuration for the sanitary survey report.
The operators should be questioned as to why and when the modification to
the pumps took place, and advised to submit the revised plan to the primacy
agency for their review, if necessary.
3.5.3 Condition of Pumps
In addition to confirming that the pump facility complies with the approved design, the
inspector should also evaluate the condition of each of the pumps in the facility to ensure
that it is operating as designed. It is extremely important that all pumps in a system be
operational to ensure the continued supply of drinking water to the customers. The pumps
should not be vibrating excessively, making loud noise, be overheating or creating odors.
Any of these may be a sign that the pump requires repairs or maintenance.
The inspector should review available maintenance records for the pumps. The pumps
should be regularly lubricated and maintained in accordance with the manufacturers
recommendations. Any lubricants which may contact the water should be ANSI/NSF
approved.
The inspector should confirm that each pump has working check valves, and pressure
gauges on the discharge side of the pump. There should also be working isolation valves on
the intake and discharge sides of the pump to permit taking the pump out of service for
repairs or maintenance (UFTREEO Center, 1998).
Suggested assessment criteria for the condition of pumps include:
1. Are all the pumps operational? If not then when does the system intend
to repair or replace the pump?
A system should maintain the capacity to provide drinking water to its
customers and should have the reserve capacity available for pump
malfunctions. Systems should take steps necessary to repair or replace pumps
which are not operational as quickly as possible.
2. Are the pumps vibrating excessively, overheated, making excessive noise,
or producing an odor?
EPA Guidance Manual 3^113\ APril 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Inspectors should briefly examine each pump to see if there are obvious signs
of the need for maintenance or repair. Appropriate safety precautions should
be taken around open, spinning shafts.
i
3. Are pumps regularly maintained and lubricated in accordance with the
manufacturers recommendations?
The inspector should ask to see records which show the dates the pumps were
lubricated and maintained. The inspector should also ensure that all lubricants
which come into contact with the potable water are NSF/ANSI approved.
3.5.4 Pumping Station
Most pumping applications rely on a pumping station that includes a purnp(s), a structure to
house or support the pump, piping - suction and discharge, lighting, ventilation, an
electrical center and control panel for the pump(s) and lighting, and appurtenances. The
inspector should determine if there are any sanitary risks by thorough inspection of all
pumping facilities. Appurtenances of a typical pumping station are shown in Figure 3-21.
3.5.4.1 Location of Pumping Facilities
i
The structure for a pumping station can be as simple as a slab that supports the pump(s) to a
building that houses the pump(s) and all appurtenances. However simple the structure, the
location of the pump station is probably one of the most important factors to evaluate for
sanitary risks. If the pump station is located in an area that is subject to flooding or
electrical outage, then the pump station will be out of service for a time. If the pump station
is down for a time, the system may experience problems with providing an adequate supply
of treated water or pressure in the distribution system.
One of the first things an inspector should do upon entering the station is to look for
evidence of past flooding. If there is no evidence, the inspector should ask system
personnel if there has been any flooding in the past. The pump station should be located so
that the finished floor elevation is at least one foot higher than the known 100-year flood
elevation for the area. If the floor elevation is lower than the flpod elevation, then berms or
dikes should be constructed around the station to prevent flooding.
I i
Since most pumping facilities require electricity for power, the electrical service reliability
should be verified. If the station is located in a remote area with only one incoming service,
a documented plan should be available for keeping the pump station in operation during
electrical outages. The plan could include the use of an emergency generator or oversizing
of storage to accommodate the power outage at the station.
APri11999 3-114 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-21. Typical Pumping Station
The purpose and vulnerability of the pumping facility location should be evaluated to
determine the measures needed to maintain its reliability.
Suggested assessment criteria for pumping station/location include:
1. Is the location subject to flooding? If so, what provisions are provided to
accommodate the flooding?
If the pump station is adjacent to a stream, river or other water body, the
inspector should check for evidence of flooding such as stains on the floors or
walls. Typically, a pump station is located above the 100-year flood plain,
however, if the station is susceptible to flooding, the inspector should make
certain that electrical controls and motors are high enough to avoid flood
waters.
2. Is the location subject to electrical outages? If so, what provisions are
provided to accommodate the electrical outage?
EPA Guidance Manual 3-115
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
The inspector should ask the operators how often there is a power outage in
the area serving the pump station. If the operators indicate there are frequent
outages, or if there is little or no elevated storage within the system the
inspector should ask if the system has emergency standby power.
3.5.4.2 Pumping Station Structure
The type of structure provided for a pumping station is somewhat dependent on the site-
specific requirements, but there are general similarities for all facilities. When visiting the
site, the inspector should assess the security and maintenance of the structure as well as the
pumps and piping.
The station should be protected from unauthorized entry and vandalism by having the doors
and windows locked when unattended. The electrical service to the strudjure should be
checked to see that unauthorized persons cannot either cut off power to the station or access
outside panels, switches, or valves. All drain and vent openings should be screened to
prevent the entry of animals and insects.
The structure should be sized to provide adequate room to maintain the equipment within
the structure. Certain building codes will specify some maintenance area requirements; for
example, the electrical code may require at least a 3-foot clearance in front of all electrical
panels. However, most of the area needed for maintenance is not restricted by building
codes and will therefore vary within a particular structure. In general, the size of the
structure shpuld be such that at least 3 to 4 feet (or more) of area is provided around all
major pieces of equipment and piping to allow for ease of maintenance.
Suggested assessment criteria for pumping station/structure include:
1. Is the structure secure from unauthorized entry and vandalism? Are all
drains and vents screened to prevent the entry of animals?
A system should take steps to prevent unauthorized entry of humans and
animals to the pump station. The pump station should be located within a
secure area such as a locked building or fenced area.
3.5.4.3 Pumping Station Appurtenances
i
The pump station appurtenances that should be evaluated include lighting, heating,
ventilation, interior drainage, signs/labeling, and controls. The following is a listing of the
appurtenances and reason to be included in this evaluation:
Lighting - should be adequate (both inside and outside) for ease of
maintenance and security;
Heating - systems should be adequate to prevent pipes from freezing;
Ventilation - should be adequate to maintain acceptable temperatures and air
flow for personnel safety and proper operation of equipment;
Interior drainage - floor drains should be provided to eliminate standing water
on the floor from leaks that may pose a safety hazard;
]
April 1999 3-116 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Signs/labeling - proper signs and tagging of equipment improve the ability of
system personnel to maintain the equipment; and
ซ Controls - should be simple and easy to maintain. In addition, all instruments
and wiring should be labeled and tagged.
Suggested assessment criteria for pumping station/appurtenances include:
1. Is the lighting adequate for security and maintenance?
The inspector should check the lighting inside the pump station to ensure that
the operators have sufficient light to operate the pumps and outside the facility
to deter vandalism.
2. Is the area subject to freezing? Can the piping in the station freeze? If
so, is heating provided?
The inspector should ensure that the pump stations located in frost prone areas
have heaters or other means to prevent freezing of the water in the pipes or
pumps.
3. Is the station equipped with ventilation? If so, does it work and is it
adequate to maintain a reasonable temperature?
The inspector should ensure that the pump station has adequate ventilation
(louvers, fans, etc.) to maintain acceptable temperature and air flow for
personnel safety and proper operation of equipment.
4. Is there a floor drain to collect all leaks? Is the floor drain operable?
There should be no standing water in the pump station. The floor should be
sloped to an operating drain.
5. Are the pumps, valving, and other major equipment items tagged? If not,
how does the system number the equipment for maintenance purposes?
The system should have a system to identify the equipment for maintenance
purposes. The inspector should see if the pumps and valves in the station are
tagged to identify them, and if the tags correspond to the maintenance records.
3.5.5 Priority Criteria
The following criteria related to the pumps/pump facilities and controls element of the
sanitary survey are considered high priority based on their potential for impacting public
health:
Capacity of Pumps - The capability of the facilities must exceed the potential
demands so that even when one pump is out of service, adequate capacity is
still available to meet all expected demand/supply conditions. Otherwise, the
EPA Guidance Manual 3-117 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
system may experience pressure problems in the distribution system that could
lead to greater problems like back-siphonage (Section 3.5.3).
i
Pump Station Location - The location of the facilities can impact the
operation of the water system. For instance, if the facilities are located in a
flood plain, then the facilities will be flooded on a regular basis and be out of
service for a period (Section 3.5.4.1).
i !
3.6 Monitoring/Reporting/Data Verification
An important part of any industry that produces a product for the consumer is quality
control. Quality control is a defined method of checking the product to ensure the consumer
that it meets or exceeds regulatory requirements as well as their minimum expectations. For
the water industry, quality control consists of monitoring the product, drinking water, from
the source to the tap, with in-house as well as outside laboratory testing for confirmation. A
monitoring plan provides the operator with data to assist in identifying potential problems
and adjusting treatment processes accordingly. It is important that all water systems create a
water quality monitoring plan and document monitoring results. For most water systems,
regulatory requirements, either state or federal, dictate the minimum scope of a water
quality monitoring plan.
The objectives of surveying the water quality monitoring/reporting/data verification are to:
i
Review the water quality monitoring plan of the public water system for
conformance with regulatory requirements;
Verify that the water quality monitoring plan is being followed by checking
test results;
Verify that all in-house testing as well as equipment and reagents being used
conform to accepted test procedures;
Verify the data submitted to the regulatory agency; and
Evaluate the procedures an operator follows to identify any problems with the
process, determine the changes needed to correct the problem, and how
adjustments to the process are approved and performed as needed.
3.6.1 Regulatory Records Review
Before the inspector goes into the field, the data available in the regulatory agency's files
concerning the subject water system should be reviewed carefully. Reviewing the files of
the subject system will indicate to the inspector how well the system is meeting its
responsibilities. The inspector should look for the following information:
Violations of MCLs, treatment techniques, monitoring, or reporting, as well as
a compliance plan to correct any violations;
I
Regulatory agency orders and compliance plans that apply to the system;
April 1999 3-118 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Regulatory agency approval of mandated sampling plans, such as for TCR and
disinfection by-products (e.g., THMs);
Regulatory approval of any changes to the system since the last sanitary
survey; and
Reported water quality monitoring data where required (UFTREEO Center,
1998).
If there are no violations or orders, and the required monitoring data are available, it is an
indication that the water system has accepted its assigned responsibilities and is trying to
complete its duties accordingly. In general, the inspector will only have to verify that all
sampling and monitoring plans are up-to-date based on the latest regulatory changes, if any.
In addition, the inspector will verify that the data reported to the agency are accurate based
on the records kept by the system. Self-monitoring data, monthly operating reports, and
daily logs should be reviewed to determine if data are of questionable quality and to
evaluate the potential for data falsification.
If there are no violations or orders, but the required monitoring data are not available, it may
be difficult to determine if the water system is in compliance with all requirements.
Laboratory results for bacteriological, chemical, and radiological monitoring must be kept
for specific time periods. The inspector should review the records to determine if they are
kept for the required time period in accordance with each regulation.
If there are violations or. orders, and all the required monitoring data are not available, it is a
general indication of possible troubles at the public water system. The inspector should
carefully review the compliance plans required by the violations or orders, and verify-that
the plan is being followed by the system. If all the required monitoring data are not
available, the inspector should determine the reason. Sometimes the cause may be simple,
such as the report was being mailed to a wrong address. However, if the problem is
persistent, then the inspector should develop a plan with the system to remedy the problem.
Suggested assessment criteria for data collection include:
1. Are there any violations or orders for the subject system? If so, is there a
compliance plan? If so, what documentation is there to verify
compliance?
If the treatment plant has submitted a compliance plan, the inspector should
take copies of the plan to verify that the compliance plan is being properly
implemented.
2. Have the required sampling plans been submitted and approved? If no,
what action is being taken to prepare and submit the plans?
Every water system has to submit a sampling plan to be approved by the state.
Such a plan should include the number of samples for each parameter, where
samples are taken, at what time and frequency, who is the person in charge of
EPA Guidance Manual 3-119 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
taking the samples, how they are going to be handled, and who is going to
analyze them.
I '
3. Are all the required monitoring data submitted? If so, do the data
appear reasonable? Do the data reported match field log books?
If a plant has complete, up-to-date, reasonable monitoring data, this is an
indication that it is well managed. However, it is still necessary to verify field
log books with submitted reports to rule out any human error in copying the
data.
3.6.2 Water Quality Monitoring Plans
For all water systems, there are two levels of water quality monitoring plans: (1) the water
quality monitoring plan(s) that the system institutes for quality control purposes (non-
regulatory monitoring); and (2) the water quality monitoring plans required by regulation
(e.g., disinfectant residual and turbidity). Typically, the water quality monitoring plan for
quality control is carried out in-house by the system operator. For the monitoring plans
required by regulation, samples are collected by system personnel in accordance with the
approved plan and are then often sent to a certified laboratory for analysis. However, for
some regulatory monitoring such as turbidity tests, samples are analyzed at the treatment
plant rather than an off-site laboratory. The water system needs to have a properly equipped
laboratory to perform these tests, as well as non-regulatory quality control tests, at the
treatment plant.
3.6.2.1 Non-Regulatory Monitoring Plans
The in-house plan provides the operator with a means of monitoring and evaluating the
operation of the system, normally the treatment facilities. This plan allows the operator to
control processes on a continuous basis and make adjustments in treatment (e.g., chemical
feed rates) as needed. Since this plan will be system-specific, the inspector will have to
check each plan individually. The plan should include the location, number, and frequency
of various tests that are needed to verify the process. A typical water quality monitoring
plan layout for a surface water treatment facility is shown in Figure 3-22. When reviewing
the plan, the inspector should assess whether the location and frequency are adequate to
identify problems that may occur. Monitoring needs to provide data that can help the
operators) quickly identify problems so that adjustments can be made in a timely manner.
In addition, the timing and methods for monitoring used should be in accordance with
accepted test methods. The inspector should ask the operator(s) if monitoring results are
used to make adjustments in the treatment process. So, the inspector should ask the
operators) to describe how, the data are used.
All test methods require that the equipment used is calibrated on a regular basis. This
regular calibration ensures that the results obtained are reasonable and accurate. Laboratory
test equipment manufacturers will provide the calibration procedures as well as calibration
standards that should be followed for each piece of equipment. As part of checking the
methods and procedures used for in-house monitoring, the inspector should check the
procedure for and the frequency of calibration. In addition, the calibration standards should
APrit 1999 3-120 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
be checked to determine whether or not the standard is usable based on the date of
preparation. In some cases, calibration procedures and frequencies may be dictated by the
state primary agency.
-, Raw
* % 5 &
: Water
C/F
pH, Alk, Turb, Jar Test, Fe, Mn, Temp
pH, Alk
, Sedimentation
I
Filtration
pH, Alk, Turb, Fe, Mn
pH, Alk, Turb, Fe, Mn,
CI2, Bacti, Fl
ฉArasmith Consulting Resources
(Source: UFTREEO, 1998; Used with permission)
Figure 3-22. Typical Water Quality Monitoring Plan Layout
for a Surface Water Treatment Facility
Suggested assessment criteria for in-house water quality control monitoring plan include:
1. Does the plan appear to be adequate for this system? If not, what
changes should be made and why?
The inspector should compare the plant's water quality monitoring plan with
the treatment processes being used. Plants with poor raw water quality tend to
have extensive water quality parameter testing between the intake and the
clear well. As the number of chemicals and processes increase, the inspector
should expect an increase in the number of testing sites and in the number of
parameters tested.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-121
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
2. Are proper testing procedures being followed?
The inspector should compare the testing methods being used in the treatment
plant with those approved by EPA.
I !
3. Are the equipment and facilities for monitoring adequate? Are the
reagents out of date? How are test results logged? Where are past logs
stored?
! , r
Old testing equipment might be suitable for measuring contaminants and
water quality parameters. However, the inspector should verify when the
laboratory was certified and whether old equipment was used to run the tests.
Laboratory certification may not be required to perform specific monitoring
tests. In these cases, the equipment that is being used must be evaluated to
ensure that it is in good condition, is properly calibrated, and provides the
necessary degree of accuracy.
4. Does the operator use test results to identify treatment adjustments?
The inspector should verify from the operator how treatment is adjusted based
on water quality tests. Adjustment may include the addition of an oxidant,
increase or decrease in chemical dose, backwashing filters, and increasing or
decreasing underdrain flow.
5. Is there a procedure, and what is the frequency, for calibrating
monitoring equipment, both laboratory and on-line? Is it in compliance
with manufacturer's recommendations, and is the procedure adequate?
Are the calibration standards acceptable?
. Cleaning and calibrating monitoring equipment is vital to good water quality
control. The inspector should verify that the calibration is done in accordance
with the manufacturer's recommendation. The inspector should look for
variances between his field test kit (for example pH) and those recorded by
on-line probes. To obtain meaningful results from this comparison, the
inspector should ensure that the field testing equipment that is used is properly
maintained and calibrated.
3.6.2.2 Regulatory Monitoring Plans
With the enactment of the recent amendments to the SDWA, various monitoring plans have
been required of a public water system to verify that the consumer is receiving safe drinking
water. The monitoring plans that are required and the associated rules are as follows:
.
Volatile Organic Contaminant monitoring (Phase I Rule);
Synthetic Organic Contaminant (regulated and unregulated)ylnorganic
Contaminant monitoring (Phase n/V Rule);
Coliform monitoring plan (TCR);
Lead and copper monitoring plan (Lead and Copper Rule);
April 1999 3-122 , EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
Turbidity and disinfection monitoring plan (SWTR); and
Disinfection and filter profiles, if necessary (Proposed DESWTR).
The inspector should verify that each system has an approved plan, and that the plan is
being followed. Note that for all the analyses required by these plans except the disinfectant
residual and turbidity analyses, the analyses must be performed by a certified laboratory.
Suggested assessment criteria for regulatory monitoring plans include:
1. Are all required monitoring plans approved by the state or other primacy
agency and are these monitoring plans being followed? If not, why?
All water quality monitoring plans have to be approved by the state. Systems
without an approved plan should work closely with the state on developing
such a plan.
2. Is a certified laboratory being used for all testing?
All regulatory water quality tests except disinfectant residual and turbidity
have to be conducted by a laboratory certified for testing specific
contaminants. Multiple laboratories may be used to conduct all necessary
tests. The inspector should verify the certification of the laboratory(ies) being
used by the treatment plant.
3.6.3 Priority Criteria
The following criteria related to the momtoring/reporting/data verification element of the
sanitary survey are considered high priority, based on their potential for impacting public
health:
Non-Regulatory Monitoring Plans - This plan is the quality control of the
final product, which is the drinking water. If no quality control is completed,
then the quality of the water is not known (Section 3.6.2.1).
Regulatory Monitoring Plans - The regulations require this monitoring plan
because it addresses parameters that are critical to public health (Section
3.6.2.2).
3.7 Water System Management/Operation
Management and/or administration is a major factor that affects the performance of a water
system. Management provides the direction, funding, and support that is needed for a
public water system to continually supply safe drinking water. For instance, if management
does not understand the requirements to produce and provide the quality of drinking water
demanded by the consumer, policies may be implemented that hinder the performance of
the system and its ability to provide what the consumer wants. Therefore, management and
staff need to work together to create an environment that facilitates meeting the goal of
providing the best possible quality of drinking water to the consumer.
EPA Guidance Manual 3-123 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
The objectives of surveying the water system management/operation are to:
i
Review the water quality goals and evaluate any plan(s) the system has to
either accomplish or maintain the stated goals;
Identify and evaluate the basic information on the system, management,
staffing, operations, and maintenance;
Review and evaluate the plan(s) for safety, emergency situations,
maintenance, and security to maintain system reliability; and
Evaluate the system's revenue and budget for drinking water to establish the
long-term viability of meeting water quality goals (UFTREEO Center, 1998).
3.7.1 Administrative Records Review
i
While much data have been collected concerning the physical features of the system, in this
section, the data needed concern the management (people) area of a public water system. If
the data are not already on file with the regulatory agency, then the inspector needs to obtain
the information during the survey. The information needed is as follows:
i: i .
Past sanitary survey reports (the latest one typically, but others can be helpful
to see what changes have been made over time);
Pertinent correspondence concerning compliance monitoring, plans of the
system that show changes made since the last survey, sampling plans,
compliance plans, and other management related issues;
Management structure as well as people in these positions for the system;
Budgetary information to include bond indebtedness, rate structure, and
specific budgetary information pertinent to the water system; and
j
Capital improvements program for the water system.
Suggested assessment criteria for data collection include:
1. What changes have been made since the last sanitary survey in the system
management, personnel, budget, etc.?
The inspector should note any changes that have been made in the system's
management, personnel, and budget, and ask the appropriate staff about any
changes that could have a detrimental affect on system performance. Changes
in personnel since the last sanitary survey may mean that the inspector needs
to work with different members of the system staff for this sanitary survey.
The inspector needs to be sure to work with the most appropriate personnel
both on the operations and management staffs so that the most complete and
accurate information possible is obtained during the survey.
2. Are the system's files up-to-date with the latest correspondence on
compliance monitoring, plans of the system showing changes made since
April 1999
3-124 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING
the last survey, sampling plans, compliance plans, and other management
related issues?
The general organization, timeliness and completeness of a system's files
provide the inspector with an indication of the system's approach to data
management and how much its data are available for use in decision-making.
The water system should have procedures and tools (e.g., paper filing system,
computer databases) for managing information such as maintenance and repair
records and plans, compliance monitoring plans, system maps, budgets,
financial data, and operating reports. The information management system
should provide for updating the information at regular intervals.
3.7.2 Water Quality Goals
Water quality goals provide a target that the public water system should strive to attain to
produce the best quality product possible. The water quality goals for a system should
include all parameters that have a regulatory level established, as well as other quality
parameters that are deemed appropriate. For parameters with established regulatory levels,
the system should set goals to achieve a higher (or at least equal to) quality of drinking
water than what is required by regulations. By striving to reach a goal that is higher than
required, the system will be more assured of meeting the regulatory requirements at all
times. For instance, if the turbidity regulatory requirement is 0.3 NTU for finished water,
setting a goal of 0.2 NTU or lower and operating the system to meet that goal will provide
greater assurance that the regulatory requirement is consistently met. Some surface water
treatment plants have adopted optimized performance goals associated with the highest
level of protection against waterborne disease. These goals include a filtered water turbidity
of less than 0.1 NTU from each individual filter.
The system should set other, non-regulatory water quality parameters, as appropriate, to
help it achieve its overall goal of producing a reliable, high-quality water supply. Examples
of some of these other water quality goals include the number of customer complaints for a
month, threshold odor number, or flavor profile analysis.
Suggested assessment criteria for water quality goals include:
1. Has the system established any water quality goals? If not, why?
Water quality goals can provide overall direction to water system management
staff and operations staff. The inspector should assess whether a system's
goals seem reasonable (e.g., achievable, measurable) and appropriate for the
system.
2. Should there be any other parameters included in the goals? If so, which
parameters, and what level?
There are important considerations other than specific regulatory requirements
in providing customers with a reliable, high-quality water supply. For
instance, customer complaints can provide a means of determining whether a
EPA Guidance Manual 3-125 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water eind GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
water supply not only meets regulatory requirements, but also satisfies
consumers' needs (e.g., taste, color, odor).
3. Do the operators know what the plant goals are, and why the levels were
established? Do operators monitor to assess whether goals are being met
and then make any appropriate process control adjustments and measure
the results of the adjustments?
Water quality goals are of little value if they do not impact both day-to-day
plant operations and long-term planning. Operators need to be aware of the
system's water quality goals and understand the goals in order to make
decisions about plant operations that lead to achieving the goals.
3.7.3 Water System Management
The direction of the system is controlled by the system's management through the
implementation of the budget and policies. During the inspection, the knowledge and
experience of these individuals concerning drinking water should be verified. As an
example, if the individual at the top of the management structure has little or no experience
with a water system, then the implemented budget and policies may reflect that lack of
knowledge in determining how the system is operated and maintained. If the individual has
the knowledge, then the water system will probably be operated and maintained differently.
Therefore, the knowledge and experience that management has with water systems plays an
important role in how a system is operated and maintained.
Another impact that management can have is on the morale of the personnel. A positive
atmosphere is generated if the management encourages an open dialogue between all levels.
This open communication allows the workers to express their opinion without fear of
reprisal. Encouraging the training and advancement of personnel will also foster a positive
morale. Although, there will be some expenses incurred on the part of the utility, this effort
shows that management wants their employees to gain the knowledge necessary to further
their careers. With the positive attitudes of personnel, the operation and maintenance of the
system will probably be at a higher level. Mistrust between management and the O&M
personnel will have an adverse effect, so if personnel have a negative attitude, system
operation and maintenance will likely be affected.
Suggested assessment criteria for system management include:
1. What is the management structure, and who are the individuals at the
various levels? What is their experience level with water systems?
If the water system has an organizational chart, the inspector should review
the chart to gain an understanding of the system's management structure and
which individuals are responsible for the different elements of system
operation and management. The system needs to have a means of clearly
indicating to its own staff who has the responsibility for various functions and
who has the authority to make decisions and approve changes to policies,
procedures, system operations, and other areas pertinent to treatment plant
April 1999 3-126 EPA Guidance Manual
* Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
performance and water supply quality. Personnel in positions of responsibility
and management should be experienced v/ith and knowledgeable about
drinking water systems and their operation, and have detailed knowledge
about their own system and its performance and needs, as well as the
regulatory requirements that apply to their system.
2. Does the water system have a planning process? Does the planning
process appear to be implemented?
Water system management should be actively involved in planning for the
system. Efforts should include both short-term and long-range planning
horizons. The system should have a process for developing and updating
plans required under applicable regulations, such as compliance monitoring,
source protection, and cross-connection control, as well as other plans integral
to a well-functioning water system, such as annual and long-term budgets,
equipment purchases, and facility expansion.
3. Does open, effective communication occur between management and
system personnel?
Open, effective communication between management and operations staff is
integral to the achievement of a system's water quality goals for the
production of a reliable, high-quality water supply. System personnel should
have a means of adequately conveying to management the need for additional
equipment and personnel and changes in facility policies and procedures, and
for providing input to budgeting and system expansion plans. Management
needs to be receptive to staff input and committed to seeking it and using it.
4. What kind of attitude is portrayed by the system personnel?
If system personnel portray a negative attitude, it may be an indication of poor
relations between system management and operations staff. Negative
employee attitudes may stem from inadequate investments in employee
training or compensation, or inadequate investment in facilities/equipment
used or operated by employees. The inspector should attempt to determine the
reason(s) for a negative attitude to the degree that such attitudes may adversely
affect system performance.
3.7.4 Water System Staffing
The inspector should determine if a list of job descriptions for system personnel is available.
The inspector can use this information to assess whether or not the system seems to have an
adequate number of qualified personnel to perform all the necessary work within the system
from operations to maintenance. One indicator of sufficient personnel is that little or no
overtime is required to adequately perform operations and maintenance. The inspector
should also evaluate the relative distribution of personnel between operations and
maintenance positions. If a system has only one individual to maintain the water treatment
facilities and distribution system and 10 operators with no maintenance responsibilities
EPA Guidance Manual 3-127 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
within their job descriptions, there are too many operators and not enough maintenance
personnel and a lack of maintenance is likely to be very noticeable. To have a well operated
and maintained facility, there should be a good mix of responsibilities and personnel, and
personnel should have some cross-training between operations and maintenance.
Suggested assessment criteria for system staffing include:
1. Is the number of personnel adequate to perform the work required?
The size of the facility and the types of treatment largely determine what level
of personnel is sufficient. The system should have enough personnel to enable
continuous operation of the treatment plant at all times, including periods
when some staff are absent (e.g., vacations, weekends, holidays). Staff should
be able to perform operations and maintenance tasks regularly with little or no
overtime hours. In addition to having an adequate number staff overall, the
system should have staff appropriately assigned to operations tasks and
maintenance tasks.
2. Is plant coverage adequate given the alarm systems used by the plan? Do
variations in finished water quality when the plant is unattended indicate
the need for additional plant coverage?
During periods when the plant is unattended or treatment processes are
monitored by alarm systems rather than personnel, fluctuations in finished
water quality may increase. The inspector should evaluate whether the
system's personnel and its use of alarm systems are adequate to promptly
address variations in finished water quality.
3. Do staff have clearly defined responsibilities and the dedsionmaking
authority necessary to carry out their responsibilities?
: . j
System staff need to clearly understand their responsibilities and have the
authority to make any decisions, such as hiring and scheduling personnel and
altering elements of treatment plan operation (e.g., equipment shutdowns for
maintenance, changes to chemical doses), that are necessary to fulfill their
responsibilities in a timely manner. System staff should also sufficiently
understand the responsibilities of other personnel so they know who to
approach with issues or questions.
4. Is there cross-training required of the individuals within the system?
! '
Some cross-training of employees between operations and maintenance
provides the facility with staffing options during unexpected periods of staff
absences (e.g., illnesses) and times when the work load balance between
operations and maintenance shifts. Cross-training may also enable staff to
better carry out their responsibilities because they have a better understanding
of other aspects of water treatment.
April 1999 3-128 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3.7.5 O&M Manuals and Procedures
Operation and maintenance (O&M) manuals, standard operating procedures (SOPs), and
standard maintenance procedures (SMPs) provide direction for the operation and
maintenance of system facilities. They can also provide a quick means of teaching new
staff about the system, how it operates, and what should be done to keep the system
operating successfully. The O&M manual contains a general discussion of system
components and their operation and maintenance, while SOPs and SMPs provide a more
detailed, step-by-step description of the procedures that should be followed to carry out
operations and maintenance tasks. Many O&M manuals also contain the SOPs and SMPs
for a system.
The O&M manual, SOPs, and SMPs should include the following information:
General description of all components within the system/facility, and its
purpose;
Performance goals for the plant;
Design criteria for all components;
Detailed description of the operation of each component (step-by-step);
Procedures for monitoring and adjusting plant performance;
Detailed description of the maintenance of each component (step-by-step),
including emergency and preventative maintenance;
Laboratory requirements - equipment, test procedures, and calibration
methods;
Safety program - spill response, emergency telephone numbers, procedures,
etc.;
Education and training responsibilities and opportunities;
Procedures for communicating problems; and
Records - plant and regulatory requirements.
The O&M manual, SOPs, and SMPs should be written by the staff, when possible, because
they are the ones that best know the system and its requirements. They should be written in
a manner that provides a clear and accurate understanding of the operation and maintenance
of facilities.
Suggested assessment criteria for operation and maintenance manuals, SOPs, and SMPs
include:
1. Is there an O&M manual for the system? Are there SOPs and SMPs for
the system? Are these documents complete and accurate?
The system O&M manual and associated SOPs and SMPs are vital to ensuring
consistent operation and maintenance of the facility from operator to operator
EPA Guidance Manual 3-129 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
and across maintenance staff. The inspector should assess whether the
documents appear adequate (e.g., are sufficiently detailed) and address all
aspects of the facility treatment processes. Information on the facility (e.g.,
system maps) and all equipment (e.g., literature received from the
manufacturer or supplier) should be organized and easily accessible so that
equipment can be properly operated and serviced.
2. Do system personnel use the documents and implement the practices
described in them? Where are copies of the manual, SOPs, and SMPs
kept?
O&M manuals, SOPs, and SMPs are of little value if they are not used by
system personnel. The documents need to be readily available to all staff, and
staff need to be aware of where the manuals are kept and encouraged to use
them.
3.7.6 Water System Funding
\
When reviewing the budget and rate structure, one of the most important questions to
consider to determine adequacy is "Is the system a self-supporting utility?" A self-
supporting utility means that the revenues are such that all budgetary requests are met, with
some excess reserves remaining for future improvements or emergencies. These reserves
would normally stay within the utility budget. However, some systems may apply these
reserves to other portions of the overall budget of the city or board. In other words, the
water system may subsidize other departments within the city or board.
i i
After reviewing the budget and revenues to determine if the system is self-supporting, the
budget should be reviewed to determine that there is adequate funding allocated to the
maintenance of the equipment within the system, as well as for providing an adequate
number of personnel to operate and maintain the system properly. Data from other systems
may help in this analysis. In comparing two similarly sized systems, any significant
differences between the two systems can be evaluated to see if they may be part of the
reason for any problems being experienced.
Suggested assessment criteria for adequacy of revenues/budget include:
1. Is the system self-supporting?
Water rates should be set at a level such that fees collected adequately cover
operating, maintenance, and replacement costs. If there is an imbalance, the
inspector should evaluate how the imbalance may be impacting the system's
performance and its ability to provide a reliable supply of high-quality water.
2. Are there adequate monies to provide the appropriate maintenance and
to support the number of personnel to operate the system correctly?
System funding needs to adequately support facility operation and
maintenance, and should include funding for an appropriate level of staff that
are properly trained. Funds need to be budgeted for future expenses such as
i
April 1999 3-130 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
equipment purchases and facility expansion, as well as current expenses
associated with staff salaries and training, electricity, chemical stocks and
equipment replacement parts, and other day-to-day expenses. The system
should have a method for prioritizing its needs so that funds are expended on
the most essential items first. The inspector should ask operations and
maintenance staff about its procedures for and past experiences with obtaining
needed supplies, equipment, and staff to determine if staff encounter
difficulties due to budget problems. The system should have a reserve or
sinking fund where excess revenues are held and accumulated for use on
future purchases and improvements and emergencies.
3. Does the water system subsidize other departments within the city or
board? If so, is funding that is returned to the water utility sufficient to
meet operation and maintenance requirements and address future
growth?
To assess this, the inspector should interview personnel that are responsible
for the water system budget, ask operator about plant funding, and examine
the budget.
4. How does this system compare to others?
If the inspector has financial data on other systems, comparisons can be made
that may aid in determining the adequacy of a system's budget/revenues.
3.7.7 Priority Criteria
The following criteria related to the water system management/operation element of the
sanitary survey are considered high priority based on their potential for impacting public
health:
Water System Management - Management provides the direction, policies,
and budget for the staff to work by and with to meet regulatory requirements
and produce quality drinking water. Management can foster a positive morale
that can lead personnel to strive for excellence in operation and maintenance
tasks and thus higher quality water. Management that is knowledgeable about
water systems is likely to make better decisions about policies and
expenditures for staff and equipment (Section 3.7.3).
Water System Staffing - Adequate staff is required for the proper operation
and management of the system (Section 3.7.4).
Water System Funding - Adequate funding for operation, maintenance, and
expansion is required to assure system viability (Section 3.7.6).
3.8 Operator Compliance with State Requirements
The need for qualified professionals to operate and maintain water systems is becoming
increasingly important in the water supply industry. This need is because the operation of a
EPA Guidance Manual 3-131 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
water system is becoming more complicated and difficult with ever changing regulations
that require the quality of drinking water to improve. System personnel must be aware of
any deteriorating conditions from the source water supply to the consumer's tap, know what
changes are required to correct the conditions, and be ready to implement the change at a
short notice. The overall goal of a water system is to provide an adequate supply of safe
drinking water to the consumer at an acceptable pressure. To meet this goal and the
associated challenges, surface water system personnel need to be adequately trained.
3.8.1 Certification of Operators
Personnel involved in providing consumers with drinking water need to know what is
required to provide a safe and adequate supply of water. One of the ways to assure the
consumer that trained and knowledgeable individuals are working in the water system is
through operator certification. Most states require a certain level of operator certification
befitting the size of the system.
The requirements for operator certification vary from state to state, but they all require a
certain amount of in-class (school) as well as on-the-job training and experience. As an
individual advances, the training requirements increase also. In addition, operator
certification is renewable and a certain degree of training is required just to maintain a level
of certification.
Suggested assessment criteria for operator certification include:
1. Does the system employ an operators) of the appropriate certification
Ievel(s), as specified in state requirements?
Proper operation and maintenance of a water system requires staff that are
trained and knowledgeable about the facility and water treatment. One means
of ensuring that system personnel have a certain minimum level of knowledge
is through operator certification. States establish operator certification
requirements so that operators without this knowledge are prevented from
posing a potential health risk to consumers through improper treatment plant
operation resulting in poor quality water. A system should have an operator(s)
that possesses certification at the level(s) specified in state requirements. The
inspector should ask for proof of certification if it is not openly displayed.
| i
2. Are operator certifications current for all system personnel? Are all
personnel meeting the minimum renewal requirements for operator
certification?
In reviewing the system's proof of certification, me inspector should verify
that all operator certifications are current and that operators are meeting any
state requirements for certification renewal.
April 1999
3-132
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of
EPA Guidance Manual
Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
3.8.2 Competency of Operators
Like all professions, some people know all the right answers according to the book and
others know what the right answer is based on experience. Operators need to know both.
During the survey, the inspector should question the operators about various aspects of the
operation and maintenance of the system. Through this questioning, the inspector should be
able to determine if system personnel are adequately trained, as well as informed about the
system.
The inspector can also see how well the system is operated and maintained. Generally, if
the system is well operated and maintained, the operators are competent and know what is
needed to operate the system correctly.
Suggested assessment criteria for competency of operators include:
1. Do the operators know how to operate and maintain the various
components of their water system from the source to the tap? Does the
system appear to be well-operated and maintained?
The inspector should evaluate the competency of operators throughout the
entire site visit, both by visual observation, and by asking the operators
questions about water treatment and distribution, the facility and equipment,
and procedures for operations and maintenance tasks. Questions the inspector
cannot ask to probe the operator's knowledge include, "Show me how you...,"
"What does this do?," and "How often do you...?" The appearance of the
facility is an indication of whether the operators properly operate and maintain
the system.
2. Are system personnel appropriately trained?
The system should have a regular training program that includes both new
personnel and existing staff. Training can be done both in-house and through
training classes offered by the state, EPA, universities, and drinking water
associations. Operators should be trained in applicable operations and
maintenance procedures, water treatment concepts, drinking water regulations,
safety procedures, emergency response, and other essential issues that have a
direct impact on plant personnel and the quality of drinking water.
3.8.3 Priority Criteria
The following criterion related to the operator compliance with state requirements element
of the sanitary survey is considered a high priority based on its potential for impacting
public health:
Competency of Operators - Competent operators are essential to a well run,
operated and maintained water system. Operators make operation,
maintenance and administrative decisions that affect plant performance and
system reliability (Section 3.8.2).
EPA Guidance Manual 3-133 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
3. CONDUCTING THE SURVEY
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
April 1999 3-134 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY
REPORT
This chapter provides guidelines for preparing the sanitary survey report and suggestions for
keeping adequate documentation of the sanitary survey. The sanitary survey report is a final
written report that is used to notify water system owners and operators of the system's
deficiencies and assists in facilitating corrective action where deficiencies are noted. Final
written reports should be prepared for every sanitary survey in a format that is consistent
statewide. Once a sanitary survey has been conducted, appropriate documentation is needed
for follow-up activities and for development of reports. Not only does documentation need
to be complete, but the results of surveys should be interpreted consistently from one
surveyor to another. Specifically, as part of documentation and follow-up, the inspector
should complete the following activities:
Complete documentation and prioritize sanitary risks that were identified
during the onsite investigation;
Notify the water utility of any variances in the sanitary survey report from that
provided in the oral debriefing at the site;
Complete the formal sanitary survey report;
Notify appropriate organizations of the results;
Provide options for correcting the sanitary risks, including sources of technical
assistance;
Follow-up on questions asked by water utility personnel; and
Assess whether the system should be considered to have outstanding
performance.
The remainder of this chapter provides additional detail on compiling the sanitary survey
report. Areas addressed include: preparing the sanitary survey report; preparing adequate
sanitary survey documentation; categorizing the findings; developing corrective actions; and
determining outstanding performance.
4.1 Sanitary Survey Report
The sanitary survey report officially communicates the results of the survey to the owners
and operators of the water system. The purposes of the survey report are to:
Notify the water system owners and operators of system deficiencies;
Request corrective action under a specified schedule;
EPA Guidance Manual 4-1 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
Provide a written record for future inspections (including a recommendation
on outstanding performance since this can affect the frequency of future
surveys);
Provide important information that may be useful in emergencies.
The report can be as brief as an extensive letter, but should be detailed enough to provide
the water utility with sufficient information on what deficiencies exist and what corrective
actions are needed. The survey report should indicate why corrective actions are necessary.
Compliance schedules are required for all sanitary survey reports that identify significant
deficiencies.
The survey report provides a record for future inspecting parties and provides technical
information that may be useful during emergency situations. It is also an important tool for
tracking compliance with the SDWA and for evaluating a particular system's compliance
strategy. The sanitary survey report needs to contain adequate documentation of survey
results. Types of documentation are discussed in Section 4.2.
: "i | i
The report should be completed promptly and reflect the information provided to water
utility personnel at the end of the onsite evaluation. If the written evaluation is different
from the oral debriefing, the water system manager should be notified of such changes.
At a minimum, the survey report should include the following elements:
Date and time of survey;
Name(s) of survey inspector(s);
Name(s) of those present during the survey, besides the inspector(s);
A schematic drawing of the system and, where appropriate, photographs of
key system components;
A statement of system capacity, including source, treatment, and distribution;
A summary of survey findings, with the signatures of survey personnel;
A listing of deficiencies based on a regulatory reference;
A summary of all analyses and measurements done during the sanitary survey;
Recommendations for improvement, in order of priority, with a timeline for
compliance;
A copy of the survey form; and
A recommendation on whether a system has outstanding performance.
'
The report needs to identify all the deficiencies noted during the inspection. The sanitary
survey report should provide more detailed information when a system has a significant
problem that could affect human health. The report should also provide options for
corrective actions that the system may take to address any significant deficiencies. As part
of the follow-up activities for sanitary surveys, the system must respond to deficiencies
April 1999 4-2 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
outlined in the state's sanitary survey report within 45 days, indicating how and on what
schedule the system will address significant deficiencies noted in the survey. The system
may also provide its own recommendations for corrective action. The sanitary survey report
should describe the actions that the state will take if the deficiencies that require action by
the system owner/operator are not corrected within the timetable provided.
The state should develop standard language ("boilerplate") for use in sanitary survey reports
and correspondence with water systems after a sanitary survey. This standard language
includes the text which will not change significantly from report to report. The standard
language should be used, when applicable, to save report preparation time and to maintain
uniformity in correspondence between the state agency and water systems. Standard
language could be developed for sanitary survey report discussions pertaining to each of the
eight elements of a sanitary survey. For example, a state could develop standard language
that describes its operator certification requirements and says whether or not the water
system operator(s) meets those requirements. The inspector would insert the applicable
language based on the results of the inspection. A state should consider consulting with its
legal staff to ensure that the standard boilerplate language is accurate within its authorities.
4.2 Sanitary Survey Documentation
Adequate documentation of survey results is essential in the sanitary survey process,
especially if the survey may result in corrective or enforcement actions. It is the inspector's
responsibility to the water system and to the public to provide an accurate and detailed
description of improper operations or system deficiencies in the sanitary survey report.
Detailed documentation should be recorded in a sanitary survey report and sanitary survey
forms. Some example forms are included in Appendix A.
The suggested minimum documentation for sanitary survey record files includes:
A cover memorandum or letter with a list of deficiencies, if any, and pertinent
information and recommended actions. The list of deficiencies should be
accompanied by references to regulatory provisions pertaining to the
deficiencies. The first page of the list of deficiencies should begin with the
header below. The items shown in italics should be provided for the particular
system. Following the header, each deficiency should be ordered by number.
The list should be prioritized by severity from the most critical to the least
critical.
LIST OF DEFICIENCIES
System: System's Name Survey Date: Inspection Date
I.D.#: Water System's ID Number Surveyed By: Inspector's Name/Affiliation
Location: County Name, State Region: EPA Region Number
EPA Guidance Manual 4-3
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and QWUDI
April 1999
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
A completed survey form or checklist for the water system (if used by the
state).
Any necessary additional pages of comments, drawings or sketches, and water
sampling data.
A copy of the USGS 7.5 minute topographical quadrangle map showing the
location of the system.
A summary of the components of the water system. This summary should
identify any modifications made to the system.
A listing of system operators, including the certification status.
4.3 Categorizing the Findings
The findings of a sanitary survey can range in severity from minor administrative
deficiencies to situations where continued operation of the water delivery system could pose
a serious health threat to the population. The inspector needs to determine which
deficiencies are significant and thus require the system to take immediate corrective action
(all deficiencies should ultimately be addressed). In general, significant deficiencies include
those defects in a system's design, operation, or maintenance, as well as any failures or
malfunctions of its treatment, storage, or distribution system, that the state determines to be
causing or have the potential to cause the introduction of contamination into water delivered
to customers.
For statewide consistency from survey to survey and inspector to inspector, a state should
establish its own definition of a significant deficiency and a list of what deficiencies it
generally considers significant. An inspector should determine which deficiencies of a
system meet the state's definition of significant, and should also identify any other
deficiencies that may pose a serious threat and should be considered significant for that
system. The priority criteria provided in Chapter 3 can help the inspector determine which
deficiencies pose a serious health threat and therefore need to be considered significant.
i
Table 4-1 illustrates one possible approach to categorization of some of the common
deficiencies by the degree of their threat to public health. The below listing includes
"examples of deficiencies that may be considered significant public health issues. This list is
not intended to be comprehensive, but serves as a guide to the state for categorizing
significant deficiencies. Other deficiencies could be deemed significant public health
issues.
April 1999
4-4 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
Table 4-1. Example of Sanitary Survey Deficiencies*
Finding ,
No approved construction drawings
Failure to update the water distribution map
Stopping work on system improvements
Failure to meet distribution system pressure requirements
Failure to meet water treatment requirements
Failure to meet water quality MCLs
System continues to operate in a noncompliance mode
System has reached the maximum number of services allowed
System not operating in compliance with water system plan
System violated coliform or VOC MCLs
Minor:
^
Moderate .-
^
/
'ป
^
^
Significant
^
^
^
^
y
* This table is for illustrative purposes only and does not represent any federal or state policy.
The following list presents some additional examples of potential significant deficiencies
that may be identified during a sanitary survey. Significant deficiencies of surface water
and ground water under the direct influence of surface water systems may include, but are
not limited to, the following types of deficiencies:
Source
- Location of intake is near pollution source (e.g., POTWs, CSO discharges)
- Not having a secured protective radius around a reservoir
- Wells of improper construction
- Springs of improper construction.
Treatment
- The hatch to a pressure filter has not been opened on a yearly basis to
clean the media, and to check for media loss and the condition of the
underdrain system
- Filter does not have adequate depth of media (e.g., less than 24 inches)
- No SOP for taking a filter out of service for backwashing, for performing
the backwash or returning the filter to service
No process control plan for coagulant addition
- Inadequate application of treatment chemicals
- Chemical feed rates not adjusted for varying raw water quality conditions
or changes in plant flow rate
- Inadequate disinfection CT.
EPA Guidance Manual 4-5
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
April 1999
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
Distribution Systems
TCR sampling plan not representative of distribution system
- Negative pressures at any time
System not flushed periodically
- No disinfectant residual, or HPC levels greater than 500/ml, repeatedly at
same sites
- Inadequate monitoring of disinfectant residual, when required
Inadequate cross connection controls, either at the treatment facility or in
the distribution system (or failure to have a cross connection control
program, when one is required)
Unacceptable system leakage that could result in entrance of contaminants.
Finished Water Storage
- Inadequate internal cleaning and maintenance of storage tank
Improper venting of tank
- Lack of proper screening of overflow pipe and drain
!
Inadequate roofing (e.g., holes in the storage tank, improper hatch
construction).
Pumps/Pump Facilities and Controls
- Ponding of water in pump housing
Inadequate pump capacity
Lack of redundant mechanical components.
Monitoring/Reporting/Data Verification
- Failure to properly monitor water quality
- Failure of system operator to address customer complaints regarding water
quality or quantity issue
- TCR sampling plan not available or not being followed
- Chronic TCR coliform detections with inadequate remediation.
Water System Management/Operation
Lack of properly trained or licensed staff as required by the state
Lack of approved emergency response plan
- Failure to meet water supply demands/interruptions to service (inadequate
pump capacity, unreliable water source, lack of auxiliary power)
- Inadequate follow-up to deficiencies noted in previous inspection/sanitary
surveys.
April 1999 4-6 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
Operator Compliance with State Requirements
- Operator does not have the correct level of certification as required by the
state.
If a significant public health issue is determined to exist, compliance action must be
required. State inspectors may judge other problems as significant enough from a public
health viewpoint to require establishment of a compliance schedule with follow-up action.
4.4 Corrective Action
There are a number of problems or deficiencies that may be considered significant public
health issues. If a significant public health issue is determined to exist, corrective action
must be required. At a minimum, the sanitary survey report should identify the deficiencies
noted during the inspection and notify the system of the actions that the state may take if the
deficiencies that require action by the system owner/operator are not corrected. To ensure
that the sanitary risks are minimized, the sanitary survey report should provide the water
utility with options for correcting significant defects. The suggestions for corrective actions
should not be overly specific and should be sufficiently conservative, since the inspector
does not have the detailed knowledge of the system's engineer or other plant personnel.
Depending upon the nature of the defect, there may be a number of adequate corrective
actions that may be applied to a significant defect. The system should be given discretion in
selecting the most appropriate corrective action, and made ultimately responsible for
selecting an appropriate action(s).
There are three basic approaches which may be taken to ensure significant defects are
corrected:
Correction of problems by the water system staff, their consulting engineers,
and/or contractor
Many deficiencies can be addressed by water system staff and their
consultants. The inspector should assess whether the water system appears to
have trained and competent staff available before suggesting approaches that
involve water system personnel in alleviating most deficiencies. The inspector
should consider the cause of the deficiencies (how and why they developed)
and judge whether it is reasonable to expect the water system operator or
manager to correct the problems promptly.
Technical assistance to the water utility by the regulatory agency,
organizations that specialize in training and technical assistance, and/or
peers at other water systems
Many water systems may need assistance in determining the cause(s) of their
performance problems and in developing a set of actions to eliminate the
problems. The inspector may be able to offer approaches the water system can
use to assess and address problems. Assistance may result in training, onsite
EPA Guidance Manual 4-7 ApriM999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
system specific technical assistance, and referrals to other available resources
at the state and federal levels (at the primacy agency, other organizations, and
at state environmental training centers).
Implementation of a composite correction program (CCP) applicable to
surface water treatment plants
The CCP is a type of technical assistance that is specific to surface water
systems. A CCP consists of a comprehensive performance evaluation (CPE)
and a comprehensive technical assistance (CTA) program. A CPE determines
inadequacies and performance limiting factors, and prioritizes deficiencies. A
CTA attempts to correct the deficiencies and involves onsite, system-specific
technical assistance.
A combination of these approaches may be appropriate, based on the type and severity of
the sanitary deficiencies.
4.5 Outstanding Performance
As noted in Chapter 1, community systems mat are classified as having outstanding
performance are eligible for having future sanitary surveys conducted at the less frequent
interval of at least once every five years, rather than at least once every three years. Based
on the findings of a sanitary survey, an inspector should include in the report a
recommendation on whether a system should be considered to have outstanding
performance at the time of the survey. This recommendation should be based on the state's
specifications for determining if a system has outstanding performance. The state was
required to develop these specifications as part of its application for primacy. Along with
the inspector's recommendation, the report should include standard state language
("boilerplate") noting that the recommendation for outstanding performance status is
contingent upon the system continuing to meet the states' specifications for that status.
In general, outstanding performance means that a system is well-operated and managed, has
a good record of performance in past sanitary surveys, and has not had any violations (at
least in recent years). A state's specifications for outstanding performance may include
factors such as the following:
No violations of MCLs since the last sanitary survey;
No violations of monitoring and reporting requirements since the last sanitary
survey;
No violations of primary drinking water regulations during the past five years
(or similar time period);
No waterbome disease outbreaks attributable to the water system during a
specified period;
i ' i
Past sanitary surveys containing no significant deficiencies;
Existence of emergency preparedness measures and backup facilities;
i
April 1999 4-8 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
Meeting exceptional performance standards (e.g., 0.1 NTU) a specified high
percentage of the time;
Expert management of system (e.g., managers are knowledgeable about
providing quality drinking water; low staff turnover and positive staff morale;
well-established water quality goals);
Expert operation of the system (e.g., skilled, certified personnel) in adequate
numbers; existence of quality O&M manuals that are used by the staff;
adequate budget and revenues);
Success under the Partnership for Safe Water Program, Phase HI program;
Effective cross-connection program developed and implemented;
Recognized in-house research programs applicable to improved system
performance;
Active public outreach programs (e.g., citizen participation committees);
Stable water source (no interruptions in supply);
ซ Source water supply drawn from a reservoir or pre-sedimentation facility that
effectively dampens raw water quality variations;
No identified significant risk of future violations or problems (e.g., equipment
past its service life);
System capacity sufficient to meet anticipated growth; and
CPE has been performed by a third party during the past three years, and the
water system has adequately addressed all Performance Limiting Factors
identified by the CPE.
As noted above, each state should have its own specifications for determining if a system
has outstanding performance. The state may choose to use some or all of the above
factors, different factors that have been developed by the state, or a combination of both.
EPA Guidance Manual 4-9 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
4. COMPILING THE SANITARY SURVEY REPORT
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
April 1999
4-10 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
5. REPORT REVIEW AND RIESPONSE
The previous chapters of this guidance manual described how to prepare, conduct, and
report the results of a sanitary survey. This chapter describes the follow-up actions that
should be undertaken by the water system operator and the state in response to the findings
of a sanitary survey, including those actions that must be taken to correct any identified
deficiencies. In general, the findings of the inspector should be transmitted to the system
owner or operator soon after completion of the inspection. In turn, the system operator must
respond to the sanitary survey findings within 45 days of state notification. The state then
needs to monitor the water system's implementation of corrective actions to ensure that
deficiencies are resolved. The remainder of this chapter discusses these follow up actions.
5.1 State Actions
For a state to be granted primacy authority, it must submit evidence to EPA that the state
has met the requirements for a determination of primacy enforcement responsibility found
in 40 CFR 142.10. These requirements are summarized in Figure 5-1. This regulatory
authority effectively outlines the range of options that the state possesses in responding to
the findings in a sanitary survey report.
Deficiencies of a minor nature may require no more response than to notify the system
operator of the violation and set a time frame for the operator to correct the situation. A
moderate deficiency could prompt the state to require the operator to respond within 30
days with a proposed solution to the deficiency and a schedule for correcting the situation.
For significant deficiencies, the state must immediately inform the system operator of the
deficiency. In some cases, the deficiency may be such that a boil water notice must be
issued to the customers in order to protect public health. In all cases, the state should
indicate the required time frame for a response, the required action for the response, and the
consequences of failing to respond. The consequences could include revocation of the
operating permit, suspension of the permit until the deficiency is corrected, and fines or
penalties levied against the system operator. When significant deficiencies exist, a consent
agreement, administrative order, or litigation by the appropriate court may be necessary to
ensure prompt and proper correction. The state should make regular and continued
inspections of the facility until all deficiencies have been corrected.
Other state activities include maintaining a tracking system for enforcement. The 1995
EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys states that the deficiencies disclosed in a
survey must be followed up on to ensure that timely corrective action is taken, especially to
correct deficiencies that have the potential to substantially affect public health. States
should develop a program for following up on recommendations made in their sanitary
surveys. A computer tracking system of deficiencies may be a useful tool for states to use
in tracking follow-up and enforcement actions.
EPA Guidance Manual 5-1 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
5. REPORT REVIEW AND RESPONSE
Summary of CFR 142.10
Requirement for a Determination of Primacy Enforcement Responsibility
1. State has adopted drinking water regulations which are no less stringent than the
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
2. State has adopted and is implementing adequate procedures for the enforcement of
such state regulations, including:
maintenance of an inventory of public water systems;
a systematic program for conducting sanitary surveys of public water systems in
the state, with priority given to sanitary surveys of public water systems not in
compliance with state primary drinking water regulations; and
the establishment and maintenance of a state program for the certification of
laboratories conducting analytical measurements of drinking water
contaminants.
3. The establishment and maintenance, by the state, of an activity to assure that the
design and construction of new or substantially modified public water system
facilities will be capable of compliance with the state drinking water regulations.
4. The state has the statutory or regulatory enforcement authority adequate to compel
compliance with the state primary drinking water regulations in appropriate cases,
such authority to include:
authority to apply state primary drinking water regulations to all public water
systems in the state covered by the national primary drinking water regulations;
authority to sue in courts of competent jurisdiction to enjoin any threatened or
continuing deficiency of the state primary drinking water regulations;
right of entry and inspection of public water systems;
authority to require suppliers of water to keep appropriate records and make
appropriate reports to the state;
authority to require public water systems to give public notice; and
authority to assess civil or criminal penalties for violations of the state primary
drinking water regulations.
5. The state has established and will maintain record keeping and reporting of its
activities.
6. The state has adopted and can implement an adequate plan for the provision of safe
drinking water under emergency situations.
Figure 5-1. Summary of 40 CFR 142.10 - Requirements for a Determination
of Primacy Enforcement Responsibility
April 1999
5-2 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
5. REPORT REVIEW AND RESPONSE
5.2 Water System Actions
As stated above, the severity of the deficiency in a sanitary survey should dictate the
appropriate response required from the water system operator. When a water system
applies for an operating permit, the system operators agree to operate the water system in
accordance with state regulations, and to deliver water of adequate volume, pressure, and
quality. A state approves the operating permit with the same understanding and with the
authority to enforce against any deficiency.
The system operator, upon receipt of the sanitary survey report, should prepare a response to
the state addressing the survey findings which may include deficiencies of varying degrees
of severity. The water system's response should be returned to the state within 45 days, and
must be returned within the 45-day timeframe when the sanitary survey findings include
significant deficiencies. The response should include:
A statement of the deficiency, including any real or potential impacts to
delivered water quality;
The approach to correcting the deficiency;
The time required to correct the deficiency;
The source of funding, if capital construction is required;
Measures put in place to prevent the situation from recurring; and
Additional follow-up actions planned.
The IESWTR does not change the requirement for a water system to maintain copies of
sanitary survey written reports and correspondence associated with sanitary surveys for a
period of at least 10 years, as specified in 40 CFR 141.33 (c). In addition to this
requirement, the water system should follow any applicable state implementing
regulations related to sanitary survey record keeping.
EPA Guidance Manual 5-3 April 1999
' Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
5. REPORT REVIEW AND RESPONSE
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
April 1999
5-4 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
6. REFERENCES
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 1999. Written personal communication
between John H. Sullivan, P.E., AWWA and Bill Hamele, EPA Office of Ground
Water and Drinking Water.
AWWA. 1990. Water Quality and Treatment. Fourth Edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New
York.
AWWA and ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers). 1998. "Water Treatment Plant
Design. Third Edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.
AWWA and DHS (Department of Health Services). 1993. Watershed Sanitary Survey
Guidance Manual. Published by the AWWA, California-Nevada Section, Source
Water Quality Committee in conjunction with the California Department of Health
Services, Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management.
CDOHS and EPA (California Department of Health Services and U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency). 1996. Water Distribution System Operation and Maintenance.
Third Edition. California State University, Sacramento.
Gulp, Wesner, and Gulp. 4986. Handbook of Public Water Systems. Van Nostrand
Reinhold. New York, NY.
Doebelin, E.O. 1983. Measurement Systems Application and Design, third edition.
McGraw-Hill Book Company.
GLUMRB (Great Lakes Upper Mississippi River Board). 1997. Recommended Standards
for Waterworks. (Also known as the Ten State Standards.)
JMM (James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc.). 1985. Water Treatment
Principles and Design. John Wiley and Sons. New York, NY.
Reynolds, T.D. 1982. Unit Operations and Processes in Environmental Engineering.
Boston: PWS-Kent Publishing.
Sanks, R.L. 1978. Water Treatment Plant Design for the Practicing Engineer. Boston:
Butterworth Publishers.
TNRCC (Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission). 1997. Rules and
Regulations for Public Water Systems. May 1997 (revised). RG-195.
EPA. 1999a. Alternative Disinfectants and Oxidants Guidance Manual.
EPA. 1999b. Disinfection Profiling and Benchmarking Guidance Manual.
EPA. 1999c. Unfiltered Water Supply Systems Guidance Manual.
EPA. 1999d. Uncovered Finished Water Reservoirs Guidance Manual.
EPA Guidance Manual 6-1 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
6. REFERENCES
i | ... i
EPA. 1998. Personal communication between Stan Callow, EPA Region 7 and Tracy
Bone, EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, Washington, D.C.
EPA. 1998a. Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection
Byproducts Rule.
EPA. 1998b. Handbook: Optimizing Water Treatment Plant Performance Using the
Composite Correction Program. EPA/625/6-91/027, revised August 1998.
EPA. 1997a. Drinking Water Inspector's Field Guide for Use When Conducting a
Sanitary Survey of a Small Groundwater System.
1 - ! !
EPA. 1997b. Drinking Water Inspector's Field Guide for Use When Conducting a
Sanitary Survey of a Small Surface Water System.
EPA. 1997c. State Source Water Assessment and Protection Programs. Office of Water,
Washington, D.C. EPA 816-R-97-009.
EPA. 1996. Ultraviolet Light Disinfection Technology In Drinking Water Application - An
Overview. Office of Water, Washington, D.C. EPA 811-R-96-002.
i i ' i
EPA. 1995. EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys. Developed as a cooperative
effort between the EPA and the Association of State Drinking Water
Administrators. Washington, D.C.
!
EPA. 1991. Guidance Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection
Requirements for Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources. Washington,
D.C.
EPA. 1991 a. Manual of Individual and Non-Public Water Supply Systems.
EPA. 1989. Cross-Connection Control Manual. Washington, D.C.
EPA. 1989a. Sanitary Survey Reference Manual. Office of Water, Washington, D.C.
EPA 570/9-88-006.
EPA. 1987. Guidance Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection
Requirements for Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources. Washington,
D.C.
EPA, ASCE, and AWWA. 1996. Technology Transfer Handbook - Management of Water
Treatment Plant Residuals. Office of Research and Development, Washington,
D.C. EPA/625/R-95/008.
UFTREEO Center (University of Florida Training, Research and Education for
Environmental Occupations Center). 1998. Learner's Guide: How to Conduct a
Sanitary Survey of Small Water Systems
April 1999
6-2 EPA Guidance Manual
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
APPENDIX A
Examples of Sanitary Survey Checklists
From States and EPA Regions
(Taken from the 1995 EPA/State
Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys)
EPA Guidance Manual A-1 April 1999
Conducting Sanitary Surveys of Public Water Systems-Surface Water and GWUDI
-------
-------
EPA/STATE JOINT GUIDANCE ON SANITARY SURVEYS
DECEMBER 1995
A sound sanitary survey program is an essential element of a State's drinking water
program. Sanitary surveys provide a first line of defense in helping public water systems
protect the public health.
EPA recognizes that the quality of sanitary survey programs has suffered due
to competing resource requirements associated with new drinking water regulations.
The draft revised State Programs Priorities Guidance places renewed emphasis on the
importance of sanitary surveys and identifies this activity as a high priority.
EPA recommends that the States work with Regions in using this guidance to
improve their sanitary survey programs into State-specific programs that are tailored
to meet, each State's needs. Improving these programs may not happen immediately,
depending on the current status of the program. States therefore need to negotiate
with their respective Regions to determine appropriate timeframes for program
improvements.
PART I. INTRODUCTION
A. DEFINITION OF A SANITARY SURVEY
A sanitary survey, as defined in CFR 141.2 (Definitions), means an on-site review of
the water source, facilities, equipment, operation, maintenance, and monitoring compliance of
a public water system for the purpose of evaluating the adequacy of such source, facilities,
equipment, operation and maintenance for producing and distributing safe drinking water.
B. PURPOSE OF A SANITARY SURVEY
The purpose of a sanitary survey is to evaluate and document the capabilities
of a water system's sources, treatment, storage, distribution network, operation and
maintenance, and overall management to continually provide safe drinking water and
to identify any deficiencies that might adversely impact a public water system's ability
to provide a safe, reliable water supply.
Sanitary surveys also provide an opportunity for State drinking water officials or
approved third party inspectors to establish a field presence with the owners and operators
of water systems in order to educate them about proper monitoring and sampling procedures,
provide technical assistance, and inform them of any upcoming changes in regulations.
EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys
Page 1 of 8
-------
They also aid in the process of evaluating a public water system's progress in
complying with Federal and State regulations promulgated to protect public health. A survey
can significantly reduce the potential risk of consumers ingesting contaminated drinking water.
Sanitary surveys also aid in assessing a system's capacity and provide am opportunity
to evaluate whether operators are adequately trained to test for water quality parameters,
and are properly reporting water quality data to the State primacy agency.
C. POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF A SANITARY SURVEY
Sanitary surveys play an essential role in ensuring safe drinking water. Some of th6
many benefits of conducting sanitary surveys are:
operator education;
source protection;
risk evaluation;
technical assistance and training;
sampling plan evaluation;
independent, third party system review;
information for monitoring waiver programs;
identification of factors limiting a system's ability
to continually provide safe drinking water;
provision of updated water system information to State program personnel;
provision of useful information for planning and capital improvements
to system owners/operators;
reduction of monitoring requirements;
reduction of formal enforcement actions in favor of more informal actions;
reduction of oversight by State monitoring and enforcement personnel;
increased communication between State drinking water personnel and public
water system operators;
provision of contact person to notify in case of emergencies or for
technical assistance;
improvement of system compliance with State drinking water regulations;
identification of candidates for enforcement action;
identification of candidates for Comprehensive Performance Evaluations;
verification of data validity;
validation of test equipment and procedures;
reduced risk of waterborne disease outbreaks;
encourage disaster response planning; and
improved system security.
EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys
I Page 2 of 8
-------
PART II. GUIDANCE ON SANITARY SURVEY IMPLEMENTATION
A. FREQUENCY IN CONDUCTING A SANITARY SURVEY
Under 40 CFR, 142.10 (Requirements for a determination of primary enforcement
responsibility), each State, pursuant to appropriate State legal authority, must establish,
as a requirement for primacy, a systematic program for conducting sanitary surveys of public
water systems in the State, with priority given to sanitary surveys of public water systems not
in compliance with State primary drinking water regulations.
EPA recommends that the frequency with which a State conducts a sanitary survey
of a water system be based on, but not limited to, a negotiated State/EPA number per year, or
based on a state sanitary survey plan completed by the State. System selection can be based
on a number of factors, including the following: source type, treatment technology(ies) used,
the type of system, system size, date of last survey, whether the system has any violations,
whether the system is a new system, whether the system has added a new source, whether the
system has a new operator, whether the system has a waiver program, and whether the system
has had a prior sanitary survey based on the minimum requirements of the Total Coliform
Rule. This rule allows sampling to be reduced for small groundwater systems if the system
undergoes a sanitary survey every five years and is certified to be free of sanitary defects.
B. QUALIFICATIONS FOR SANITARY SURVEY INSPECTORS
All sanitary survey inspectors should possess certain baseline qualifications
to ensure both their own safety and the quality of the inspection itself. An inspector's
technical background and experience should qualify him/her to assess the types of systems
being surveyed. At a minimum, these qualifications should include appropriate health and
safety training and an understanding of basic water supply operation and treatment processes
where applicable. Other means of assessing inspector qualifications include whether the
inspector has attended formal training sessions, whether he/she has documented on-the-job-
training, whether the training received is appropriate for the type and size of the system being
surveyed, and whether the inspector is knowledgeable about State and Federal SDWA
regulations.
C. ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
States, as part of their sanitary survey program, should develop assessment criteria
for each of the minimum elements recommended for review during a sanitary survey. These
criteria are needed to ensure that deficiencies are evaluated consistently among the various
inspectors in a State. As part of this effort, States should identify the types of deficiencies
that are considered to be significant and the appropriate follow-up actions. The criteria
should also discuss appropriate follow-up actions for lesser deficiencies.
EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys
Page 3 of 8
-------
D. MINIMUM ELEMENTS OF A SANITARY SURVEY
; j !
Prior to the survey, the inspector should review pertinent files relating to the system
being inspected. Particular attention should be focused on information regarding past sanitary
surveys the system might have.had, any changes or improvements made to the system, as well
as files relating to the system's compliance and enforcement history.
A review of the eight elements listed below is considered essential for the proper
conduct of a thorough sanitary survey. States should, however, have some flexibility
to tailor minimum elements based on system type, size, and complexity. Included below with
each main element are examples of areas that should be addressed:
Element 1. - Source
Protection, including:
watershed protection program, including physical and hydrogeological
description of watershed, land use and topography, and
identifying potential contamination sites
wellhead protection program
verification and reevaluation of vulnerability assessment
waiver from filtration
well sites and impoundments
water quality/quantity
security measures
spring sites
i j j
Physical Components and Condition, including:
wells, including both construction information and sanitary conditions
surface intakes
infiltration galleries
springs
catchment and cistern
raw water storage and transmission
adequacy of source capacity, present and future
backup source capacity
interconnection with existing supplies (emergency)
emergency power generation
EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys
Page 4 of 8
-------
Element 2. - Treatment
schematic diagram of treatment process
appropriateness of current treatment, given water quality
adequacy of current treatment, including the adequacy of:
aeration equipment, chemical addition (control and automation
potential), chemical mixing process, type and effectiveness of
clarification, sedimentation, filtration, disinfection, monitoring
equipment, controls, as well as use of test results in process
control, on-site sample results by surveyor to establish treatment
efficacy, and adequacy of treatment capacity, both present and
future
treatment enhancements
O&M of treatment facility
condition of equipment
process control, including standardization, calibration and sample
analysis procedures
record keeping
use of approved chemicals (e.g., NSF-approved)
chemical storage/spill containment
cross-connection program
operator qualifications
CT assessment where applicable
security measures
rated capacities of treatment processes
operational flows versus treatment process rated capacity
epichlorohydrin/acrylamide certification
treatment and equipment reliability
ability to respond to changes in raw water fluctuations
redundancy
emergency power
Element 3. - Distribution System
overall distribution system map and plan
overall condition of the system
materials and construction of distribution system
cross-connection control inspection program
installation and repair procedures for water mains
flushing schedule and procedure
pressure controls (e.g., for adequate fire protection)
corrosion control program
leak detection/unaccounted water (including meter replacement)
EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys
Page 5 of 8
-------
maintenance schedule and procedure
disinfectant residuals
condition of system components
proper separation from sewage system components
valve exercise/replacement program
Element 4. - Finished Water Storage
contamination prevention
O&M of facilities
water use demands and storage capacity
condition of system components
condition of facilities
use of NSF approved coatings
assessment of CT where applicable (at plant)
security measures
overflow piping
Element 5. - Pumps/Pump Facilities and Controls
types and capacity
condition of pumps including reserve pumps
: - condition of pump facilities
emergency power
flooding potential
NSF approved lubrication oils
security measures
vulnerability assessment
pumping capacity with largest pump out of service
pumping controls
Element 6. - Monitoring/Reporting/Data Verification
^ __^_ WH^^, f .1n_ป^M^K_r---| .-i_._-i...-r_m_nTU- r. | ^
sample plans for appropriate rules (e.g., TCR, L&C Rulea etc.)
verification of validity of data reported to State through comparison
of logbook data to data submitted to State
review of bench sheets, on-site logs, and monthly operational
reports
waivers
monitoring schedule and history, including an assessment of
compliance with State and Federal monitoring requirements
appraise current water quality vs. historical data
verification that required monitoring is being conducted accurately
EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys
Page $ of 8
-------
calibration of process control and compliance equipment,
including review of QA/QC procedures
determine if primacy agency information is accurate and complete
review of overall past/present practices
review of cross-connection control inspection logs
review of annual cross-connection control test reports
a summary of water quality data, including raw, treated and
distribution system data
Element 7. - Water System Management/Operations
basic information on system and system operator
emergency contingency plans
staffing
review of past survey results
review of compliance with regulations
operator support/training
O&M plan and manuals
cross-connection control plan
water loss/conservation program
safety program, including verification of safety strategy
facility security
basic information on equipment
public notification plan
review of standby and redundant capability
condition of facilities
sample siting plan
adequacy of revenues/budget
Element 8. - Operator Compliance with State Requirements
certification requirements
qualifications
training
competency (on-site observations of performance)
crossKionnection inspector certification
E. DOCUMENTATION
Each sanitary survey should be documented by having the inspector prepare a final
written report of the survey on a format used consistently within the State. The final written
report should be used to notify water system owners and operators of the system's
deficiencies and to encourage them to take corrective actions where deficiencies
are noted.
EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys
Page 7 of 8
-------
The report will provide a written record for future inspectors as well as information
that is useful during emergency situations. It will also provide a reference as to the need for
technical assistance and training. Information contained in the report should be used to
update records in the State's database management system. The following should be included
in the report:
i I ' !
1. The date the survey was conducted and by whom;
2. The name(s) of those present during the survey besides the inspector;
3. A schematic drawing of the system and, where appropriate, photographs of key
system components;
4. The findings of the survey, along with the signatures of the survey team
members; and
5. Recommendations for improvement and a timeframe for compliance.
The written final report must have a more substantial and descriptive explanation
when a system is determined to have a significant problem that could affect human health.
Any differences between the findings discussed at the conclusion of the on-site survey and
what is included in the final report should be discussed and clarified with the water system
operator and management prior to becoming a part of the survey's official documents.
F. FOLLOW-UP AFTER SURVEY
; j ' "
The findings of the inspector should be transmitted to the system owner or operator
soon after completion of the inspection. The report should identify, at a minimum, the
deficiencies noted during the inspection and should also request that the system provide its
recommendations for corrective action and a timetable for the completion of such action.
The report should also notify the system of the actions that the State will take if the
deficiencies that require action by the system owner/operator are not corrected.
G. TRACKING AND ENFORCEMENT
For sanitary surveys to be effective in ensuring that public water systems provide
safe drinking water, the deficiencies disclosed in a survey must be followed up to ensure
that timely corrective action is taken, especially to correct deficiencies that have the potential
to significantly affect public health. States should develop a program for following up on
recommendations made in their sanitary surveys. A computer tracking system of deficiencies
may be a useful tool to assist states in tracking follow up actions.
EPA/State Joint Guidance on Sanitary Surveys
i Page 8 of 8
-------
UTAH
Sanitary Survey Guidance Document
Sanitary Survey Form
-------
-------
UTAH DIVISION OF DRINKING WATER
March 1994
SANITARY SURVEY GUIDANCE DOCUMENT
This document provides general information on conducting sanitary surveys along with new
guidance on issues that need to be addressed during a sanitary survey as a result of the Federal
Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments (SDWA). These new issues include, for example:
monitoring waivers, source protection issues, surface/groundwater determinations, and source
locations. If we continue to conduct sanitary surveys as we have in the past, without collecting
the additional information required of us, we will be ill prepared to implement the provision of
the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments in Utah. *"
The purpose of this document is to provide information to those conducting sanitary surveys so
that they, in turn, will ask the right questions and perform the necessary investigations. Such
front line activities will promote: 1) safe drinking water, 2) informed water system management,
and 3) smooth implementation of changing federal regulations.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. The Need for Sanitary Surveys 3
B. Who Can Conduct Sanitary Surveys 3
C. Preparing for Sanitary Surveys 3
D. The Prescribed Content of Sanitary Surveys .". . . . . . . . 3
E. Lead/Copper Rule 6
F. Waiver Eligibility Determinations 7
G. Waiver Verification Procedures 9
H. Surface/Groundwater Determination ...... 11
I. Source Location 14
Appendix A: 15
Reference Material
Appendix B: 17
Suggested List of Things to Look For
Appendix C: 23
Sampling Site Plan
Appendix D: 26
i | _ - . .
Appendix E: 32
Computer Reports Referred to and Used in Connection with the Sanitary Survey
1) Water System Inventory
2) Water System/Source Chemical Monitoring
3) Water Source Citing, Treatment and Vulnerability
-------
A. The Need for Sanitary Surveys
Sanitary Surveys provide a means for the exchange of information. For example,
the operator is informed of monitoring and reporting requirements, efficiencies that
can be gained and deficiencies that need correcting. The surveyor is informed of
the existence and status of physical facilities and evaluates the external influences
that may effect water quality. The findings of the survey can and will have a
direct bearing on subsequent monitoring requirements for the surveyed system.
B. Who Can Conduct Sanitary Surveys
As provided in Section R309-101-4 of the Utah Public Drinking Water Rules, the
following groups of individuals may, under varying conditions, conduct Sanitary
Surveys.
a. Division of Drinking Water
b. Utah Department of Health District Engineers
c. Local Health Officials
d. Forest Service Engineers
e. Utah Rural Water Association
f. Consulting Engineers .
g. Other qualified individuals authorized in writing by the Drinking
Water Board, Executive Secretary , .
C. Preparing for a Sanitary Survey
Coordination and communication between State Department of Environmental
Quality, District Engineers, local health department, and water system management
is essential in preparing for a Sanitary Survey. Preliminary discussions should
include: a review of the system's historical records including chemical and
bacteriological data, correspondence, engineering studies, and past violations.
Through these preparations one will be able to assemble and evaluate all the
proper information during the survey and make sound recommendations.
D. The Prescribed Content of the Sanitary Survey
A. Sanitary Survey and its associated report must include:
1. The name, address and phone number of the person
legally responsible for the water system.
-------
2. A visual inspection and written description of the water system's
physical features from the source through the distribution system.
The physical facilities include:
a) Description of each source (wells, springs, intake structures).
b) Description of any treatment or disinfection facility, including type,
capabilities, flow treated, associated source, etc.
c) Number of storage reservoirs, size, construction type and sanitary
aspects.
d) Description of the transmission and distribution system, as well as
each pump station, etc.
*Note: If the physical facilities are adequately described by an
earlier report, the earlier report can be referenced in the text
of the new report, but a copy of the earlier report must be
attached to the new report and the new report must contain
a statement identifying the facilities that were inspected
during the more recent survey.
I - ' ;.,!,' 'I ' ''.
3. Establish an exchange of information between the operator and the
surveyor. This should include:
a) Discussion of proposed,. pending as well as
anticipated, EPA regulations and encourage the
operator to offer comments to EPA as appropriate,
b) Discussion of the water system's sampling site plan
for Lead/Copper and for bacteriologic samples.
Each utility is required to have a written sampling
site plan (see Appendix B for bacteriologic guidance
and Section E Lead/Copper evaluation questions on
page 7).
c) Discussion of and report pn the system's planning
and budgeting efforts to -keep abreast of water
demands and regulatory demands.
d) Discussion of a report on the system's emergency
response capability as well as its cross connection
control program.
e) Discussion of the status of certified operators. Also
describe the services available to operators seeking
certification and the need to obtain CEUs.
-------
4. Computer information should be discussed and/or verified with the
operator. This includes the information contained on three
computer reports (see Appendix E) as follows:
.a) The water system inventory (Report 3.1.02).
b) Water system/source chemical monitoring (Report 3.1.09).
5. Waiver eligibility determinations for Phase II & V contaminates
(See items F and G below for a more detailed explanation of
waivers).
6. Surface/Groundwater assessment (see item H below for a more
detailed explanation of Surface/Groundwater assessment).
7. Drinking Water Source Protection Plan.
8. Debrief the operator/owner following the survey.
9. The report must provide formal notification of deficiencies.
10. The report should give appropriate time tables if necessary.
11. Report historical facts as appropriate.
12. The report should be completed and sent within four weeks of the
survey, with a transmittal letter to the appropriate representative of
. the water system. Copies of the report should be sent to
coordinating agencies.
-------
E. Lead/Copper Rule
Action Levels
0.015 ppm for lead
1.3 ppm for copper
The Environmental Protection Agency's lead and copper regulations require all community and
non-transient non-community water systems to collect tap water samples to determine lead and
copper levels to which customers may be exposed. By the applicable date for monitoring, each
applicable water system shall complete a material evaluation of its distribution system in order
to identify a pool of targeted sampling sites that meet the requirements for sample site locations.
All sites from which first draw samples are collected, must be from this pool. The pool must
consist of tier 1 sites. If there is an insufficient number of tier 1 sites, than tier 2 sites may be
added to the pool. If there is still an insufficient number of sites then tier 3 may be added to the
sampling pool.
Tier 1. single family structures that contain lead pipes, or copper pipes
with lead solder installed after 1982, and/or are served by lead
service lines.
Tier 2. buildings and multiple-family residences served by lead service
lines, or that contain lead pipes, or copper pipes with lead solder
installed after 1982.
Tier 3. single family structures that contain copper pipes with lead solder
installed before 1983.
If you're surveying a non-transient non-community water system, lead and copper tap water
samples must be collected from sampling locations that meet one of the following criteria:
!
Tier 1. buildings that contain copper pipes with lead solder installed after
1982 and before 1986, and/or are served by lead service lines.
Tier 2. buildings that contain copper pipes with lead solder installed before
1983 and before 1986.
To identify enough sites that meet the targeting criteria the water utility personnel should survey
all records documenting the materials used to construct and repair your distribution system,
buildings connected to your distribution system.
-------
It is recommended that a system identify more sampling sites than the number of samples you
are required to collect during each monitoring period in case volunteers drop out.
During the sanitary survey, the surveyor must review with the water utility personnel their criteria
for selecting sites and procedures for collecting samples.
Evaluation Questions:
1. Has your water system completed a sampling site plan?
2. .What methods were used to identify the sampling sites?
a. Plumbing Code - Construction date of the house between 1982 and 1986.
b. Plumbing Permits - Records of remodeling which would include the plumbing
between 1982 and 1986.
c. Existing sample results - previous monitoring which may indicate problem areas.
d. Community survey - questionnaire mailed to water consumers asking about the
plumbing materials as well as gaining consumer cooperation with the sampling.
3. Was the system able to identify a sufficient number of "Tier 1" sites?
4. How did the system handle the required sampling procedures (first draw water, and
bathroom or kitchen sinks only)?
a. If consumers collected the sample, how was the training on' the sampling methods
provided? ,
A written narrative of the system's methods in identifying the lead and copper sampling sites
must be included in the sanitary survey. - ,
F. Waiver Eligibility Determinations
The Phase II & V Rules allow the Executive Secretary to issue monitoring waivers. These
waivers are issued to specific sources and can significantly reduce the amount of samples that
a system must take on that individual source. Three types of waivers are offered, each type must
meet certain criteria before it can be issued. Each waiver will affect the monitoring frequency
for a specific contaminant group. Verification of certain elements of the waiver(s) program
must occur during a sanitary survey, without this verification, the existing waiver(s) will not
be considered verified and will be revoked. The isystem must then begin monitoring that
source at the base monitoring frequency. All waivers must be periodically renewed. After 1999,
waivers will only be renewed if there is in place a source; protection plan and it verifies the waiver.
-------
Type of Waivers:
1. "Reliably and Consistently" Waiver (R): The source water quality is reliably and consistently
below the MCL.
2. "Use" Waiver (U): Contaminants are not used, manufactured, and/or stored in source area.
! ' i ,
3. "Susceptibility" Waiver (S): Source is not susceptible to contamination based on an evaluation
of: prior analytical data; vulnerability assessment results; environmental persistence and transport
of the contaminant; construction of the source; the extent of the protection area around the
source; the movement of the groundwater and the geology of the area; and the proximity of
contaminants to the source combined with appropriate management practices associated with such
contamination. This type of waiver will only be issued in conjunction with the Drinking
Water Source Protection Plan for a particular source and only if deemed appropriate with
regard to the susceptibility waiver criteria listed in section G.
Asbestos
Nitrate/Nitrite
Inorganics & Heavy Metals
VOCs
Pesticides/PCBs/SOCs
Unregulated Organics
fSaJgJI
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
U, S
R
U, S
U, S
U, S
No asbestos cement pipe
and no asbestos geology
Evaluation of last 3 cycles
of monitoring
Presence of contaminants
and/or susceptibility of
source to contamination
State Implementation:
1. "Reliably and Consistently" Waiver (R): Computer code will be written to search the state
database for previous analytical results on these specific contaminants, the code would then
compare the results to see if they are reliably and consistently below the MCL. Sources eligible
for the monitoring waiver would be automatically flagged on the inventory and the system would
be notified by direct mail. The computer routine could be executed periodically as new data is
received.
2. "Use" Waiver (U): A questionnaire has been sent to the operators of every community and
non-transient non-community water system asking specific and general questions about each of
their sources. The Division will also gather data from different segments of the federal
-------
government which will focus on the different land use practices of each of the agencies involved,
both current and historical.
3. "Susceptibility" Waiver (S): Systems with sources not eligible for a use waiver have been
notified. If the system wishes to pursue the possibility of a susceptibility waiver, a Drinking
Water Source Protection Plan will need to be in place before the source will be evaluated for
waiver eligibility.
Perform by Persons Conducting Sanitary Surveys:
1. "Reliably and Consistently" Waiver (R): No involvement is anticipated.
2. "Use" Waiver (U): Assist water utility managers in filling out questionnaires and
latitude/longitude of existing sources during the next sanitary survey of the water system.
Adjustments to any waivers would be made at that time. As source protection areas are
delineated for the-Drinking Water Source Program, the inventory of potential sources of
contamination will need to be verified in place of the questionnaire information.
3. "Susceptibility" Waiver (S): Initially no involvement is anticipated, however, as source
protection areas are delineated for the Drinking Water Source Program, the inventory of potential
sources of contamination will need to be verified.
G. Waiver Verification Procedures
As can be seen, the above criteria are rather easy to assess, provided the operator
is familiar with the nature and extent of man's activities around the system's
sources and the surveyor has access to past analytical results. It is imperative that
the surveyor comment on the above aspects of the water system in the Report of
Survey. However, it must be recognized that the above outlined approach is
rather simplistic because it does not take into account special construction methods
or mitigating geologic conditions.
In order for mitigating circumstances to be taken into account the water system mus.t
document to the satisfaction of the Executive Secretary that a source is not susceptible
to a potential contamination site within the area. Only sources that have completed a
Drinking Water Source Protection Plan will be evaluated for "susceptibility" waivers.
The Executive Secretary may issue a susceptibility waiver based on an evaluation
of the following criteria:
1. Previous analytical results.
2. The proximity of the source to a potential point or non-point source of
contamination. Point sources include spills and leaks of chemicals at or near a
water treatment facility or at manufacturing, distribution, or storage facilities, or
-------
from hazardous and municipal waste landfills and other waste handling or
treatment facilities. Non-point sources for Pesticides/PGBs/SOCs include the use
of pesticides to control insect and weed pests on agricultural areas, forest lands,
home and gardens, and other land application uses.
3. The environmental persistence and transport of the contaminants.
4. How well the water source is protected against contamination due to such factors
as depth of the well and the type of soil and the integrity of the well casing and
sanitary seal.
In the case of Pesticides/PCBs/SOCs the following would also apply:
5. Elevated levels of nitrates at that particular source.
6. Use of PCBs in equipment used in production, storage, or distribution of water
(i.e., PCBs used in pumps, transformers, etc.).
Required Verification Elements that must be included in the Report
These elements must be addressed within the body of the sanitary survey report. Any
potential site of contamination in the area around each source must be listed in the report.
The exact area of concern will vary depending upon the type of source and whether or
not there is a source protection plan in place for each individual source.
1. Once a Drinking Water Source Protection Plan is in place, the area that need
to be looked at is the actual geographic area scientifically delineated for each
individual source.
2. Protection zone delineation and inventories of potential contamination sources
are integral parts of the new Drinking Water Source Protection (DWSP) rule
which became effective on July 26, 1993. However, since this rule will not be
fully implemented until 1999, the Division of Drinking Waiter allows waivers to
be based on a 1500-ft radius until December 1995. And from January 1996 until
December 1999, a one-mile radius will be used in conjuntion with a sanitary
survey. If a system's DWSP Plan is due prior to December 1999, its waivers
must be based on this plan. After December 1999, all waivers will be based on
DWSP plans. Additionally, since waivers must be reevaluated every three years,
systems may delineate a three-year ground-water time of travel protection area
around their sources on which to base their waivers.
I . . i , : . I .
The purpose of the inspection is to look for potential sources of organic contamination,
the following is a partial list of contaminants or potential sources of contaminants. This
list is just for illustration purposes and by no means reflects a complete list of the items
of concern.
10
-------
1. Volatile Organic Chemicals (VOCs): Dry cleaners, landfills, any industry that
uses chemicals, gas stations, oil wells, etc.
2. Pesticides/PCBs/SOCs: agricultural fields, transformers, golf courses,
residential areas with large areas of lawn, etc.
H. Surface Water/Ground Water Determination
Recent amendments to 40 CFR Parts 141 and 142 of the National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations commonly called the "Surface Water Treatment
Rule" define "ground water under direct influence of surface water," as:
Any water beneath the surface of the ground with (i) significant
occurrence of insects or other microorganisms, algae, or large-
diameter pathogens such as Giardia lamblia, or (ii) significant and
relatively rapid shifts in water characteristics such as turbidity,
temperature, conductivity, or pH which closely correlate to
climatological or surface water conditions.
Part of these amendments require that the "State" classify all ground water
sources as to whether or not they are influenced by surface water. These
classifications will be made by the Executive Secretary and state staff.
Previously, R309-106-1 of the Utah Administrative Code made the following statement:
R309-106-1 SURFACE WATER
A surface water source is defined to mean tributary systems,
drainage basins, natural lakes, artificial reservoirs, impoundments
or low quality springs. Surface water sources will not be
considered for culinary use unless they can be rendered acceptable
by complete treatment (chemical coagulation, sedimentation,
filtration and disinfection) or other equivalent treatment acceptable
to the Executive Secretary.
Part of the amendments published in the federal register of Thursday June 29,
1989 require that "direct influence must be determined for individual sources in
accordance with criteria established by the State" and that "the State determination
of direct influence may be based on an evaluation of site-specific measurements
of water quality and/or well construction characteristics and geology with field
evaluation." Further clarification in part HI, Response to Major Issues; states, "It
is important to note that the intent of this rule is not to regulate viral and bacterial
contamination in systems using ground water, unless Giardia cysts are also
associated with such occurrence. Thus, if there is little likelihood for Giardia
11
-------
cysts to occur in a system using ground water, but there is potential for bacterial
and viral contamination, EPA does not expect the State to classify this source as
a ground water source under the direct influence of surface water."
The State of Utah intends on following EPA's recommendation not to regulate
viral and bacterial contamination in systems using ground water sources via this
rule and intends to classify only those ground water sources which clearly indicate
a likelihood for Giardia cysts to occur in a system using ground water, but there
is potential for bacterial and viral contamination, EPA does not expect the State
to classify this source as a ground water source under the direct influence of
surface water."
The State of Utah intends on following EPA's recommendation not to regulate
viral and bacterial contamination in systems using ground water sources via this
rule and intends to classify only those ground water sources which clearly indicate
a likelihood of contamination by Giardia cysts as "under direct influence of
surface water."
We request the aid of surveyors in identifying those sources which are influenced
by surface water. In order to do this we recommend that the following questions
should be reviewed and answered for each source inspected:
1. Is it clear that the source is obviously a surface water, i.e. pond,
lake, stream, etc., or does the utility have open storage facilities
that furnish water for human consumption without additional
treatment.
' ' ', , I " i
2. If the source is a well, does the system have a copy of the "Report
of Well Driller" as required to be filed with the State Engineer's
Office, and does the report and the well itself indicate the
following:
a. a casing that penetrates a confining strata of clay,,
shale, or otherwise impervious material,
b. the annulus between the drilled hole and the casing;
is sealed using bentonite clay, cement slurry, sand-
cement grout or other acceptable material; and this
seal extends from the surface down and into the
confining strata mentioned above,
c. any perforations of the casing or placement of
screens are below the confining strata mentioned
above,
12
-------
d. the well is drilled to a depth greater than 50 feet,
e. the well is located at a distance greater .than 200
- feet from any surface water,
f. the well has been pump tested in accordance with a
reviewed and approved yield/drawdown test and
results clearly determine the porosity and
transmissivity of the aquifer materials, and
g. water quality records indicate that there is np record
of total coliform or fecal coliform contamination in
untreated samples collected over the past three
years; no history of turbidity problems associated
with the well; and no history of known or suspected
outbreaks caused by Giardia or other pathogenic
organisms associated with surface water and
attributed to the well.
If the above conditions are met, then the well is probably not
influenced by surface water.
3. If the source is a spring, does the spring indicate any of the
following:
a. a variable discharge; especially one which exhibits
increased discharge coinciding closely with
snowmelt runoff or periods of precipitation,
b. periods of increased turbidity that; if not measured,
are clearly visible as either cloudiness or
discoloration; or if measured, approach or exceed
the maximum level of 5 NTU,
c. standing or running surface water within 50 feet of
the collection devices,
d. located within a broad flood plane, meadow or
stream/drainage bottom,
e. water quality records indicate that there has been
total coliform or fecal coliform contamination in
untreated samples collected over the past three
years, or there is a history of known or suspected
13
-------
outbreaks caused by Giardia or other pathogenic:
organisms associated with surface water and
attributed to the spring.
i I .
If any of the above conditions exist, then the spring may be
influenced by surface water and further tests will be necessary.
Those tests may involve one or more of the following:
1 ' ' i' "
1.) Temperature, pH, Conductivity, and turbidity monitoring and
recording.
2.) Mircroscopic Analysis (MPA) - Consensus Method for Determining Groundwaters
under the direct influence of Surface Water (refers to Sampling Water for
Detection of Waterbome Macroorganisms such as Giardia).
i
3.) Dye Testing
4.) Hydrogeologic investigation by one trained to perform such
I. Source Location
to facilitate: a) computer based geographic information system (GIS) mapping, b)
emergency response, c) computer aided determination .of contaminating entities
and many other GIS uses involving integration of numerous environmental factors,
it is necessary to accurately locate each drinking water source. This is done by
accurately identifying each source by latitude and longitude.
Essentially all community drinking water sources have already been located by
latitude and longitude. This information should be field verified and additional
information involving non-community and non transient-non community water
system sources should be obtained.
The following procedure should be used to determine the latitude/longitude of
sources.
i i
: '
1. Obtain and use a U.S.G.S. quad map to plot sources in the field.
2. Extract the latitude and longitude off the quad map using a
georuler.
14
-------
3. Enter the exacted latitude and longitude data onto the computer
data base. Note the extracted latitude/longitude information will
appear on the "water source citing, treatment and vulnerability"
computer printout if it has been entered, (Report 3.2.04 - Section
D - Item 4 above, or Appendix D-3 below).
15
-------
APPENDIX A
Suggested References
1. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations, Code of Federal Regulations. Part
141, (1986).
2. A Manual for the Evaluation of a State Drinking Water Supply Program. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (1974).
I
3. Sanitary Survey Training Student's Text. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. (1983).
4. Manual for Evaluating Public Drinking Water Supplies. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (1971).
5. Karalekas, P.C., Jr., "Watershed Management and Water Quality", Journal of New
England Water Works Association. March, (1977).
6. Reilly, J. Kevin, Steppacher, Lee, et all., "Water Supply: Surface and Groundwater
Applicability", Merrimack River Geographic Initiative,. U.S.E.P.A., Boston, MA
(1986).
7. Woodruff, Lee, "Watershed Control Program", Guidance Document, EPA,
Washington, D.C. (1986).
8. Moore, E.W., "Sanitary Analysis of Water", in Preventive Medicine and Public
Health. 10th ed., Sartwell P.E., Ed., Appleton-Century Crofts, New York, (1973).
9. Hibler, Dr. Charles P., "Hibler Test For Giardia", C.H. Diagnostic Incorporated,
2012 Derby Courts, Fort Collins, Colorado, 80526.
10. Manual of Water Utility Operations
Available from: Texas Water Utilities Association
6521 Burnet Lane
Austin, TX 78757
16
-------
11. Water Systems Handbook
Available from: Water System Council
221 North LaSalle Street
Chicago, IL 60601
12. Environmental Engineering and Sanitation
- by Joseph A. Salvato
Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Somerset, NJ 08873
13. "How to Conduct a Sanitary Survey" Procedures Manual
Available from: New Mexico Health and Environmental Department
Environmental Improvement District
P.O. Box 968
Santa Fe, NM 87504-0968
17
-------
APPENDIX B
i ' ', j ',''' i
Suggested List of Things to Look For
i
Well and Spring Information
1. Is there a sanitary seal on the well, and is it properly installed?
2, Does the casing extend at least 12" above the floor or 18" above ground?
3. Is the top of the well protected so that foreign matter or surface water cannot enter
the well?
! |
4. Is the site protected against flooding?
5. Does the well site and well pump house have proper drainage?
6. Is the well vent properly constructed including a screened end which terminates
in a downturned position at least 18" above ground level or above the maximum
flood level?
7. If a pitless adapter or well pit is used, are all entry points to the casing tightly
sealed?
8. Are the check valves, water meters, and other well system appurtenances
maintained and operating properly?
9. If standby power is available, is it in operable condition and well maintained?
10. Is direct surface drainage and contamination diverted around or away from the
spring?
11. Is the area around the spring properly fenced?
12. What are the depth and extent of spring collection facilities?
13. Is there adequate soil cover over the spring collection system?
18
-------
Surface Water Source
1. Is the source subject to industrial, domestic, or other types of pollution?
2. Have the intakes been properly protected from silt buildup?
3. Are there multiple intake locations?
4. Is human activity restricted in the watershed?
5. Is the raw water pumping capacity adequate?
6. If standby or auxiliary power is available, is it operable and well maintained?
7. Are chemicals properly -stored and handled?
8. Is chemical feeding adequate to produce a visible and settleable floe?
9. Is jar testing routinely performed to optimize chemical feed?
10. Are the necessary treatment plant report forms properly completed and reported
to the State on time?
Vulnerability of Source
1. What is the nature of potential sources of contamination and how far are they
located from drinking water source sites?
2. Is the source within a known or potential VOC/SOC contamination area?
3. What physical/geological conditions exist to protect drinking water sources?
4. Is the source drawing from a confined or unconfined aquifer?
5. What is the proximity to stored chemicals, pesticides, industry, mining, septic tank
and drain fields, land fills, fuel storage and feed lots.
6. Is there nearby use of possible VOCs and SOCs? If so, how far away?
7. Are intakes properly located, protected and in good working condition?
19
-------
I "
8. Is the source collection point located in a metropolitan area?
9. Does the water system have adequate control over watershed areas?
10. What is the proximity to drainage areas - can the pattern of drainage be
determined?
Source Location
1. Has each source been correctly plotted on U.S.G.S. quad maps?
1 ' ' ' i
2. Has all the latitude/longitude information on each source been verified?
! ' ! ' ' i
3. Has the extraction of the latitude and longitude off the quad map by a georuler
been completed?
Surface/Ground water
, . , i
I. Is the source subject to contamination as evidenced by past chemical and/or
bacteriological history?
2. Is there relatively rapid shifts in water quality parameters such as turbidity,
temperature, conductivity and pH?
i i
3. Is the well or spring properly constructed?
4. Is the source susceptible to contamination by surface water via infiltration,
underground channeling, lakes, streams, rivers, canals, lagoons, etc.?
Disinfection
1 i i
1. Is the disinfection equipment being operated and maintained properly?
2. Are critical repair tools and spare parts on hand?
i i i
3. If gas chlorination is used, are adequate safety precautions being followed (exhaust
fan with intake near floor, gas mask with positive pressure system used, an
ammonia leak bottle available, tanks chained to wall or otherwise secured)?
; ; j, ;
4. If hypochlorite is used, are dilutions being made in a proper manner?
1 i . i
20
-------
5. Are chlorine residual measurements being made and recorded?
6. Is a free chlorine residual being maintained throughout the water system?
7. Is there sufficient contact time (at least 30 minutes) between the chlorination point
and first point of use?
8. Are the necessary report forms being completed and properly reported to the
State?
Other Treatment
1. Is chemical storage adequate?
2. Are chemical feeders and pumps in operation, good condition and being properly
maintained?
3. Are instrumentation and controls for the process being utilized and in proper
working order?
4. Are accurate records being maintained (amount of water treated, amount of
chemical usage, etc.)?
5. Are adequate safety devices available and precautions observed (dust mask, safety
goggles, gloves, protective clothing)?
Storage
1. Is there adequate storage capacity?
2. Is the storage reservoir properly coated to reduce flaking and corrosion? Is an
approved coating material used?
3. Does surface run-off and underground drainage drain away from the storage
structure?
4. Are the storage reservoir protected against flooding?
5. Are overflow lines, air vents, and clean out pipes turned downward or covered,
screened and terminate a minimum of 18 inches above the ground or storage tank
surface?
6. Are the storage reservoirs clean and free from contamination?
21
-------
7. Is the reservoir structurally sound?
I . . I ,
Distribution System
1. Are pressure and flows adequate throughout the system at all times of the year?
2. Are all services metered?
3. Are plans of the water system available and current?
4. Are there multiple pressure zones?
5. Are valves and hydrants routinely exercised?
Management
1. Are personnel adequately trained? For those community systems serving a
population above 800, is the responsible charge operator properly certified?
2. Is the emergency plan available and workable? ,
3. Are supplies and maintenance parts inventories adequate?
4. Are sufficient operation and maintenance records being kept?
5. Are routine maintenance schedules established and adhered to for all components
of the water system?
6. Are all facilities and activities free from safety defects?
7. Are the necessary operational reports completed and submitted on time to the
State?
Cross Connections
I. Does your system have a Cross Connection Control Program?
2. What are the basic components of your program?
a. Does your system have an ordinance, bylaw or policy regarding cross connection
control in place? If yes, what are the basic requirements?
22
-------
b. Has your system distributed public awareness information? If yes, what type and
how was it distributed? What follow up information do you plan to provide and
ซซfV>AXtO
when?
c.
Has the water system personnel been trained in the area of backflow prevention
and cross connection control?
d. Where are your records for the program stored?
What do your records consist of (assembly test reports, assembly location forms,
copies of public awareness information, copies of written notice given for dual
check installation if required)?
How is the system tracking and ensuring that the required annual test of backflow
assemblies is completed?
e. How is the program being enforced?
s
What type of protection strategy is the water system using containment or
isolation?
Is the enforcement procedure outlined within the ordinance, policy or bylaw?
Are the procedures clearly understood by all water system personnel?
3. Has the water system been separated into areas of high and low hazards?
Have hazard assessments been performed on all high hazard connections?
Has the appropriate protection been installed?
A written narrative of the system's cross connection control program must be included in the
sanitary survey. The narrative must include a complete discussion of the issues outlined above.
23
-------
APPENDIX C
I . i
Guidance For the Preparation of
SAMPLING SITE PLAN
On June 29,1989, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized the Total Coliforrn Rule (TCR)
under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The TCR applies to all public water systems (PWS) and
becomes effective on January 1, 1990. Under the TCR, all routine bacteriological samples must
be collected according to a written sample site plan. The intent of the plan is to assure that all
required routine samples are collected at sites which are representative of the entire water
distribution system.
The following criteria have been established to assist PWSs in developing a sampling site plan.
By January 1, 1991, each community and applicable non-community PWS must have a written
plan on file and are required to sample according tO4 the sample sites identified.
I i i
Sampling Site Plans - content and use
Sampling site plans should consist of:
i i
; '! !,,''' i i,,1
A map of the water distribution system showing the location of each sampling site.
A complete description of each sampling site (i.e., address and specific sampling
point).
i I
Beginning January 1. 1991
All required routine bacteriological samples must be collected from the sites
identified in the approved plan.
I I
Required routine samples cannot be collected from the same site more than once
during the month unless all remaining sites have already been sampled.
24
-------
Number of Sampling Sites
The number of sampling sites is recommended, based on the population served as shown
below:
Population Minimum Number of Sampling Sites
1000 5
1001-2500 8
2501-3300 10
3301-4100 12
4101-6700 15
6701-21500 20
21501-59000 30
59001-70000 40
70001 ' 50
This chart indicates the minimum number of sample sites recommended. You may designate
more if desired. Sample sites should be rotated on a regular basis.
Systems using groundwater as the sole source of their water supply and serving less than 4901
people may take all samples in one day. Other systems should indicate a time table during a
month when samples will be taken.
Location of Sampling Sites
Criteria to use when choosing sampling sites are as follows:
1. Accessible at reasonable times of the day for sampling
2. Available during the entire year
3. Located throughout the entire distribution system
4. Not the last service site on a dead end line
5. Has a tap suitable for sampling; preferably a single cold water non-swivel and non-
aerated tap.
Sampling must be possible from a tap within five service connections
upstream and downstream of each sampling site (to meet the repeat
sampling requirements).
Sampling sites cannot be located any closer than two service
connections upstream of dead ends in the water distribution system.
Small systems with few service connections may need to appropriately
adjust the location of repeat samples.
25
-------
Selection of Sampling Taps
The plumbing should be inspected to assure that no cross-connections
exist with nonpotable water sources.
The sampling tap must be free of any aerator, strainer, hoses, or water
treatment devices
Outside sampling taps should be avoided.
Each plan will be reviewed when a site visit, sanitary survey, or construction inspection is made.
Sampling site plans should be reviewed each year by the public water system to insure that the
plan is current.
26
-------
APPENDIX D
REPORT OF SURVEY
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Drinking Water
LOGAN CITY WATER SYSTEM
On Thursday, June 17, 1993, a sanitary survey of the Logan City Water System was conducted
by Dennis Corbridge, operator of the Logan City Water System along with Grant Koford and
Leonna Lundstrom of the Bear River District Health Department and David F. Hansen of the
Division of Drinking Water. The following report describes the physical features of the system
and offers conclusions and recommendations regarding deficiencies noted during the survey.
General Description
The Logan City Water System serves about 30,000 people through approximately 11,500
connections. Residents receive their water from four well sources, a spring source, three booster
stations, and six storage reservoirs with a total capacity of 7,500,000 gallons. The spring source
is the only source that is chlorinated.
Sources
Dewitt Spring:
The Dewitt Spring area is located approximately five to six miles east of Logan in Logan
Canyon. It consists of a very large concrete junction with feeder tile extending into the spring
collection area. In the collection area three boxes gather surface water and distribute into the
overflow area of the spring. The spring area sits at the base of Logan Canyon, water collects into
the feeder tiles and then into the junction box which was properly gasketed and locked. It is then
properly chlorinated. The spring area is properly fenced with a chain link fence and secured with
a locked gate. The fenced spring area is approximately 3 1/2 acres and well drained. It has been
raised by fill dirt which protects it to some extent from flooding by the Logan River. The
immediate area around the spring has be landscaped, and planted with grasses.
Well No. 1:
Well # 1 is located on Canyon Road and Crockett Avenue. It is 12 inches in diameter
approximately 990 feet deep with the top of the bowls located at 210 feet. It is equipped with
a 700 Hp Johnston vertical turbine pump with a I.D. Electric motor capable of delivering 4,600
-------
gpm. Each well house is constructed of concrete block and is properly equipped with a sampling
tap, check valve, pressure gauge, flow meter and air relief valve although not properly screened.
There is a bypass line from the wells to an adjacent canals. The buildings was properly heated,
lighted, vented, and properly locked during the time of the inspection.
Well No. 2:
This well is located on 2nd East and Center Street. It is 10 inches in diameter approximately
1,000 feet deep with the top of the bowls set at 200 feet. It is equipped with a Fairbanks Moorse
200 Hp pump with a Fairbanks Moorse 400 booster pump capable of delivering 3,800 gpm when
in operation.
Well No. 3:
Well # 3 is located on 6th East and 7th North. It is 12 inches in diameter approximately 1,000
feet deep with the top of the bowls set at 170 feet. It is equipped with a Johnston pump with
a U.S. Electric 200 Hp motor capable of delivering 3,400 gpm.
Willow Park Well:
This well is located on the west side-of Willow Park next to the canal. It is 12 inches in
diameter, approximately 990 feet deep with the top of the bowls set at 220 feet. It is equipped
with a Johnston pump with and U.S. 500 Hp motor capable of delivering 3,600 gpm. This well
was used only once during the last eight years.
Booster Stations
Golf Course Booster Station:
This pumping station is well constructed from concrete, and has two 75 Hp motors with four
Auora pumps which alternate depending on the load. The pump station serves the bench area
north and east of Utah State University.
Cliff Side Drive Pump Station:
There are two Cliff side booster stations with station # 1 being the older of the two and is
currently used as a standby station. The standby station or Cliff side # 1 has two 60 Hp
marathon motors. Cliff side # 2 is equipped with two U.S. Electric 125 Hp motors which are
sensor probed two the Cliff side 1,000,000 gallon reservoir which kicks the booster on at 7.5 and
turns off at 14.5 .
-------
Storage
Golf Course Reservoirs:
Logan City has 5 different reservoirs located on the hillside next to the golf course. Two of
these tanks are rectangular in shape concrete and buried. The one nearest the golf course booster
station is 1,000,000 gallons and the other has 2,000,000 gallons in storage. The other two
reservoirs are circular concrete buried tanks. Each of these tanks have a storage capacity of a
1,000,000 gallons. In addition Logan City has contracted with Utah State University and is using
a 1,000,000 gallon reservoir. They were all properly locked and screened.
Cliff Side Reservoir:
The cliff side reservoir is the newest of Logan City reservoirs and has a 1,000,000 gallons
storage capacity.
Castle Hills Reservoir:
The castle hills reservoir is a 500,000 gallon concrete circular reservoir, about a mile north of
the college reservoir.
Chlorination Facilities
The new chlorination facility for the Logan City water system is housed in a building located just
north of Dewitt Springs. The vacuum operated chlorinator is operated by dual alternating 1 1/2
H p Lesson motors powering Jaczzi booster pumps located in an adjacent underground vault.
The chlorinator is a Wallace and Tiernan V-notch chlorinator. The chlorinator was set a 53
pounds per day. Water flow is measured through a transducer and indicated the spring water is
being chlorinated at the rate of 0.3 ppm. The building was state of the art with chlorine leak
detectors, digital scales etc. The chlorination building had separating rooms for the cylinders and
the digital read outs for chlorine and flow. There were no gas maks but we were told at the time
of inspection they were on order. The only thing noticeable wrong was that the chlorine vent
tube should be screened.
Distribution System
The City of Logan serves approximately 30,000 people through 11,500 connections. There are
approximately 610 fire hydrants. The distribution system is made up of 8, 6, and 4 pvc, steel
and asbestos line. Logan's water works is connected to a telemetry system which maintains
pressure, activates wells, points out terrible spots, maintains reservoir levels and records the day
to day operation of the system. Even with the heavy loads during the last few years water
pressure seems to adequate in all areas of the City.
Waiver Assessment
-------
I I I
Although the well sources are deep in nature, properly grouted and equipped with a sanitary seal
Use Waivers cannot be granted because of the close proximity of the homes, parks, canals etc..
The Dewitt Spring, however, due to its remote location does qualify for a Use Waiver. Source
protection plans must be developed for these sources.
Sampling Site Plan
Logan City currently has a bacteriological and Lead/Copper site plan in place.
! i
Cross Connection
! I j
Logan City cross connection program consists of dual checks at the meter and required annual
testing of double checks and RP devices.
Source. Location
The latitude and longitude of each source has previously been determined by the Division of
Drinking Water.
!
Recommendations and Conclusions
1. Remove the deep rooted vegetation in and around the spring area.
2. Screen all reservoirs and tank overflow pipes with non-corrodible, # 4 mesh screen.
3. The new chlorination building apparently was developed without review and approval of
plans and specifications for its construction. As-built plans must be submitted to this
office for review and approval. Therefore, you must provide as-built plans and the
documentation outlined in R309-106-5 of the Utah Public Drinking Water Rules.
4 All the wells air relief valves were not properly screened with a No. 14 non-corrodible
mesh screen.
5. The chlorine vent tube must be screened with a No. 1 non-corrodible mesh screen.
6. Once the gas masks arrive they should be mounted in a properly area for convenient
access.
-------
X 00
CD -
CM tO V
X CM
s
c
0
c a
o
U C
IB 4r
13
3
C. If.
O c;
cc a. cc
U!
v
U)
o
u
c
o
0
i.
41
*J
o
s
w
c
o
-J
'onnec
o
z
IB
O
H
3
0
u
c
c
o
u
i.
V
o
41
>,
H
> S CO
cs in
"
3 a a.
4i a. ts
4J t3 **
-a
S. C
a
e
ฃ
Ul
>
VI
a
L.
o
u
u.
(.ISO
til O Z
>* ~*
1 1
cr
3 -O 41
< 41 ป>
U 41
Of V S
3 4> U
i/l E 41
w *ป
41 r- l/l
t. U IB
0. 0. Z
' O
3 W
3
ซ-> C
?- O ttfl
-> i C
3 ...
U I U
C 3 C
W ~>
.ปป
(o ^ cs co in ซ3
CM T T CS in CO
en cs en en es en
CS 0 CS in CS in
co 2 S * ^-S
3
(3
Z
l"-
yr
ป*
CC
o
c
t
zฐ
c
(/:
M.
>
t^
CJ
ฃ
<
t-
jU
s
H
M
Z
O
*H
|^
<
O
ฃx.
Z
*ซ '
SM
51
a.
us
cc
(-
3
u
(^
' _J3
ffi.
-3.'
a.
es
es
n
s
i.
4;
A
E
Z
41
^
Sk
w
L.
A^
(6
ป .
Q p. ^. p, f^ _
ui (c cr. en cc es n
> X X X X XX
OF-^ZN esf^cc
o.xx_;xis:xi3
^ s s ^ o z ฎ *"*
s
o
s
a a: u c
t ._>,.. u c o
c > tt -c c. t- c
u a. a- c. c -J c .
cc -o >,>,<._ซ
u 4- 4: CC 63 t. 4J
K >>- > C C 41 It
n:ii:o.i_
C C ~ V C C
U 63 *J ปJ t/S >ป a. E' C.
C C C C V C C C
. ._ ฃ U a > *J iJ ._
j->jj>>ซi_ซioaj-c
IBieCCIB3l3>,<;C
CC CC ^ *^ ซ M W 22 Ltl
.' . >'
5
ง ง
s ฃ "
>ซ re _:
W V <
cc u
Ul Q. H*
E*^ CC ^* Z ^
< c ^ .: u: (_
u? E cc cs
(- H X t- i < z
""cs i- _; ID - ic
o Cr cc ** n * in
z (- cr. ~ cr.
z z z z LL- = c en u: en
< i
uu isausosi^s
cc -cc-, 4) '41 ซ
E4!K 4; C. 1. C L C
itcc- i.c>uccc
zsu <=(-cj; c.ฃ
C c c is c. c a.
< ซ-' S
1
I
1-
z
u
E
^
u:
i-
i
i
i
t
i
i
i
i
ปn
^
cc
o
H
'
l
i .
i
I
>.
H
<
S
u
i
_!
C
1-
^
e*
I
Z
C
H
<
Z
ป-<
CC
*;
x
u '
. ซ
.. -J
4J C
C. IB
1- O.
, r
u:
**
u
z
o
U
v:
4^
C
c
^ ซ
4.' U
ฃ 41
E -J
3 It
Zฃ
s cs
in
* . *^
ฃ. C.
- E
C V)
E
C 3
CC i x
cs
c^
" X
en
4!
cc
V)
It " 13
U! It C
C Vi tzj
~ IT.
ฃ 1- C
"OS
C O
c oi PC
2
4)
E
IB
01
L.
H
L
, 0
4!
C.
1-
c-*ป
C 0
o s-
< C-
"C *^*
~" ~
1 tC
.(^
l C
*
^<
0}
s
I Q.
1 "
4;
E
It .
z
4;
i.
3
C
V.
s
U 01
t. c.
3 >.
0 1-
V,
c
z
*
z
c
*-
H
z
>^
,cc
c "j;
^ z
r: o
<
I-
[- Li!
I- i:
*. ฃ
O U
ts
;z
IX.
a. &
ts s
z z
C 0
z z
cs s
es es
,ec T
r~
b;
1-
Z
u; u;
u
s
t- s
u: (o
U.' Z
cs s
s es
E S
S 3
CS S
z z
c c
z z
^
t!
^ป
S S
cs cs
o in
S CO
CM r-.
a.
lฃ
U!
Q
H
<
tsl
^ฃ
CC C9
< CS
a. n
ป z
o
_ cs
w ฎ
H- CS
^f r+
til lil
? 9
u< tc
cs cs
z z
* s
c
"ฃs?
f:
^
(
' c
z
>*
^
H*
z
t;
a:
O
w
H*
u;
u
cc
2
c
w
M
!-
. ,
V.
z
^
u;
Z
<
z
*
5
-------
B ป *
m e
K
* z~*
< 1 CD * *
V CD
* ZJITT
O -3 !-*ป-*
O > bl U) ^ ^
2 < "*
* EC w >< bi bi
^ b. X Hซ 3 S
ZH O 1- H
2 i < 1-1 K-I
ฃtj Cu [ U
b! O < < Z
O 3ฃ CJ ซ2 CD
C= CCS -1
= 0 bl
O O !/! U
ซ M ee
CR 5
x i o
CD M
CC 1
ฐ *
S
o
*-
w
1- *
o ซ
ft bl
H
X ft M
< ft M
H ce
bl
*~i ft U*
. S
* >ซ
* +*
* C9Z
* ^ s
*
* K b; ce
ft CC < CC
' 2 ^ 2
* bi
2 H bl
* U M U
* "2 M S
~ < ce M
C Z
0
: b: z
i 3 *-
! o
5 H
' O
ซ
u:
u
ce
0
*
*
*
*
*
y
*
t
*
*
*
*
$
m
9
<
*
*
*
*
*
*
VIOLATION INFOHMATION
3.
WAIVER ISSUED:
ce ฃ
b.
oil
|H
ft H b:
X 3
ft b! C
ft Ul
b!
ft t^ C.
. Si
M
< M
C
0.
0
ce
(9
^
u
s
5j
w
ce
>
ฃ
b!
U5
CR
X
ce
r*
X
(O
s
06/1 8/9?.
,,
to
JJ
i
te
u
z
<
e
ce
e
z
(B
tt
tx!
S
p5
V
CC
s
en
X
^
12/17/90
M
u:
c
C*
S
z
c
o
c
USE WAIVER
g
CB
**
5
bl
ce
o
*
*
*
*
07/03/90
u
z
<
IS
g
ฃ
5
^
3
(9
b:
CB
Z
*
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
*
ft
*
ft
ft
*
*
ft
*
*
*
ft
ft
ft
*
ft
m
*
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
*
ft
ft
ft
ft
*
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft
analysis to the State. Some labor-
, please specifically instruct the
ts yourself. All results of analysts
^
u. u *
0 ซ. 3
on *
W uป 41
* 4) L. 1. ft
i. e s
3 a 4; ~> rt *
M ฃ ฃ 1C EC
41 ปJ ซJ 3t T ft
u i
. -o B3 V ป
0 41 i. C
t. *j a ป
n ic s c A 7 ^M
5 jj t. o c cecr. < ^^H
I. M O --. -^H
o ซ- " t. r * ^^H
<*- 4; u c ic te ^ซซV
ฃ U t J-il ft
C J-> C M b. SB
*> C ."5 ft
c 4; s >m
>*j o u c n -j *
-J *.- c O OS ~
us a a T (j -i ซ
^v: -*.**^H4tc:
ซ?4i E X le "" *
Ul C ฃ O O O J
c t *> u x u *
O ฃ * Z
e.-e o 2 ic o c *
4!IO H3Q.Mct *
t. * v.
L. * *
ซ C
K
*> >. 4i *
f- U
(0 4.
*> U ฃ *
"" *) ft
L. 1C C
o e i. *
w O 1C
re *j ป >
S 3 ซ- C
(0 0 4J *
4; ^
ฃ *> *> ft
*> o e c
c * f *
V! M
e > ซ
c t. t
*> c o
4f S TJ ป
bi T C 9 ซ
1- O ฃ O
O *> ffl ฃ *
Z IB ซ) (
' ^
fl
^H
^B
>
t,
I
V
w
-------
c
u:
13
t t
S S
9
P!
0.
l/J
ซr e
S 10 T
a. o
i a - - H
P> 01
I S T ^ i-l U
z -J es * * u s
O J -< .-< Z >"
>-bJP>T--O,
.o .c
IB > IB
c
.u a
a u
S 3 <ซ
QUO
10
V) M
(B 4)
ปJ !_
1.1 ID
u
O ซ)
-J Q.U.
tc ^ซ
u - tzi
o a. H a
U. > M 3
Z H U H
-. < ซ
U 0. H
UJ tj < <
u s: u -J
e 3
S O b!
O -
(- CC
SI
a
o
H
*
z
o
E
It
u
' S.
=>
o
M
SSU
VE
WA
U
c
s
* ^
s
ซ P:
cc ป
u: cc
H ซ
< S-
3 Z *
H
EC
u;
u;
OUARTERI
cc
EVERY 4
OUARTERI
ซ
ซ
i.
. 1C 3
CO
IB >ป
c a
IB U)
u. a.-
01.=
O u
*" 1- L.
"5 C ซ
U ฃ ฃ
ซi * *!
L.
-D
C ซ U
u * n
IB it 3 c jd
3 - - O C
I. M C
O ~> i.
U. 4; U O
ฃ - C ~~
C ซJ C V5 u.
C
C ft! ฎ
>ปป* ti u c P>
-J - C C =
ซ c .u *r
-J -J VI *T
* * ^ ซ* p^
j: = o. >
v. t 6 X
v. c; ฃ o o _o
c-i: c v it o
*
*
*
*
>^
u;
z
u;
t-
<
c
H
V.
<
u;
H
<
O
^
^
M
_ *
t
2
<
ซ
III
T_j
CM
Jg
<
W
tf!
CR
X
C
X
(C
e
cv
o:
X
cc
1
x
ฃฃ
s
p:
o:
CO
X
U)
s
re
cr.
X
cc
^
x
(C
s
p:
en
x
cc
l-f
x
to
s
CsT
o;
x
cc
X
(C
s
p:
O!
X
P)
s
X
s
s
O!
X
P!
S
X
ts
S
p;
o*
X
P:
s
x
[^
s
v
en
x
r-ป
fat
X
PC
"
s
cr.
x
N
jim
X
cs:
p;
0!
X
i-ป
P!
X
p>
s
s
CR
X
p>
s
X
ts.
s
*
*
*
*
E u: E
< cc <
Z E Z
ฃ z u:
uj u ซ
H III CC
M ซJ 3 *
> ec o
elM I
b!
H *
<
3 >
ง
O
L.
C
u
o
EC
C
C
ซ
b:
i-
u
f- C
c
M -
It _
c w
9 I
LL
EL
Z
O
O
e
b:
e
L:
ซ c re
L. 3 , t
CO.
ซ t: j:
*j c c
s 3 i. e
IB O *>
c
-j c c c
C i-> C
v. v;
c >ป
c i. c
^ C J3
"" C IB -C
u; t. c "3
H c c c
C * a ฃ
z 10 v.
2 a.
j:
1C ifl
(_
s
ซ. =
u Z
o
IB
\n c-
-------
CC
Ul
t-
(9
z
z
10 0 D n I
' 02/20/94 .
M
O
=
^
H
*"*
ATER SYSTEM
*
H
U
?
S
i REQUIREMENTS FOR: 1,
W
i
cc
1
i
z
5
e
>
-H
0
IS ง
H r-
M CC
>i n J
VJ T <
CD U
ce -"
U H
HZ *^
ZSt^ -1
.* M CM 0
cm a.
>< D i
H < X H "> ป
i-i J O 3 X t-. f-
u m n co >-i
l_ -01 - z
z cc z en to 3
< U! O < 1 CM ฃ
gcc ID e ฃ
C O U3 O
j ce a. J is u
WATER SYSTEM NAME:
fATER SYSTEM MANAGER:
ADDRESS:
CITY. STATE:
PHONE;
POPULATION;
TYPE OK SYSTKM;
^
ซ
* ซ
s
* >-! *
e
n *
* *
* cc *
* cc *
* 3 *
Z
* ซ
* U! *
(t
* (/i *
^ซ
< W *
ป CC ป
Ul
* H ป
* ' * *
(9
Z
ce
o
2
o
ฃ
ฃ
Ul
1-
w
i/:
z
o
ป-i
H
3
CD
^
CC
t-
VI
o
cc
U!
CC
z
Ul
u
1-
cc
u.
X
o
cc
u;
c.
w
u:
E
E
I/I
s
IS
z
s
c
z
ฃ
U
(9
q
o
ce
H
O
<.
ce
H '
< ซ ป ul
Ul IB ซ ป
a. 3 -
Ul C S IB
SO V)
: ul C
u 41 3
u a
*J O S IB
l/I fl C
gj 41 ftfl
g t
IB H 1-
*> Ul < O
IB Ul
41 O. 41
o -U as **
* ! lซ
IB -O O
o -
0 -O ul
1- JC ซJ
*. 4J -J 13
Ul O
3 4i a ui
S jc
3 O **
o o -o o
>. C J3
4) O
- J3 0 C
>. 41 O
t_ 4J Ul
O VI U
*J 3 41 C
0 E JC C
IB t- -
; unsatisf
'" samples
sample.
:e connect
~ U! 1- >
4i a. o ...
U! > 41
O.CC U V!
E t i:
IB >- ซ
V. 41 U! >
(J +1 -J lu
IB
bj Ib U C
0 C C
* i 1ป JC
Of *<
. c
L. C ซ S
41 ' =
*J 13
U M ซ
IB ซ ป
J3 V t- C
C 41
64;
u- IB ฃ O
f, Ul *> 0
4!
V!
C
C.
13
V.
>,
u
c
IB
M C 41
O O 0.
to o*
Ul VI O
-> c u
Ul Ul O
ซ>>-
IB O <"
e 3
Ul *J IB ... S
0. 13 ซ 0
n u- ซ
_> 1. O C
E I.. M >.
0 4J 4!
o en jc "O
u c 3 -J c
ฃ ..- v> IB
rt! L. C -O
ja .- a
tSJSS5
ฐ.-.= u
C JC -O O 2
JC O
0 C 0 - >.
< 41 U 41
1_ 41 U
J* -0 " M
f O 10
41 2 V
ฃ 41 tU t.
-J C t- C O
1! 4! VT Jฃ O
J3 C U
s 41 .*
5 ^ ce u 41
L. 0 Q t-
tu C IB
Iw
: v> C O VI
3 ra C E
< J= - C t.
-J c O
ซ... ... U *" JC
CC 5 O *- ~>
0 Q "
tern fl?
C J3 v: E C
3 C IB >><-.
2; ^> ff Ul J3
.< 3 E 0 -0 JC
S - ! -
W ! -U
u: ป ซ - *x
_: 4; < o > c
feagrg-
< E c. c. o
M IB 1- IB
U VI V) ซ ฃ
s c: i. S
n 3 ... 4;
u. o c jc
< 8 JC I" ซ
Z
cc
c
z
c
ฃ
CC
CL
D.
{*
o9
O
^
*.
..-
M
0
1-4
H
DURCE AT AREAS IN THE
FACILITY AND AT LOCA
IS MEASURED
t/1 Z .
CHLORINATED 1
E CHLORINATIOI
LEAST 0. 2 mg/
0 H H
o u.
CC X C
c u.
Z M 3
U! U! C
1 SAMPLES MUST OF. TAK
IIIUITION SYSTEM FURTH
; A CHLORINATION REST
EX; ii. ซ;
" r- CS
O W h2
.Ti
^
X
1x3
i
i
cc
h
ซ
r^
c
K
ป
*
M
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
9
*
*
m
*
g
*
*
*
*
g
m
*
*
*
g
ate. Some labor-
ly instruct the
esults of analysis
4*1 -^ La
(.1 a
O
u
O 41
U! -*
VI V
~ 41 VI
U VI i.
>. IB 3
41 O
IB - >,
C 0.
IS V).
u. 41
0 t. 3
O Ul
ul lu 41
*> ซ U L.
_ L C S
3 4r 41 1 ' ff
-> 3 T
t. i
-o mi-
C 41 U C r-
t. *> IB -'
IB IB 3 C je 7
S *j i. o c co en
L. I/J O -fi
O 0- ป>.-.ฃ"
u. 4i o e IB ic
0 5 0 V. h. 3 0
*J C CO
o > s; es >>in
>*j o -cm-"
*J *> CCS '"
ซ tft IB G ป* *T U 1-1
J3 3 C. > J, 4!
iZ HI
IB 4!
^ C JC
"* jj
I. IB -O
41 E i.
*> O IB
ซ*ป
* 3 1. C
IB O -u
.
c t- c
*> O JB
1 Ul 4J
4: IB -C
1.
u: i. e 3
t- o a c
O ซ IB JC
z o -< v.
*
*
*
*
*
a
*
ซ
*
v
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
g
*
9
*
,
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
-------
cc
u:
H
0
Z
ป-*
z
cc
0
T
c
s
c
c
o >
e
z
o
M
*^
^
ป_i
o
X
<
l-
3
1ATION - -
d
CC
ฃ
z
i >
li:
U 1
cc
0
T CO
n
v i
3
> 1
>*
^
;
a
- a
a
a
a
*
a
a
a
*
ซ
a
ป
a
a
*
*
a
a
a
t s
-4 ซ
ฃ P) CM
CL
m en
JJ ea T v
z a
c a ป
X -! .H
/) r-
iUUHLf. lIKt:
SOURCE CAPACITY:
LATITUDE:
LONGITUDE:
g
H
co
X
CO
cc
bl
H
^
^
H
U
< CC
> O
CO CC CO
bl
CC H
(l< ^
( 1 ^
^
s
: CHLORINATION
TYPE OF TREATMENT:
H
[*
3
=
..
bl
ฃ
ซe
Cc*
{j
CC
s
VJ
-1
<7
J
Jl
3
_ซ
S CO
3
Z
< Z
""
u:
tf*
en
X
CD
X
IO
N
CR
X
CC
*-
X
U>
s
..
CO
^
r
Ul
ฃ
of
(J
z
c
e
o
z
*
cc
b:
^
cc
J;
u:
PJ
CR
X
CC
x
(0
s
cc
CR
X
ffi
X
(C
s
, .
CiT
[_
^
c
i-
5?
cc
b:
j^
cc
;ฃ
b:
CO
CR
X
cc
c-1
X
u>
cs>
cc
CR
X
cc
X
to
s
, ,
u:
i-
c
H
5?
If
3
3
CO
cc
^
b!
(C
jj
B
u:
P:
CR
X
P)
s
X
Cs
S
C9
CR
X
P!
X
S
..
U!
U
c
^
0 USE WAIVER.
u:
c
>*
^
c
cc
o
z
^
u:
e
i^*
^^
H
b;
D.
w
^
u;
^
T
jj
CC
>
b:
^y
CR
X
^
X
cc
fj
s
CR
X
ts
X
cc
^
,.
CO
u;
ฃ
i. M
0 4) >.
IB <-> <0
C
*J IB
41 U
e 3 <~
O L. O
CO 4->
M M
C ป
* ~" "3
IB ~* 4)
JJ L.
CO IB
O
41 .- -.
U
O V
M ' 41
41 W
Ul Ul U
>ป 18 S
CO
n >
c c.
<0 u
i ty to forward results of
s to the State, therefore
ate, or forward the result
ance Section
ion of Drinking Water
4030
City Utah 84114-4830
1 ) 5:ปl-Hl!i9
*j _> .- ir, T cs
M i ... _i 41 s
.03 c. > .a ~
MC E X IE
ui a: .c o o o _;
C L ** (J C ***
o .c *> z
C.-O O 41 IB C O
4i IS 1- 3 O. CO Jt
1- 3 Ul
! 4J
ui o
4! lu r
K
** >ป V
U S.
3 *J
4J
L. IE t;
41 ฃ L.
*> 0 IE
1C ฑ> 3
3 2 (- C
ID O JJ
C th>
J O O C
C -ป 4!
- 0 Ss "
0 t. 4!
-J O ฃ
Ul *J
4; IB -O
-~ 'L. *-*
i>: L. e 3
H O ^ O
o * a r
z o M
a
a
a
a
a*
a
a
a
a
*
*
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
*
*
a
a
a
a
ป
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
*
-------
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
Reference Guide for Inspecting Public Water Systems
-------
-------
REFERENCE GUIDE FOR
INSPECTING PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS
OCTOBER 1993
Prepared By
Division of Drinking Water Management
Bureau of Water Supply and Community Health
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
-------
-------
Reference Guide For Inspecting
Public Water Systems
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Forward, i
A. Source Water and Facilities 1
1. Watershed Characteristics, 1
2. Contamination and Adverse Activities, 1
3. Watershed Management and Source Protection, 2
4. Source Construction, 3
5. Source Equipment, 4
6. Sampling, Monitoring and Records (refer to "Treatment" section)
B. Treatment 6
1. Overall Facilities, 6
2. Presedimentation Basin, 6
3. Chemical Pretreatment, 6
4. Rapid Mix, 7
5. Flocculation, 7
6. Sedimentation, 7
7. Filtration, 8
8. Disinfection, 8
9. Fluoridation, 10
10. Phosphate Treatment, 10
11. Ion Exchange, 11
12. Aeration, 12
13. Reverse Osmosis (Membrane Filtration), 12
14. Sampling, Monitoring and Records, 13
15. Miscellaneous, 13
-------
c.
Distribution System ,
1. Storage, 16
2. Pipes and Meters, 17
3. Corrosion Control.Program/Lead and Copper Rule, 18
4. Cross-Connection Control, 18
5. Total Coliform Rule Sampling, 21
6. Sampling, Monitoring and Records (refer to "Treatment* section)
16
D.
Administration and Management
1. Water System Administrators, 22
2. Water System Staff, 23
. n , * !
3. Financial, 25
4. O&M Manual/Procedures, 25
5. Complaint Response, 26
6. Emergency Response, 26
E. Maintenance (Source, Treatment & Distribution) ......
1. Preventive, 28
2. Corrective, 28
3. General, 28
4. O&M Manual/Procedures (refer to "Admin/Management* section)
References, 30
22
28
-------
FOREWARD
This reference guide was developed for the purpose of assisting Safe
Drinking Water Program staff in the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources. With the increasing complexity of federal regulations and the varieties
of treatment needed for compliance, a guide was necessary to ensure consistent,
detailed assessment of source, treatment and distribution facilities. While no
'reference guide contains all components of a public water system, this guide
includes some of the most common inquiries into physical conditions, operation,
maintenance and administration. While using the guide, the facility insp.ector
needs to keep two questions in mind:
1) Is the problem (or potential problem) resulting in a real impact on
the performance of the water system, and thus compromising public
health protection?
2) Is the problem a violation of the Pennsylvania Safe Drinking Water
Regulations (which would again entail public health protection)?
Every public water system will have some problems that,' in an ideal world,
should be corrected. However, in recognition of time constraints and limited
resources of the water system and the facility inspector, those problems resulting
in a "YES" to either of these questions will increase the priority schedule for
correction. Nevertheless, it is anticipated that priorities will shift due to new
or modified regulations and changing time constraints, thus initiating frequent
revisions of this reference guide.
-------
-------
Reference Guide for
Inspecting Public Water Systems
A. Source Water and Facilities
1. Watershed Characteristics
Are all of the following items (a - f) documented in records,
and do any of them adversely impact water quality or quantity of
the source water?
a. Area of watershed or recharge area
b. Stream flow
c. Land uses (e.g. forested, agriculture, rural housing,
recreation, commercial, industrial, etc.)
d. Degree of public access to the watershed or recharge area
e. Terrain, soil type, and geology
f. Types of vegetation and extent of cover
2. Contamination and Adverse Activities
Do any of the following items (a - q) in the watershed or
recharge area adversely impact (actual and potential) water
quality or quantity of the source water?
a. Point discharges of sewage, stormwater or other wastewater
b. Single and multiple family sewage disposal systems
c. Recreation (swimming, boating, fishing, hunting, etc.)
d. Human habitation
e. Pesticide/herbicide/fertilizer application
f. Logging
g. Commercial, industrial or manufacturing activity
h. Solid waste or other disposal facilities, including
landfills, hazardous waste, waste tailings, etc.
i. Materials storage, transport or transfer, including
hazardous materials storage, road salt stockpiles,
road/rail/barge transport with spill pptential, transfer .
stations, manure pits/ etc.
-------
j. Above and below ground storage tanks and pipelines
k. Mining operations and discharges
1. Injection and productions wells (oil, gas, water, etc.)
ra. Livestock and other concentrated domestic animal activity
n. Agricultural activities such as grazing, tillage (erosion),
concentrated manure areas, chemical applications, etc.
o. Turbidity fluctuations from precipitation
p. Inorganic contaminants from parent materials (e.g. asbestos
fibers)
q. Algae blooms
Watershed Management, and Source Protection
a. Surface and Ground Water
1) If the public water system does not own the entire
watershed or recharge area, have written agreements beer
made with other land owners to satisfactorily control
the land uses?
2) Is the public water system making efforts to obtain as
complete ownership of the watershed or recharge area
as possible? Is effort directed to control critical
adverse impacts on the source?
3) Where access is limited, is the watershed or recharge
area regularly inspected for new potential and actual
sources of contamination?
4) Does the water system employ adequately qualified
personnel to identify watershed and water quality
problems? Who is given responsibility to correct these
problems?
5) Are raw water quality records kept to assess trends and
to assess the impact of different activities and
contaminant control techniques in the watershed or
recharge area?
6) Has the water system responded adequately to concerns
expressed about the source or watershed/recharge area
in past inspections and sanitary surveys?
7) Has the water system identified problems in its yearly
watershed control reports, and if so, what progress has
been made in solving these problems?
8) Does the water system actively interact with other
-------
agencies that have control or jurisdiction in the
watershed or recharge, area? Are their policies or
activities consistent with the water system's goal of
maintaining high raw water quality?
9) Does the water system actively initiate corrective
measures to improve raw water quality (e.g. copper
sulfate treatment to control aquatic growth, vegetation
control around reservoir shorelines, etc.)?
b. Ground Water
1) In addition to the above management practices and
protective measures (items 1 - 9), has the water system
formally delineated a wellhead protection area for each
well? Is it being implemented?
2) Is a protective radius of 100 feet established around
each well? How is it controlled?
3) Are any contaminant sources within a zone of 100 feet?
4) Is the source protected from rapid shifts in water
quality characteristics during heavy precipitation
events? Is infiltration occurring from a nearby surface
source?
5) Do any man-made features (e.g. .abandoned wells,
roadcuts, etc.) within 200 feet of the source expose the
aquifer to direct surface water infiltration? Does the
topography, or depth of weathering, within 200 feet
expose the source?
6) Is the well located in a carbonate aquifer and does it
have a static water level of 50,feet or less? If in an
unconfined aquifer, does the well have a static water
level of 100 feet or less? If in a confined aquifer,
does it have a static water level of 50 feet or less?
7) During a pump test, is the well's recharge boundary
within 200 feet of a surface water body?
4. Source Construction
a. Surface Intakes
1) Is the source adequate in quantity?
2) Is the best quality source, or location of the source,
in use?
3) Is the intake protected from icing problems?
4) Can intake levels be varied to obtain the best water
quality?
-------
5) Is the intake screened to prevent entry of debris, and
are the screens maintained?
6) Is animal activity controlled within the immediate
vicinity of the intake?
7) Is a raw water tap available for routine monitoring?
b. Wells
j i i
1) Is the source adequate in quantity?
2) Is the well properly cased and grouted? Is the casing
capped and locked?
i
3) Is a well construction diagram available?
4) Is a raw water tap available for routine monitoring?
c. Springs, Infiltration Galleries, and Collectors
1) Is the source adequate in quantity?
2) Is the immediate source area adequately protected
(fencing and locks), and is the area within 200 feet
controlled?
*- ' ' '' '
3) Is the best construction used to capture the flow?
4) Are drains available to divert surface water from the
vicinity of the source?
5) Is the collection structure of sound construction with
no leaks or cracks?
6) Are the vents, overflow, and drain pipes screened?
7) Is the supply intake located above the floor and
screened? "
8) Is a raw water tap available for routine monitoring?
Source Equipment
I ' I " !
a. Are all intake pumps, booster pumps, and other pumps of
sufficient capacity?
b. Does the design of the intake structure result in excessive
clogging of screens, a buildup of silt, or passage of solids
that damages downstream processes?
''. ' ' i ' I , ' i ;
c. Are all pumps and controls operational and maintained
properly?
-------
d. Does the existence of high volume constant speed pumps cause
undesirable hydraulic loadings on downstream unit processes?
e. Are check valves, blow-off valves, master meters, and other
appurtenances operated and maintained properly?
f. Is emergency power backup with automatic start-up provided
and is it checked regularly to ensure good working order?
g. Are underground compartments and suction wells waterproof?
h. Is the interior and exterior of the pumphouse in good
structural condition and properly maintained?
i. Are there any safety hazards (electrical or mechanical) in
the pumphouse?
j. Is the pumphouse locked and otherwise protected against
vandalism?
k. Are water production records maintained at the pumphouse?
1. SOURCE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (refer to Maintenance,
Section E)
6. Sampling, Monitoring and Records
(refer to Sampling, Monitoring and Records under Treatment,
Section B)
-------
B. Treatment
1. Overall Facilities
a. Does the excessive age or poor physical condition of
facilities adversely affect water quality delivered to
consumers?
b. Is hourly production within the design flow capacity of the
treatment facilities?
c. Do one or more of the following raw water quality
characteristics (items 1-3) exceed what the facilities
were designed for, or exceed what is thought to be
tolerable, and degrade process performance?
' ! . i ' in, 1
1) THM Precursors
2) Turbidity
3) Seasonal Variation
Do seasonal variations such as change in temperature or
high turbidity during spring runoff exist?
d. FACILITY MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (refer to Maintenance, Section
2. Presedimentation Basin
Does a deficient design cause poor sedimentation that results in
poor plant performance (e.g. inlet configuration, size, type, or
depth 'of the basin; or placement or length of the weirs)?
3. Chemical Pretreatment
a. Are the appropriate type and amount of chemicals added?
b. How does the operator determine proper chemical doses
(e.g. jar tests, process monitoring results, streaming
current monitor or zeta meter, visual observation of floe,
historical performance data, etc.)?
c. Are pH levels properly maintained after the coagulant is
added (e.g. pH at 6.7 to 7.2 after alum addition or pH at
7.0 to 8.8 after ferric chloride/sulfate addition)?
d. Are sufficient alkalinity levels maintained after the
coagulant is added (generally greater than 20 mg/1)?
. . i , . '. | - i
e. Do chemical feed facilities have various fesed points to
optimize treatment (e.g. feed coagulants arid cationic
-------
polymers at rapid mix, feed non-ionic or anionic polymers at
points where mixing is gentle)?
f. Do facilities exist to feed the types of chemicals required
to -produce a high quality stables finished water (e.g.
coagulant aids, flocculant aids, filter aids, stabilization
chemicals)?
g. Do chemical feed facilities provide adjustable feed ranges
that are easily set for operation at all required dosages?
h. Do chemical feed controls remain set once adjusted or do
they vary?
i. Are chemical feed rates easily measured, and are chemical
feed facilities calibrated at least once every six months?
4. Rapid Kix
Does a lack of mixing or inadequate mixing result in
excessive chemical use or insufficient coagulation to the
extent that it impacts plant performance?
5. Flocculation
a. Does the performance of the flocculation unit process
contribute to problems in downstream unit processes and
eventually degrade plant performance?
b. Does a lack of flocculation time or flocculation stages with
variable energy input result in poor floe formation and
degrade plant performance?
c. Is a floe formed and does it settle at an appropriate
location?
6. Sedimentation
a. Does a deficient design cause poor sedimentation that
results in poor filter performance (e.g. inlet
configuration, size, type, or depth of the basin; or
placement or length of the weirs)?
b. Do design problems or other problems (e.g. high flow rates)
lead to short-circuiting?
c. Is sludge removed often enough to prevent short-circuiting?
d. Does the type or capacity of sludge disposal and treatment
processes cause process operation problems that degrade
plant performance? Are sludge facilities of sufficient size
and type to ensure that poor plant performance does not
occur, or that applicable permits regulating the discharge
are not violated?
-------
7. Filtration
a. Does excessive filter run time between backwashes lead to ฃ
degradation in filter effluent quality?
b. What criteria (e.g. headloss, time or turbidity, or all
three) is used to determine when to backwash a filter?
c. Is the backwash time long enough and backwaish rate (usually
15 gpm/sq ft) high enough to adequately clean the media?
Are mudballs and mud accumulation apparent?
d. Is the backwash even throughout the filter bed (e.g. no
media boils or dead spots)?
1 i i , ' I ' ' i
e. Are the surface wash and backwash facilities adequate to
maintain a clean filter .bed?
f. How severe are post-backwash turbidity spikes? Does the
lack of filter-to-waste (rewash) facilities, or lack of use,
result in high on-line turbidity spikes?
g. How quickly does the filter effluent return to the
pre-backwash turbidity levels?
h. Does the size of filter, or the type, depth and effective
size of filter media hinder its ability to adequately treat
water?
i. Have the underdrains or support gravels been damaged or
disturbed to the extent that filter performance is
compromised?
j. Does the lack of functional filter appurtenances (e.g.
headloss gauges, rate-of-flow controllers, etc.) result in
degraded filter effluent quality?
k. Are the backwash waste facilities and disposal area of
sufficient size and type to ensure that poor plant
performance does not occur, or that applicable permits
regulating the discharge are not violated?
8. Disinfection
a. Is the disinfection equipment appropriate for the
application (e.g. correct equipment for chloramines, liquid
or gas chlorine, ozone, chlorine dioxide)?
b. Are back-up units available in case of failure, and are they
operational?
c. Is auxiliary power available with automatic start-up in case
of power outage? Is it tested and operated on a regular
basis, both with and without load?
-------
d. Is an. adequate quantity of disinfectant on hand and is it
properly stored?
e. In the case of hypochlorinators, does an excessive amount of
scale buildup on feeder valves result in a failure to
properly feed the solution?
f. In the case of gaseous chlorine, is automatic switch-over
equipment available when cylinders expire?
g. Are scales available and operational?
h. Are chlorine cylinders properly labeled and chained?
i. Are critical spare parts on hand to repair disinfection
equipment?
j. Is disinfectant feed proportional to the water flow?
k. Are daily records kept of disinfectant residual near the
first customer from which to calculate CT values?
1. Are production records maintained to determine CT values?
m. Are year-round CTs acceptable based on the level of
treatment provided?
n. Does prechlorination cause excessive finished water
disinfection by-products?
o. Is the proper disinfectant residual maintained at the entry
point and in the distribution system/ and are records kept
of daily or continuous measurements?
p. Is the system in compliance with all disinfectant and
disinfectant by-products monitoring requirements?
q. If gas chlorine is used, are the following safety
precautions (items 1-5) being followed to ensure the
safety of both the public and employees in the event of a
chlorine leak?
1) Is the exhaust fan operational, and is an intake located
within six inches of the floor?
2) Is a self-contained breathing apparatus available, and
is it regularly tested?
3) Is regular safety training provided to employees?
4) Are automatic chlorine leak detectors available, or
ammonia bottles?
5) Are windows provided to view the, chlorine room's
interior?
-------
9. Fluoridation
a. Are the minimum and maximum fluoride doses based on the
proper annual average of the maximum daily air temperatures
b. Do excessive natural fluoride levels in the raw water lead
to high finished water fluoride levels?
c. Does the lack of chemical feeder calibration, lack of
flow-paced feed, or lack of a means to check feeder output
lead to improper fluoride doses?
d. Does the lack of continuous monitoring equipment and alarms
result in excessive finished water fluoride levels?
e. Do improper sodium fluoride bed depths (i.e. typically 6 to
10 inches is proper) in the saturator cause improper
treatment?
i 'i,i i
f. Does excessive hardness (i.e. over 75 mg/1) of the dilution
water result in scaling in the equipment and feed lines?
/ : ' , ' ' i '" i " ' .. 'i ; ' ' !
g. Does the lack of routine cleaning and maintenance result in
equipment failure?
h. Is 'the system in compliance with all fluoride monitoring
requirements?
i i, i
i. Is safety equipment available, including goggles or face
shield, gloves, apron, respirator, eye wash station, safety
shower, exhaust fan/dust collector?
10. Phosphate Treatment
a. In the case of sequestration, do iron and manganese levels
(i.e. more than 0.1 mg/1 and 0.3 mg/1, respectively) limit
the phosphate's ability to adequately sequester these metals
b. For sequestration, is chlorine added after (downstream of)
the addition of the phosphate?
c. Are phosphate solutions used within 48 hours?
d. Is enough free chlorine (i.e. 0.2 mg/1) maintained
throughout the distribution system to prevent growth of iron
bacteria?
e. Does the phosphate treatment result in phosphorous levels
that lead to excessive bacterial growths in the distribution
system?
f. Do phosphorous levels cause the wastewater treatment plant
to violate the discharge limit?
10
-------
1.1.. Ton Exchange
a. Synthetic Zeolites
1) Does the source water contain any dissolved oxygen that
can foul the resins with insoluble iron, rust or
manganese dioxide?
2) Does infrequent regeneration with brine solution lead to
occasional breakthrough of contaminants?
3) Do high concentrations of raw water contaminants prevent
full removal by regeneration?
4) Do high raw water concentrations of hardness (e.g. over
350 mg/1) or total dissolved solids (e.g. over 500 mg/1)
lead to excessive leakage into the finished water?
5) Is the backwash of sufficient duration and flow to
adequately expand media (e.g. 75 to 100%) for solids
and contaminant removal?
6) Do inadequate brine concentrations (e.g. less than 10%
sodium chloride solution) lead to excessively long
contact times for successful regeneration? Do high
brine concentrations (e.g. 15 to 26%) result in osmotic
shock on the ion exchange resin?
7) Do inadequate rinse cycles lead to noticeable salty
tastes when the unit is returned to service?
8) Does the overall ion exchange process lead to excessive
levels of sodium in the finished water?
9) Is the brine solution disposed of in an approved manner?
b. Greensand Zeolite
1) Do the source water contaminant concentrations limit the
efficiency of the greensand filters?
2) Do upstream processes (i.e. reaction basins) provide
sufficient detention time for chemicals to react?
3) Does infrequent filter media regeneration with potassium
permanganate lead to iron and manganese breakthrough?
4) Does the lack of process control testing (i.e. jar
tests) result in incorrect doses of chlorine, potassium
permanganate, alkalis, etc.?
11
-------
12. Aeration
a. Dispersers, Cascade
1
1) Are the source water contaminant concentrations too
for aeration to work properly?
2) Does the lack of alkali addition (i.e. lime, sodium
hydroxide, etc.) result in a reaction time that is too
slow for oxidation to occur?
3) Are flow rates too high to allow enough time for-
oxidation reactions to occur?
4) Do insufficient disinfectant levels lead to excessive
slime growths?
5) Do problems with freezing prevent the year-round
practice of aeration?
6) Does the lack of covered units or unscreened vents lead
to contamination from rain, stormwater runoff, rodents
arid insects? Are air gaps present to prevent backflow?
b. Counter-Current (Packed) Towers
' i , i i1 i i;
i i j !
13. Reverse Osmosis (Hembrane Filtration)
a. Does improper feedwater quality adversely affect the
osmosis system and its accessory equipment?
1) Are excessive turbidity levels and suspended solids
concentrations removed with cartridge filters?
i ' " ] ' E
2) Are pH values adjusted to proper ranges?
3) Are precipitating compounds (e.g. calcium carbonate,
calcium sulfate, etc.) sequestered with sodium hexameta-
phosphate to prevent scaling or fouling of the membrane?
4) If necessary, is the proper chlorine dose used to
prevent excessive biological fouling?
b. Are differential pressures across the unit routinely checked
to prevent possible damage to the reverse osmosis modules?
Are pressures within the manufacturer's acceptable limits?
,!. ; , ; ' ' , . i J .; i :.: , >
c. Does inadequate cleaning frequency, or improper use of
cleaning solutions, hinder the performance of the membrane?
d. Do malfunctioning automatic controls and shutdown alarms
lead to unacceptable operating conditions?
e. Is the reject stream disposed of in an approved manner?
12
-------
14. Sampling, Monitoring and Records
a. Does the operator frequently measure and record the
appropriate water quality parameters throughout the source,
treatment, and distribution processes to determine and/or
verify proper chemical treatment?
b. Is the operator performing the necessary testing for all
water quality parameters?
c. Are samples collected as close to the sample sources as
possible to prevent contamination from sample lines?
d. Are sample taps opened slowly and thoroughly flushed to
prevent dislodged scale and other material from
contaminating the sample?
e. Are samples preserved/fixed with the proper chemicals? Are
analysis for metals completed within 48 hours, or otherwise
acidified to a pH level of 2?
f. Does the absence or wrong type of process control testing
cause improper operational control decisions to be made?
g. Does the operator correctly interpret and apply the
monitoring results?
h. Are monitoring tests .truly representative of performance?
i. Is the analytical equipment adequate and are the instruments
properly and regularly calibrated? Is the shelf life of
reagents expired?
j. Is the system in compliance with all treatment techniques
and monitoring requirements for the source, treatment, and
distribution processes?
k. Are records of water test results and water quality
compliance results maintained?
15. Miscellaneous
The "miscellaneous" category covers areas of inadequacy (mostly
design oriented) that are not specified in the previous
treatment categories.
a. Process Controllability
1) Do the existing process control features provide
adequate adjustment and measurement of plant flow rate,
backwash flow rate, and filtration rate?
2) Does the lack of needed automated monitoring or control
devices (streaming current monitor, continuous
13
-------
recording turbidimeters, etc.) cause excessive operator
time for process control and monitoring? Does the
automatic operation of critical unit processes degrade
plant performance during start-up and shutdown?
b. Lack of Standby Units for Key Equipment
Does the lack of standby units for key equipment cause
degraded process performance during breakdown or during
necessary preventive maintenance activities (e.g. backwash
pumps arid chemical feeders, etc.)?
c. Flow Proportioning Units
Does inadequate flow proportioning or flow splitting to
duplicate units cause problems or partial unit overloads
that degrade effluent quality or hinder achievement of
optimum process performance?
d. Alarm Systems
Does the absence or inadequacy of an alarm system for
critical pieces of equipment or processes cause degraded
process performance, (e.g. raw or finished water turbidity)?
e. Alternate Power Source
Does the absence of an alternate power source cause problems
in reliability of plant operation leading to degraded plant
performance?
f. Laboratory Space and Equipment
Does the absence of an adequately equipped laboratory limit
plant performance?
g. Sample Taps
Does a lack of sample taps on key process flow streams (e.g.
individual filters, sedimentation basin solids, backwash
recycle streams) for sampling prevent needed information
from being obtained?
h. Plant Inoperability Due to Weather
Are certain units in the plant externally vulnerable to
weather changes and, as such, do not operate at all or do
not operate as efficiently as necessary to achieve the
required performance? Do poor roads leading into the plant
cause it to be inaccessible during certain periods of the
year for chemical or equipment delivery or for routine
operation?
14
-------
i. Waste Recycle
Does excessive volume and/or a highly turbid return process
flow stream (e.g. backwash waste water recycle flow) cause
adverse effects on process performance, equipment problems,
etc.? Does the inability to measure or sample these streams.
degrade plant performance?
15
-------
C. Distribution System
1. Storage
a. Gravity
1) Are storage reservoirs covered and otherwise constructor
to prevent contamination?
2) Are all overflow lines, vents, drain lines, or cleanout
pipes turned downward and screened?
3) Are reservoirs inspected regularly?
4) Is the storage capacity adequate for the system,
including fire fighting demands?
5) Do the reservoirs provide sufficient pressure throughout
the system (e.g. no less than 20 psi)?1
6) Are surface coatings within the reservoirs in good
repair and acceptable for potable water contact?
7) Is the hatch cover for the tanks watertight and locked?
8) Can each reservoir be isolated from the system?
9) Is adequate safety equipment (e.g. caged ladder, OSHA
approved safety belts, etc.) in place for climbing tanks
10) Is the site fenced, locked or otherwise protected
against vandalism?
11) Are storage reservoirs disinfected after undergoing
repairs?
12) What is the scheduled cleaning program for removing
sediments or slime growths on the floor and side walls?
13) Are provisions made for potential service interruptions
resulting from power supply, equipment, or structural
failures?
, ' i "... '!', | '.:'"' 1
b. Hydropneumatic i
i .
1) Is the storage capacity adequate for the system,
including fire fighting demands?
2) Are instruments, controls, and equipment adequate,
operational and well maintained?
16
-------
3) Are the interior and exterior surfaces of the pressure
tank in good condition?
4) Are tank supports structurally -sound?
5) Does the low pressure start-up provide adequate pressure
throughout the entire system (e.g. no less than 20 psi)?
6) Is the pump cycle rate acceptable (not more than 15
cycles per hour)?
7) Are provisions made for potential service interruptions
resulting from power supply, equipment or structural
failures?
Pipes and Meters
a. Do all construction materials meet AWWA or equivalent
standards?
b. Is the appropriate pipe size,and type used for the system
conditions?
c. Are proper pressures and flows maintained at all times of
the year?
d. Are all services metered and are meters read?
e. Are maps for the distribution system available and current?
f. Does the distribution system have an adequate maintenance
program?
1) Is leakage evident in the system?
2) Is there a pressure testing program?
3) Is there a regular line flushing program?
4) Are valves and hydrants regularly exercised and
maintained?
5) Are AWWA standards for disinfection followed after all
repairs?
6) Are specific bacteriological criteria and limits
prescribed for new line acceptance or following line
repairs?
7) Is the system interconnected with other systems?
17
-------
3. Corrosion Control Program/Lead and Copper Rule
a. Corrosion Control Program
! , : , , !, . !
1) Have customer complaint records been examined to
evaluate distribution areas of discolored water, stained
plumbing fixtures, pressure loss from scale build-up, or
deterioration of household pipes/hot water heaters?
2) Have accurate corrosion indices (e.g. Langelier
Saturation Index, Aggressive Index, etc.) been developed
to predict corrosion?
3) Has an accurate, representative sampling plan been
developed for a thorough corrosion monitoring program?
Has the program isolated problem sections in the
distribution system due to differences in pipe
materials, pipe/tank linings, or water quality
characteristics ?
4) Is the best corrosion control treatment or combination
of treatments in use (e.g. alkalinity and pH adjustment,
calcium and hardness adjustment, or phosphate/silicate
based corrosion inhibitor)?
5) Has the water system developed a means to evaluate an
optimum corrosion control treatment plan (e.g. desk top
evaluation, pipe rig/loop tests,, metal coupon tests,
partial system tests, etc.)?
b. Lead and Copper Rule
i . i
1) Has an accurate, representative sampling plan been
developed for lead and copper monitoring?
2) Has the water system exceeded any action levels for lead
and copper? If so, have the correct target public
audiences received minimum education materials that are
consistent with mandatory language?
3) Has the water system identified areas of lead pipe and
lead service lines, and areas of lead solder used?
4) Is the system in compliance with all Lead and Copper
Rule monitoring requirements?
4. Cross-Connection Control
a. Legal Authority
1) Has the water system adopted an ordinance that contains
the necessary provisions and authority for eliminating
and preventing cross-connections, including penalty
provisions for non-compliance?
18
-------
2) Have all municipalities served by the water system
adopted an ordinance relating to cross-connections?
3) Where appropriate, has the PUC approved the ordinance?
4) Does the ordinance include the following items?
0 purpose and general policy statement outlining the
need for the program
0 definitions of terminology used in the program
0 technical requirements (materials specs, sizes-, etc.)
0 responsibilities of each party (customer, water
system, testers, etc.)
0 acceptable backflow prevention devices and their
uses depending on degree of hazard
0 requirements for testing/retesting installed devices
0 qualifications for persons who install, test, and
repair backflow prevention devices
0 authority to enter premises to conduct inspections
0 provisions on penalties or termination of service
Plumbing Standards
Has the water system adopted a nationally recognized
plumbing code or developed its own plumbing standards that
establish minimum requirements?
System Surveys and Plan Reviews
1) Has the water system implemented a program to survey
existing customers and to approve new construction for
determining the type of backflow prevention devices
required?
2) Has the system surveyed and classified customers by
degree of hazard?
3) Has the system established installation deadlines based
on the degree of hazard?
4) Are plans for new service connections to the system
under review for approval?
Installation Requirements
Has the water system established standards on acceptable
cross-connection control procedures and how each device or
19
-------
assembly is to be installed in the distribution system,
including the following?:
ฐ information on devices or assemblies acceptable to or
required by the water system
": ! ' ; . I i1
ฐ criteria on the type of devices required for each type or
degree of hazard
ฐ guidelines on the required installation procedures for
each type of device
ฐ minimum and maximum acceptable performance standards for
each type of device
: !
0 guidelines on the required installation testing
requirements
0 qualifications standards for installers of devices
Testing and Maintenance
1) Has the water system adopted requirements covering the
routine testing of each device?
2) Do these requirements clearly indicate who is
responsible for the device's testing, repair or
rep1acement ?
3) Are testing and inspection procedures documented?
Record Keeping
Has the' water system developed a system for maintaining
records on the installation, repair and replacement of
backflow prevention devices, including the following:?
ฐ each customer's name, address, telephone number, and
emergency contact person(s)
0 each customer's commercial activities and types of
potential water contaminants
0 devices installed, size, make, model, and serial number(s)
0 installation and testing dates and testing results
ฐ name, address, and certification number of the person
testing the device
ฐ correspondences or notices sent to customers
Training
1) ' Has the water system established a training program for
20
-------
system personnel, including concepts of backflow and
backsiphonage, identif Iccition of cross-connections, and
the measures to eliminate them?
2) How many persons have been assigned to administer the
program?
3) Does the water system refer plumbers/customers to a
tester certification program?
h. Public Information
1) Has the water system estciblished program requirements
for disseminating information to those affected?
2) Can the system provide copies of relevant state, federal
and local regulations that apply to cross-connection?
3) Does the water system provide information on the
precautions that should be considered when installing
devices (e.g. thermal expansion, pressure differentials,
and changes in flow, etc.)?
4) Is the system prepared to provide comments on the
installation of fire suppression systems, irrigation
systems, auxiliary sources, swimming pools, and other
hazards?
i. Accident Response
Does the water system have an emergency response plan that
includes the necessary guidance on how to respond to the
contamination of the distribution system due to backflow or
backsiphonage?
Total Coliform Rule Sampling
a. Is an accurate, representative sampling plan available to
meet requirements of the Total Coliform Rule?
1) Where in the distribution system are samples collected?
Do the locations adequately represent the distribution
system? Do they include the first service connection
(or equivalent) and dead ends?
2) Who is collecting the samples?
3) When are samples collected?
4) Are the correct number of samples collected?
Samplingt Monitoring and Records
(refer to Sampling, Monitoring and Records under Treatment,
Section B)
21
-------
D. Administration and Management
1. Water System Administrators
a. Policies
Do operating staff members have authority to make required
decisions involving operation (e.g. adjust chemical feed),
maintenance (e.g. hire electrician), and/or administration
(e.g. purchase critical piece of equipment), or do policies
caus> critical decisions to be delayed, which in turn
affects water system performance and reliability? Does any
established administrative policy limit system performance
(e.g. non-support of training, or system funding too low
because of emphasis to avoid rate increases)?
b. Familiarity with Water System Needs
Do administrators have a first-hand knowledge of needs
through water system visits or discussions with operators?
Are they adequately trained, educated and/or certified? If
not, has this been a cause of poor system performance and
reliability through poor budget decisions, poor staff
morale, or limited support for system modifications?
c. Supervision
Do management styles, organizational capabilities, budgeting
skills, or communication practices at any management level
adversely impact the water system to the extent that
performance is affected?
d. Planning
1) Do administrators regularly summarize both current and
long-term problems in the water system and define how
they intend to solve the problems? Is their planning
mechanism effective and do they follow through with
plans?
2) Does lack of long-range plans for facility replacement,
alternative source waters, emergency response, etc.
adversely impact system performance?
e. Violations
Does the long-term inability of the system to comply with
all applicable MCLs or monitoring requirements result in
extra burdens on water system personnel?
22
-------
f. Water Demand
Does excessive water use caused by a declining rate
structure, concessions to industry, or high unaccounted-for
use exceed the capability of treatment unit processes and
therefore, degrade system performance? '
g. Safety
Have administrators instituted a safety training and
education program regarding specific work environments,
tools and equipment, and is it reinforced with regular
meetings, literature and supervisor oversight?
2. Water System Staff
a. Manpower
1) Number
Does ^ a limit to the number of people employed have a
detrimental effect on water system operations or
maintenance (e.g. not getting the necessary work done)?
2) Insufficient Time on Job
Does the short time on the job and associated
unfamiliarity with water system^needs result in the
absence of adjustments or in improper adjustments being
made (e.g. opening or closing a wrong valve, turning on
or off a wrong chemical feed pump, backwashing a filter
incorrectly, etc.)?
3) System Coverage
Is water system coverage adequate to accomplish
necessary operational activities? Can appropriate
adjustments be made during the evenings, weekends or
holidays? For example, is staff available to respond to
changing raw water quality characteristics or
emergencies during periods of operation?
4) Workload Distribution
Does the improper distribution of adequate manpower
(e.g. a higher priority on maintenance tasks) prevent
process adjustments from being made or cause them to be
made at inappropriate times, resulting in poor water
system performance?
5) Personnel Turnover
Does a high personnel turnover rate cause operation
and/or maintenance problems that affect process
performance or reliability?
23
-------
b. Morale
1) Motivation
Does the water system staff want to do a good job
because they are motivated by self-satisfaction?
2) Pay
Does a low pay scale or benefit package discourage more
highly qualified persons from applying for operator
positions or cause operators to leave after they are
trained?
3) Work Environment
Does a poor work environment and/or numerous safety
concerns create a condition for more "sloppy work
habits" and lower operator morale?
Staff Qualifications/Certification
1) Aptitude
Does the lack of capacity for learning or understanding
new ideas of critical staff members cause improper
operation and maintenance decisions leading to poor
system performance or reliability?
2) Level of Education
Does a low level of education result in poor operation
and maintenance decisions? Does a high level of
education cause staff to believe that needed training is
unnecessary?
3) Water Treatment Understanding
Is the operator's lack of basic understanding of water
treatment (e.g. limited exposure to terminology, lack of
understanding of the function of unit processes, etc.) a
factor in poor operational decisions and poor system
performance or reliability?
4) Application of Concepts
Is the staff deficient in the application of their
knowledge of water treatment and interpretation of
process control testing such that improper process
control adjustments are made?
5) Certification
! '
Does the lack of adequately certified^personnel result
in poor operation and maintenance decisions?
24
-------
6) Training and Technical Guidance
Does inattendance at available training programs result
in poor process control decisions by the water system
staff or administrators?
Does inappropriate operational information received from
a technical resource (e.g. design engineer, equipment
representative, state trainer or inspector) cause
improper operational decisions to be implemented or
continued?
3. Financial
a. Insufficient Funding
Does the lack of available funds (e.g. inadequate rate
structure) cause poor salary schedules, insufficient spare
parts inventories that result in delays in equipment repair,
insufficient capital outlays for improvements or
replacement, lack of required chemicals or chemical feed
equipment, etc.?
b. Unnecessary Expenditures
Does the manner in which available funds are utilized cause
problems in obtaining needed equipment, staff, etc.? Are
funds spent on lower priority items while more necessary,
higher priority items are unfunded?
c. Bond Indebtedness
Does the annual bond debt payment limit the amount of funds
available for other needed items such as equipment, staff,
etc. ?
4. O&K Manual/Procedures
a. Adequacy
Does the Operation and Maintenance Manual contain at least
the following (items 1 - 11):?
1) A description of the facilities.
2) An explanation of startup and normal operation
procedures.
3) A routine maintenance program.
4) Records and reporting system.
5) Sampling and analyses program.
25
-------
6) Staffing and training.
7) Sanitary survey program.
8) Safety program.
9) Emergency plan and operating procedures.
10) Manufacturer's manuals.
11) An interconnect, valve and blowoff exercise and testing
program.
b. Use
Does the operator's failure to utilize a good O&M
Manual/Procedures cause poor process control and poor
treatment that could have been avoided?
Does inappropriate guidance provided by the O&M
Manual/Procedures result in poor or improper operation
decisions?
c. Productivity
Does the water system staff conduct the daily operation and
maintenance tasks in an efficient manner? Is time used
efficiently?
5. Consumer Complaints
a. Have administrators developed a policy for responding to a
recording consumer complaints? Does the lack of adequate
response adversely affect morale of water system personnel?
b. Does the lack of records lead to inadequate follow-up
procedures and inability to determine trends?
c. Have administrators developed informational brochures,
utility bill inserts, and other educational tools to inform
consumers and avoid future complaints?
.1 i i i. .1
6. Emergency Response
a. Is a comprehensive emergency plan of action available that
includes response to equipment breakdown, loss of power,
pipe/storage tank breaks or failures, vandalism, toxic
spills, employee strikes, and natural disasters?
b. Do provisions include the following (items 1 - 7):?
1) Alternative sources of supply and reserve finished water
storage capacity.
26
-------
2} A list of organizational personnel and detailed
descriptions of their responsibilities.
3) A plan for recovery operation.
4) Training programs for operators to carry out the plan.
5) A plan for local and regional coordination such as state
agencies, police, and fire departments.
6) Communications procedures.
7) Protection for personnel, plant equipment, records, and
maps.
c. Is the plan reviewed and updated at least annually?
27
-------
E. Maintenance
1. Preventive
' , ' '; 1 ' i , ' i"' . i
a. Lack of Program
Does the absence or lack of an effective scheduling and
recording procedure cause unnecessary equipment failures or
excessive downtime that results in water system performance
or reliability problems?
b. Spare Parts Inventory
Does a critically low or nonexistent spare parts inventory
cause unnecessary long delays in equipment repairs that
result in degraded system performance?
2. Corrective
a. Procedures
Are procedures available to initiate maintenance activities
on observed equipment operating irregularities (e.g. work
order system)? Does the lack of emergency response
procedures result in activities that fail to protect
process needs during breakdowns of critical equipment
(e.g. maintaining disinfectant or chemical feeds during
equipment breakdowns)?
b. Critical Parts Procurement
Do delays in getting replacement parts caused by procurement
procedure result in extended periods of equipment downtime?
3. General
a. Housekeeping
Does a lack of good housekeeping procedures (e.g. unkempt,
untidy, or cluttered working environment) cause an excessive
equipment failure rate?
' t " : i i i
b. References Available
Does the absence or lack of good equipment reference sources
(maintenance portion of O&M Manual, equipment catalogs,
etc.) result in unnecessary equipment failure and/or
downtime for repairs?
28
-------
c. Staff Expertise
Does the water system staff have the necessary expertise to
keep the equipment operating and to make equipment repairs
when necessary?
d. Technical Guidance (Maintenance)
Does inappropriate guidance for repairing, maintaining, or
installing equipment from a technical resource (e.g.
equipment supplier or contract service) result in equipment
downtime that adversely affects performance? If technical
guidance is necessary to decrease equipment downtime,, is it
available and retained?
e. Equipment Age
Does the age or outdatedness of critical'pieces of equipment
cause excessive equipment downtime and/or inefficient
system performance and reliability (due to unavailability of
replacement parts)?
4. O&M Manual/Procedures
(refer to O&M Manual/Procedures under Administration and
Management, Section D)
29
-------
REFERENCES
I
Substantial portions of the preceding reference guide were obtained from the
following documents:
Renner, R.C., B.Al Hegg, J.H. Bender, E.M. Bissonette, Handbook"- Qptimizine Water
Treatment Plant Performance Using the Composite Correction Program.
EPA 625/6-91/027, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, February 1991.
Water Treatment Plant Operation. Vol. II, California State University, Sacramento,
California, 1991.
Guidance Manual For Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for
Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources. Appendix K, U.S. EPA, Office of
Drinking Water, Washington, D.C., March 1991.
30
ฃ)
-------
APPENDIX B:
Guidance Table for Using Surveillance Forms
-. Forms
Department Activities Inspection Narrative Inventory
*Full Inspection x ?
New Violations Identified x
Follow-up/Progress Evaluation x
Inventory Update x
Complaint Investigation x
On-site Consultation x
*.-
Office (phone contact, etc.) x
Emergency Response (no violations) x
Permit Related x
*use Water Supply Inspection Checklist as mnemonic tool
-------
LB'ii liiiiJiiiill... i
-------
Safe Drinking Water Program
Surveillance Strategy and Implementation Guidelines
October 1993
SECTION II
INSPECTIONS
Introduction
Under the requirements of Chapter 109, Safe Drinking Water
Regulations (SDWR), the Department must conduct a first-time sanitary
survey at all community water systems by June 29, 1994, followed by a
sanitary survey frequency of once every three years. Department staff
will conduct more frequent surveys or consultations if problems have
been identified in the system. In years between surveys, staff should
review the community water system's annual survey that is attached to
the annual water supply report as a tool in assessing conditions of
source, treatment and distribution facilities. At noncommunity water
systems, the Department must conduct a first-time sanitary survey by
June 29, 1999, followed by a sanitary survey frequency of once every
ten years for protected groundwater systems and once every five years
for all other noncommunity systems. For the purposes of the SDWR, the
Department's inspection format as outlined inthjs^ strategy satisfies
all sanitary survey requirements. Accordingly, inspection dates must
be transferred into the Model State Information System to satisfy the
Primacy agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency for sanitary
survey frequency.
During the inspections, staff should review source, treatment
and distribution facility conditions and operational control, focus on
current and proposed regulatory information, and refer the water systeit
to helpful organizations, groups, assistance programs and other public
water systems. Staff should also determine if the water system's
inventory forms require updating; the appropriate inventory forms
'should be on hand during inspections. Two inspection formats, one a
routine inspection and the other a narrative report, are outlined
below.
Inspection
Staff should conduct an inspection jointly with the facility
operator and use a checklist (Attachment 2A) of specific items to
review during the on-site assessment. The checklist serves as a
mechanism to maintain consistency'in the review process of facilities,
but not as an inventory mechanism. Checklist items include an
evaluation of surface and groundwater sources and their watersheds to
substantiate possible reduced monitoring requirements and to maximize
"use" and "susceptibility" waivers. The checklist also includes
treatment facilities, along with finished water storage facilities and
the distribution system. Other items to examine include operation and
complaint records as well as support documents (emergency response
plans, cross connection control plans, etc.). An inspection should
II-l
-------
1
also entail on-site measurements of water quality parameters to verify
proper facility operation, compliance with regulations, or to
cross-check facility monitoring equipment.
Staff should refer to the document, "Reference Guide for
Inspecting Public Water Systems" when inspecting water systems. The
following references may also serve as useful tools for conducting an
inspection:
a. Permit
b. Prior Department inspection reports or inventory forms
c. Filter plant performance evaluation report
d. Small systems outreach report
e. Annual water supply report
f. Annual public water system sanitary survey (in the annual
water supply report)
g. Complaint reports
h. Emergency response plan
i. Cross connection control plan
j. Water quality analysis results
k. Water system distribution map
1. MSIS inventory and reports
m. Brief description form
n. Correspondences
o. Other reports or studies
In addition to documenting the review of a water system, the
inspection form (Attachment 2B) also documents violations or problems
that have been identified, and any necessary corrective actions. This
documentation is especially critical to assist Field Operations staff
in selecting a water system for more intensive surveillance efforts
(see "Comprehensive Evaluations", Section III) or for additional
follow-up activities. Staff should discuss an overview of inspection
findings and violations with the water system operator prior to leaving
the facility. Staff should complete the inspection form only in
conjunction with a full inspection (i.e. review of source, treatment
and distribution facilities) or when documenting new violations.
FREQUENCY: At community water systems, the Department must conduct an
inspection at least once every three years. At noncommunity water
systems, the Department must conduct an inspection at least once every
ten years for protected groundwater systems and once every five years
for all other noncommunity systems. More frequent inspections may be
necessary at public water systems presenting a health risk to
consumers.
DISTRIBUTION: The original inspection form is retained in the district
office, and copies are provided to (1) the public water system and
(2) the regional office (or county environmental health director).
The completed checklist form is retained in the district office.
11-2
I):- i
-------
Narrative Report
A narrative report form (Attachment 2C) serves as a means to
record other Department activities associated with a public water
system. The goal of the narrative report is to demonstrate the water
system's progress in resolving specific problems, especially violation
or problems previously requiring enforcement action. Field Operations
staff should include in the report any on-site consultations that were
initiated as a result of problems previously identified in an inventor;
survey, inspection or comprehensive evaluation. Other items may
include partial inspections, responses to consumer complaints,
emergency response, the supplier's completion and updating of the
annual water supply report and annual sanitary survey, transfer of
regulatory information, training associated with the supplier,
permitting activities such as source siting, pump tests and progress o
construction, and office activities such as telephone consultations.
The reason the narrative was completed should be clearly stated at the
beginning of the form.
FREQUENCY: Staff should use discretion when deciding when or if an
on-site follow-up consultation is necessary. However, staff should
document all activities associated with a public water system by using
a narrative report. The report should seek qualitative results (as
opposed to a quantitative orientation), and should serve as a tool to
achieve progress in correcting problems at a public water system.
DISTRIBUTION: The original is retained in the district office, and if
necessary, copies are provided to the public water system.
II-3
-------
Attachment 2.-
PWS
DATE
WATER SUPPLY INSPECTION CHECKLIST
SURFACE & GROUNDWATER
SOURCES
01 Watershed/recharge area
characteristics & changes
02 Contamination/adverse activities
& changes
03 Watershed management/
wellhead protection efforts
04 Source construction & quantity
satisfactory? Y N
Source equipment operational &
maintained? Y N
Date of last watershed survey by
PWS?
05
06
OVERALL FACILITIES &
MAINTENANCE
*tO Max. production rate GPM
Total production GPD
Operating time hours
Design capacity. GPD/GPM
11
12
Are all facilities operational & in
good physical condition? Y N
Maintenance program? Y N
DISINFECTION
20 Back-up units/parts available? Y N
21 Auxiliary power available? Y N
22 Stored quantity/proper storage of
disinfectant? Y N
23 Auto switchover equipment? Y N
2d Flow proportioned feed? Y N
*25 Entry point residual/CTs
maintained? Y N
26 Gas chlorine facilities & safety
equipment adequate? Y N
OTHER TREATMENT
30
Chemical doses/solutions proper,
equipment operational,
monitoring adequate? Y N
Zeolite adequate for source water
quality? Y N
Zeolite regeneration, backwash &
rinse sufficient? Y N
33 Aeration adequate for source
water quality? Y N
3d Flows/chemicals optimal for
aeration? Y N
35 Reverse osmosis feedwater
optimized? Y N
Reverse osmosis pressures
proper? Y N
3 1
32
36
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
*50 Storage reservoirs protected? Y N
51 Storage reservoirs maintained? Y N
*52 Storage capacity adequate? Y N
*53 Pressure problems? Y N
*54 Distribution maps current? Y N
55 Adequate distribution system leak
detection/flushing/ maintenance
programs? Y N
*56 Lead & copper site sampling
plan?Y N
57 Corrosion control inhibitor?
*58 Cross connection control
plan?Y N
"59 TCR site sampling plan? Y N
*60 Adequate disinfection residuals
maintained? Y N
MONITORING & RECORDS
*70 All monitoring requirements
fulfilled? Y N
71 Proper sample collection
procedures? Y N
72 Approved/appropriate analytical
tests performed? Y N
73 Adequate/calibrated analytical
equipment? Y N
75 Outdated reagents/
chemicals? Y N
74 Are results recorded properly? Y
N
ADMINISTRATION & MANAGEMENT
*80 O&M plan & "records
. _ updated? Y N
*81 Complaint records? Y N
*82 Emergency response plan? Y N
*83 Certified operator? Y N
MISCELLANEOUS
90 Corrective action(s)from previous
surveys? Y N
91 Inventory update needed (list items)
II-4
5URFACE WA TER FILTRATl
CHEMICAL PRETREATMENT
100 Coagulant dose (mg/L)
Polymer dose (mg/L)
Pre-Clj dose (mg/L)
Others?
101
How does the operator dete
proper chemical doses? (jar
process monitoring, etc.)
102 Proper pH/alkalinity ranges?
103 Chemical feeders operation;
good condition, & easily
adjustable? Y N
104 Date of last chemical equiprr
calibration
FLOCCULATION & SEDIMENTATI
110
111
Flocculation time & facilities
adequate?Y N
Floe formation & settling
adequate?Y N
112 Short circuiting evident? Y !>
113 Sludge disposed properly & o
enough? Y N
114 Turbidity of settled water _
FILTRATION
120 Filtration rate (GPM/Ft*)
121 Excessive filter run time? Y N
122 Criteria used to initiate backv
(time, turbidity, headloss)
123 Backwash rate & time
adequate?Y N
124 Backwash uniform? Y N
125 Filter-to-waste after wash? Y
'126 Turbidity when filter is put on
127 Filter media size, depth &
condition adequate? Y N
128 Filter appurtenances
functional?Y N
129 Backwash waste facilities
adequate/permitted? Y N
* Potential Violations o' 25 Pennsylvania
Chaoter 109
NOTE: Some problems may indicate the need for a specific water quality analysis (attach results)
-------
WATER SUPPLY INSPECTION CHECKLIST
Check
List*
Notes
-------
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
WATER SUPPLY INSPECTION
.1 Attachment 2B
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
SAOl'TY NAME
PWSiO-
COUNTY
MUNICIPALITY
:NS?EC~ON
CฃR*Fiฃ0 OPERATORS NAME
TELEPHONE NO
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL'S NAME TYPE SYSTEM
TV LOCATION-ADDRESS
FIELD ORDER *
SSuE DATs
V A1. Response to emergency
A2. Continuous disinfection
A3, Response to an acute violation
51. Inadequate supply
82 Minimum disinfection residual
83. PMCL'trt. technique violation
84, Public notice for PMCL
SS. Noncompliance with Order
86. Failure to obtain perm it
Cl. Design/construction standards
C2. Performance monitoring
C3. Failure to treat as permitted
C4. Operate and maintain PWS
C5. Certified operator
C6. Improper interruption.repair
D1. Reports/Records. Maps
D2. Operation and maintenance plan
E1. Other
T:Mฃ
START
STOP
MARRA'IVE
WATER QUALITY
SAMPLING POINT LOCATION
SAMPLE NUMBER
PH
CHLORINE
TURBIDITY
RECEIVED BY (SIGNATURE AND DATE) INVESTIGATOR (SIGNATURE AND DATE) MSIS UPDATED SUPV INITIALS
-------
VIOLATION
REGULATION REFERENCE
A1. Failure to act in an emergency situation (includes: disease outbreaks,
spills, unregulated contaminants). 109.4,
A2. Failure to provide continuous disinfection (Disinfection must be done
continuously; any breakdown is an imminent threat). 109.4
A3. Failure to respond to an acute violation (includes reporting to DER,
public notification, investigation of cause and corrective measures
for the following acute violations: nitrate MCL, turbidity exceeding
5 NTU, and MCL for total coliform with fecal coiiforms present). 109.4,
.402
.202(c)(1)and(2)
.401-.403
81.
B2.
B3.
B4.
B5.
B6.
Failure to provide an adequate supply of water (includes: source,
storage and distribution system inadequacies).
Failure to obtain a permit, experimental permit, major permit
amendment, or emergency permit.
109.602, .603
Failure to provide acceptable minimum disinfection residual
throughout the system. 109.710
PMCL or treatment technique violation (includes: filtration/turbidity
violations).
Failure to issue public notice for a PMCL violation.
Failure to comply with an Order issued by the Department.
109.202
109.401, .403, .701(a){<
Section 13.(a) of Act 43 (SDWA)
109.501-.507
C1. Failure to meet design and construction standards (additive for
multiple violations).
C2. Failure to conduct performance monitoring for surface water
systems.
C3. Failure to provide level of treatment as designed and permitted,
failure to filter to waste.
C4. Failure to operate and maintain the water system or implement
O&MPIan.
C5. No certified operator or certified back-up.
C6. Improper interruption and repairs, failure to disinfect facilities.
109.602-.609,
109.301(1) and (2)
.611-.61!
109.703
109.4.
109.701
109.708,
.702
.711
D1. Failure to maintain/submit: daily plant records, sample siting plan,
water supplier complaint log. 109.701
wa supplier sanitary surveys. 109.705
distribution map. 109.706
emergency response plan. 109.707
D2. No operation and maintenance plan. 109.702
E1. Violations of other Safe Drinking Water Regulations (examples:
SMCLs, unregulated contaminants, special monitoring, etc.)
-------
ERWSCH04: Rev. 1/93
REPORT SHEET
(Consultation, Narrative, etc.)
Page of .
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
, . ,| i Attachment 2C
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE'
Facility Name
Prog. Code
Address
Date
PWS No.
City, Boro. Twp.
Permit/Lie. No.
County
Item No.
Received By (Signature and Date)
Investigator (Sif nature and Date)
II-6
Supervisor's Initials
-------
MARYLAND
Water Treatment Plant Inspection Report Form
-------
'. l!!!l,i!,i < 1 , .Hill Pii!,1,,,
-------
MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Public Drinking Water Program
Water Treatment Plant Ihsnection Renort
PWSED #:
County:
Name:
Plant Class:
Inspection Class:
Problem: Y/N
Inspected By:
Follow-up Letter Sent: Y/N
Date:
Follow-up Inspection Scheduled: Y/N
System Information
# Raw Sources:
# Connections:
Mailing Address:
System Contact:
Telephone #:
System Owner.
Interconnected To:
Plant Information
Plant Address:
Plant Contact:
Avgerage Daily Flow
Raw Source(s):
Type
RESIDENTIAL
(STREET)
(CITY)
(STATE)
(_ J .
POE#:
Jn-servicei
On-standby;
Out-of-service:
(FRDS): Total # POEs:
Source Type: GR su SP PG PS
Metered: Y/N
NON-KESID. OTHER
(ZIPCODE)
Title:
Fax #: (_
Telephone #: (
Reason: PURCHASE
Plant Status: ACTIVE/INACTIVE
Telephone #: (
MGD Design Capacity:
# Ground: # Surface:
# Ground: # Surface:
# Ground: # Surface:
Population:
_
J - _
J
SELL EMERGENCY
New Treatment: Y
J
MGD
# Spring:
# Spring:
# Spring:
Treatment:
Chemicals Added:
Aeration \ Pre/Post-Disinfection \ Disinfection \ Coagulation \ Flocculation \
Sedimentation \ Filtration \ Corrosion Control \ Fluoridation \ Iron Removal \ Othei
Operating Agency:
Superintendent:
Operator(s):
Other:
CERTIFEEDCY/N)
CLASS
NO.
Comments/Recommendations:
-------
I
INSPECTION INFORMATION
FLOW MEASUREMENT:
Identification
Meter Type
Units
Present Reading
Previous Reading
Date
!
PLANT MONITORING:
Parameters
pH
Free C12
Total C12
Iron
Fluoride
Turbidity
Other
Method
Frequency
Location
On-Site Test
On-Site
Location
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Part 1 - Management
Plant Safety
Record Keeping
Laboratory Control Tests
Maintenance Log
Customer Complaint Log
Emergency Response Plan
Preventative Maintenance
Staffing
Other
S
US
NA
Comments
-------
Phut Information
Plant Address:
POE#:
Plant Status: AcnvE/lNACTlVE New Treatment:
1. Avgerage Daily Flow
Raw Source(s):
Treatment:
Chemicals Added:
Plant Information
Plant Address:
Avgerage Daily Flow
Raw Source(s):
Treatment:
Chemicals Added:
Plant Information
Plant Address:
Avgerage Daily Flow
Raw Source(s):
Treatment:
Chemicals Added:
Plant Information
Plant Address:
Avgerage Daily Flow
Raw Source(s):
Treatment:
Chemicals Added:
;
In-service:
On-standby:
Out-of-service:
Aeration \ Pre
Sedimentation
POE#:
In-service:
On-standby:
Out-of-service:
Aeration \ Pre
Sedimentation
POE#:
'*
In-service:
MGD
# Ground:
# Ground:
ft Ground:
Design Capacity:
# Surface:
# Surface:
# Surface:
/Post-Disinfection \ Disinfection \ Coagulation \
\ Filtration \ Corrosion Control \ Fluoridation \
Plant
MGD
# Ground:
# Ground:
# Ground:
Status: AcnvE/iNAcnvE
Design Capacity:
# Surface:
# Surface:
# Surface:
/Post-Disinfection \ Disinfection \ Coagulation \
\ Filtration \ Corrosion Control \ Fluoridation \
Plant
MGD
# Ground:
Status: AcnvE/iNAcnvE
Design Capacity:
tt Surface:
On-standby: # Ground: # Surface:
Out-of-service: # Ground: # Surface:
Aeration \ Pre/Post-Disinfection \ Disinfection \ Coagulation \
Sedimentation \ Filtration \ Corrosion Control \ Fluoridation \
POE#:
>
In-service:
On-standby:
Out-of-service:
Aeration \ Pre
Sedimentation
Plant
MGD
if Ground:
# Ground:
# Ground:
Status: ACTIVE/INACTIVE
ป
Design Capacity:
# Surface:
# Surface:
If Surface:
/Post-Disinfection \ Disinfection \ Coagulation \
\ Filtration \ Corrosion Control \ Fluoridation \
MGD
# Spring:
# Spring:
# Spring:
Flocculation \
Iron Removal \
Other
New Treatment: Y/K
MGD
ft Spring:
# Spring:
# Spring:
Flocculation \
Iron Removal \
Other
New Treatment: Y/N
MGD
# Spring:
# Spring;
# Spring:
Flocculation \
Iron Removal \
Other
New Treatment: Y/N
MGD
# Spring:
# Spring:
# Spring:
Flocculation \
Iron Removal \
Other
-------
Plant Information
Plant Address:
POE#:
Avgerage Daily Flow:
Raw Source(s):
Treatment:
Chemicals Added:
Plant Status: ACTIVE/INACTIVE New Treatment: Y/N
M
MGD
In-service: # Ground:
On-standby: # Ground:
Out-of-service: # Ground:
Aeration \ Pre/Post-Disinfection \
Design Capacity:
# Surface:
# Surface:_
# Surface:
Disinfection \ Coasul
MGD
# Spring:
#Spring:_
# Spring:
ation \ Flocculation \
Sedimentation \ Filtration \ Corrosion Control \ Fluoridatiori \ Iron Removal \ Other
Plant Information
Plant Address:
POE#:
Plant Status: ACTiVE/iNAcnvE New Treatment: Y/N
Avgerage Daily Flow:
MGD
Design Capacity:
MGD
Raw Source(s):
Treatment:
Chemicals Added:
In-service:
On-standby:
Out-of-service:
# Ground:_
# Ground:_
# Ground:
# Surface:,
# Surface:,
# Surface:
ป Spring:,
# Spring:_
# Spring:_
Aeration \ Pre/Post-Disinfection \ Disinfection \ Coagulation \ Flocculation \
Sedimentation \ Filtration \ Corrosion Control \ Fluoridation \ Iron Removal \ Other
Plant Information
Plant Address:
POE #:
Plant Status: ACTIVE/INACTIVE New Treatment: -Y/i*
Avgerage Daily Flow:
Raw Source(s):
Treatment:
Chemicals Added:
\
In-service:
On-standby.
Out-of-service:
MGD
# Ground:
# Ground:
i Ground:
Design Capacity:
# Surface:
# Surface:
# Surface:
MGD
# Spring:
#Spring:s
# Spring:
Aeration \ Pre/Post-Disinfection \ Disinfection \ Coagulation \ Flocculation \
Sedimentation \ Filtration \ Corrosion Control \ Fluoridatiori \ Iron Removal \ Other
Plant Information
Plant Address:
P0E #:
Avgerage Daily Flow:
Raw Source(s):
Treatment:
Chemicals Added:
Plant Status: AcnvE/iNAcnvE New Treatment: Y/N
rป
In-service:
On-standby:
Out-of-service:
MGD
# Ground:
# Ground:
# Ground:
Design Capacity:
# Surface:
# Surface:
# Surface:
MGD
# Spring:
# Spring:
# Spring;
Aeration \ Pre/Post-Disinfection \ Disinfection \ Coagulation \ Flocculation \
Sedimentation \ Filtration \ Corrosion Control \ Fluoridation \ Iron Removal \ Other
-------
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Part 2 - Water Source(s)
PWSID ป:_
System:
'1
Quantity
Quality
Protection
S
US
NA
Comments
Part 3 - Treatment Processes
Screening
Aeration.
Pre-Disinfect
Post-Disinfect
Disinfection
Mixing
Coagulation
Flocculation
Sedimentation
Filtration
Corrosion Ctrl
Fluoridation
Iron Removal
Taste & Odor
Other
Method
S
US
NA
Comments
Part 4 - Distribution System
Pressure
Cross Connection Prevention Plan
Storage
Flushing Program
Other
S
US
NA
Comments
-------
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Part 5 - Maintenance
Spare Parts Inventory
Instrument Calibration (eg. chemical
feeders, meters, gauges, etc.)
Sludge Removal
Other
S
US
NA
Comments f
'
PLANT SCHEMATIC:
-------
WELLS
PWSID ft_
System:
| INSPECTION -'" '. ' '':" ' '""'
II Well Location (eg. outside):
Protected?
ADC Map Coordinates (pg/grid):
Well Tag? (Y/N)
Tag No.:
Casing Height Above Ground (ft):
Run Time (hrs/day): ..........
Time Metered? (Y/N)
Raw Water Sample Tap? Before
check valve?
Finished Water Sample Tap?
Well Vented? Screen?
Well Cover/Seal Tight?
Check Valve?
Blowoff Valve?
Pitless Adaptor? (Y/N)
VELL COMPLETION REPJORTS
Year Drilled:
Original Well Driller:
Well Depth (ft):
Aquifer:
Confined? (Y/N)
Casing Diameter (in):
Casing Depth (ft):
Pump Type (S7T/J):
'Pump Depth (ft):
Pump Intake Level (ft):
Rated Pump Capacity (gpm):
Pumping Test rate/time(gpm/hrs):
Static Water Depth (ft):
Drawdown (ft):
Well #
Well #_
Well#
Well#_
Well#
Well#_
Well #
Well#_
E: if current information available, do not use Well Completion Report data
List all sources for the information (e.g. past inspection, well data table, etc.) noting any discrepancies:
-------
i.-.,
WELLS
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. What directly controls well pump operation? (eg. storage tank pressure)
1 ; ' ' I '
2. Do wells operate together? Explain.
3. List potential sources of contamination (eg. farmland, septic fields, fuel tanks) in the well's vicinity:
i ; i
4. Are the wells subject to flooding? If yes, what is the flood level? (NOTE: Well casing should terminate
at least 18" above flood level)
5. Have the wells been evaluated to determine whether they are under the influence of surface water? If
yes, what do the results indicate?
6. Have any wells ever tested positive for total coliform and/or fecal coliform? Please describe.
:' , ' I '/i ' ' , i ' ' ''{.'
WELLHEAD PROTECTION
If the system has a Wellhead Protection Program (WHPP), please check the following:
a. Designation of the Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA)
Map of the WHPA (generally 1/2 to 1 mile radius around well)
b. Potential contaminants are identified and located
Land use divided into: residential, agricultural, industrial, commercial
c. Management of the WHPA
Regulatory controls (eg. zoning)
Non-regulatory controls (eg. public education; ground water monitoring)
d. Future planning
Potential future problems identified
Contingency plan for alternate water supplies in the event that water supply is disrupted by
contamination or other events
New wells sited carefully
WELL AREA SCHEMATIC
-------
SURFACE WATER
PWSID #:
System:
GENERAL INFORMATION
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Source:
Location:
# Reservoirs:
Total # intakes:
Volume:
Intake level(s):
sals
ft
# intakes used during normal operation:
Reason for selecting a particular intake:
6. Maintenance schedule for intakes (eg. how often screen inspected; how often debris removed):
7. Is the area around the intakes restricted (eg. swimming, powerboats) for a radius of 200 feet?
8. Are there any sources of pollution in the proximity of the intakes? Specify, (eg. waste wate
discharges, marinas, boat launching ramps, sewers, construction projects, animal pasturing, chemicall
treated agricultural land, chemical storage areas (eg. highway de-icing salt or petroleum products))
9. Is the source adequate in quantity and quality to meet current and future (10 or 20 year) demands?
10. Are pre-treatment chemicals applied in the reservoir? If yes, please describe.
11. Conditions which cause water quality fluctuations (eg. stratification, algal blooms, ice formation):
12. Type(s) of raw water testing: Frequency:
13. Is there a dam? If yes, is it inspected for safety?
14. Raw water quality (ranges): pH Turbidity Temperature
WATERSHED PROTECTION
1. What is the nature of the total watershed (eg. industrial, agricultural, forest, residential)? Give %.
2. What is the size of the owned/protected area of the watershed?
.--. Zoning restrictions and ordinances?
3. How is the watershed managed/controlled? (eg. ownership with restricted access, ordinances)
4* , Has management had a watershed survey performed?
5. Is a list available with all upstream users and dischargers?
6. Is there an emergency spill response plan with potential spill sites identified?
/. What arrangements are in place with other owners in the watershed?
-------
SPRINGS
PWSID #:
System:
1. Name:
i . i |
2. Location (Please include ADC map page & grid):
3. Type (gravity or artesian):
4. Is the recharge area protected?
5. What is the nature of the recharge area? (eg. industrial, agricultural, forest, residential)?
6. Is the site subject to flooding?
| , ;
7. Is the collection chamber properly constructed:
a. watertight?
b. impervious and locked tank cover?
c. exterior valve on drain?
d. drain screened at end?
e. drain apron for overflow discharge to prevent soil erosion?
8. Is the site adequately protected from stray livestock and tampering (eg. fence, locked covers, warning
signs)?
"! ,f: ' : !| ||).
9. Is there a surface drainage ditch uphill from the source to intercept surface water runoff and carry it
away from the source?
10. Has the spring been rehabilitated to protect from surface water influence?
If yes, please explain what was done.
, ,:!' " , ' ,,|
11. Has the system performed sampling according to PDWP sampling protocol? (eg. rainfall event sampling
and dry weather sampling for pH, coliform, turbidity, and temperature)
If yes, what do the sampling results indicate? Explain.
12. Has the spring been evaluated to determine whether it is under the influence of surface water? Explain
what was done.
13. Has the system conducted tracer studies?
If yes, what do the results indicate?
-------
STORAGE
KYOROPNEUMATIC TANK
Identification
Location
Total Size (gal)
Operating Pressure Range (psi)
Effective Storage (%)
Protection from Vandalism?
Exterior Condition
Sightglass?
Alarm?
Bypass?
Pressure Relief Valve?
Drain? Size.
Air Compressor?
Manual or Automatic?
ELEVATED AND/OR GROUND STORAGE
Identification
Location
Capacity
Operating Range (ft or psi)
Covered?
Drain? Size.
Altitude Valve?
Pumped or Gravity
Floating on the System?
Vent Screened?
Overflow: Termination Point
Screened?
General Condition
Interior Coating NSF/ANSI Approved?
Type/Frequency of Inspections
Able To Isolate From Rest of System?
Manhole Watertight and Locked?
| Protection from Vandalism?
Are there provisions tor maintaining water supply when storage out-of-service? If yes, please describe.
-------
DISTRIBUTION
i
1. List all distribution materials (mains and service lines), percent of each, and the diameters.
2. Frequency of main breaks:
3. Pressure testing program?
4. Flushing program?
' i i
5. Valve maintenance program?
6. Disinfection after repair?
7. Repair materials available?
8, Dead ends?
1. Total # pumps:
PUMPS
if in service:
# out-of-service:
# on-standby/backup:
2. Type (eg. high service):
3. Rated capacity (hp and/or gpm):
3. Application (eg. chemical feed):
4. Location:
5. Type and amount of lubricant:
6. Condition of equipment:
7. Protection of equipment (eg. protective guards on rotating parts):
8. Emergency/backup systems?
9. Preventative Maintenance (PM) program?
ADDITIONAL NOTES
-------
MIXING
1. What chemicals are added at the mixing iasin?
2. Is there any noticeable short circuiting?
3. Where is the mixing basin located?
4. What type of mixer is used (eg. motorized, baffles, etc.)? If a. motorized mixer used, is it variable spet
5. What is the condition of the mixer?
6. Does the plant require shut-down in order to make repairs to the mixer?
COAGULATION
1. What chemical is used for coagulation?
2. Where is the chemical added?
FLOCCULAHON
1, Number of fiocculation basins:
2. Are baffles used? If yes, how many?
3. Is a mechanical flocculator used? If yes, what type? Is it shearing the floe particles?
4. What is the appearance of the flocculated particles?
5. Is there an even distribution of floe?
6. What is the condition of the flocculation equipment?
SEDIMENTATION
1. Number of sedimentation tanks: Size (gal): Surface Area (ft2):
2. Are tube settlers or inclined plates used? If yes, .describe condition.
3. Does the floe settle out properly?
4. Is the flow through the tank smooth?
5. Is the flow over the weir even throughout the tank?
6. Sludge: How is the sludge collected and removed? How often? By whom?
What is the condition of the removal equipment?
7. Can the unit(s) be taken out of service for inspection and repair?
-------
FILTRATION
1. Total number of filters:
2. Number of filters used at a time during normal operation:
3. Average filter rate (gpm)?
4. Is the flow equal through all filters? Y or N
5. Type of filters) (eg. pressure, rapid sand, etc.):
6. Filter media used:
7. Filter aids used:
8. Backwash Cycle:
a. Does the plant shut-down when the filters backwash? If not, is the raw water flow reduced?
b. Do the filters backwash at the same time?
c. Where does the water to backwash filters come from? Is it meterecl? Gravity or pumped? If
pumped, are there back-up pumps for backwashing?
d. Where does the backwash water go to?
e. Is recycle used? If yes, describe point where re-introduced in plant and any additional treatment)
f. Is the cycle automatic or manual?
g. What determines when backwashing will take place (eg. headless, turbidity, time)?
. "'' ' " " 1 i"' ' ' ]' '>'
h. Duration of cycle (from draining to putting back on-line):
i. Is there surface wash or air scour? If yes, describe: type, source of water/air, pressure,
duration, and condition of equipment.
1 j ' i'
j, What is the bed expansion (%)?
i , in!' " i | | : | ,;;
k. What is the backwash rate (gal/min/ft?*)? "NOTE: ft2 refers to the filter surface area.
,,''. .1. ! , I ..
. j ,,
9. Are filter-to-waste procedures followed after backwash? Does the plumbing allow for filter-to-waste'
10. What are the procedures when filter put back on-line after backwash (eg. slowly increase filter rate)'
V '' i; .'', ! ,,!!,,, '!' I < ' . . i .. '
11. What are the procedures for plant start-up (eg. backwash filters; filter-to-waste)?
12. Are there obvious problems with the filter(s) (eg. mudbails, media cracking, uneven bed expansion)'
",i;l ' '!(, '' i
13. For surface water plants:
a. Are influent and effluent turbidity measurements taken from each individual filter?
b. Are the turbidimeters cleaned and calibrated regularly?
-------
LIQUID DISINFECTION
Check all that apply: __Pre-disinfection Post-disinfection Disinfection
1. Chemical used: Brand Name:
NSF Approved? Y/N Chemical Name:
Concentration:
2. Is it purchased as a liquid solution or as a dry powder?
3. What is the dilution ratio and/or concentration of the chemical feed?
4. Is an adequate residual being maintained? Y/N
5. Location of disinfectant injection point(s):
6. Is there a day tank and/or mixing tank? Y/N. Size: gal. How often filled?
7. For systems with alternating wells and one chemical feed pump, is the feed rate adjusted for each wel
(eg. if wells have different pumping capacities)? Y/N
8. Is the disinfectant dosage automatically adjusted according to variations in water quality or quantity vi;
flow-paced equipment or streaming current detectors? Y/N
If no, are manual adjustments typically made? Y/N
What is the basis for the adjustments (eg. residuals)?
9. Describe chemical feed/injection equipment:
Equipment condition:
Are the feed equipment and line accessible for repairs? Y/N
10. What determines when chemical is fed (eg. well pump signals feed pump)?
11. Is operational stand-by/back-up equipment provided? If not, are critical spare parts available?
12. Chemical storage:
Amount: Location:
Adequate/safel Purchase/refill scked:
13. Are proper safety precautions being taken in the hztndling of the chemicals? (eg. gloves) Y/N
14. Is there a Preventative Maintenance program? Y/N
15. Chlorine storage and feed equipment area(s):
a. Isolated from other areas? Y/N b. Heated? Y/N
c. Ventilated? Y/N d. Warning sign on door? Y/N
e. Exhaust fan and light switches outside bldg.? Y/N
16. Is there a continuous chlorine analyzer? Y/N
"7. For surface water systems, has the chlorine contact: time ever been calculated? Y/N. Is it sufficient
-------
ADMINISTRATION
PWS ORGANIZATION
1. Ownership/Management Type (check applicable category)
PUBLIC (Town/City/District/State)
[ ] Water Commissioner
[ ] Selectmen
[ ] Town Manager
C ] Other:
2, Governing Body (Water Commissioners, Selectmen, Trustees, Operator, and other legally
responsible parties). Please list the names, addresses, telephone numbers on the Update
Form (or on blank page).
Name of Governing Body:
Length of service of its members (term of office):
I
Number of members:
Names/Addresses/ Telephone Numbers (attach to this page):
Number of Governing Body meetings for the year:
8. If an organisational chart, is available, please provide OR (put on blank page) identifying the
hierarchy of decision making for the PWS.
4. Staff Meetings How often are Staff meetingo held with Staff?
6. Does the system have an updated master plan? Yes No
If yes, Date updated
If available, provide DEP region with a copy.
Page of Pay*s
-------
ADMINISTRATION CONTINUED
NAME/TITLE
F/P*
DUTIES
Certification
Grade/**
Total
Years
Exper-
ience
COM-
MITS
F/P ซ Full Time/ Part Time
Use blank page for additional information
** Does staff have appropriate Certification?
Page of Pages
-------
ADMINISTRATION CONTINUED
PERSONNEL: Plant/Distribution Coverage: (Number of operators and grade certification)
Weekdays:
Shifts (Times/Overlap?/Number/Shift):
Weekends and Holidays:
Are there sufficient personnel?
TRAINING ACTIVITIES
Do you have a plan for Staff training? If written, please supply.
What incentives and opportunities are provided to new and existing staff to train and/or to increase
their knowledge on water supply?
Operator Training Budget (ATTACH if available):
Training Activities of Staff over the Last Year (attach):
Pa&e___<*f Pages
-------
FINANCIAL
FINANCIAL INFORMATION (Planned or Actual for (YEAR)
Attach appropriate pages of master plan if this information is presented)
SOURCE OF REVENUE (please check): [ ] Taxes; [ 3 Flat Fee; [ 3 Metered User Fee; [ 3
Other ): _
If Budget is available, please provide. If not please fill out below:
ESTIMATED INCOME/REVENUE:*
1. Taxes:
2 Flat Fee:
3. User Fee:
4. Connection Fee:
5.
6. .
TOTAL INCOME (A)
Review Water Rates Questionnaire on most current Annual Statistical
Report.
ESTIMATED OPERATION EXPENSES
Personnel/Overtime
Water Quality Testing
Supplies/Operating
Expenses
Contract Services
Repairs
Debt Service
(principal + interest)
TOTAL EXPENSES (B)
*Are financing and budget satisfactory?
Subtract Total Expense (B)
from Total income (A)
In spaco provided here list
capital improvements
planned in next six years.
j SURPLUS /LOSS Q
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
s
$
Page of Pages
-------
FINANCIAL CONTINUED
INCOME LOSSES and INCOME .SURPLUSES. What do you do when you have an income loss
or income surplus?
INCOME LOSS
WitMraw from eaarfeacy fond
WitMraw from starpriM fund
Withdraw from reeซ.i<ซ account.
How maca k in the reeerv* account?
Borrow
D*lซy Paying Billf
Othew:
INCOME SURPLUSES
Depoeit to enterpriae ftmd
Depoeit to general fund of town
Depoeit to saving*
Depoeit to *mซrgปncy ftmd
^
Dซpo*it to water department operation* budget
Profit/Income
Pay bond interact, Pay down debt
Pay corporate dividend
Buy needed equipment or euppliei
Other:
How much money do you set aside for major repairs and emergencies?_
reflects what percentage of your total estimated expenses?
This
Have you ever received subsidized grants and/or loans from state and/or federal resources? [ ] YES
[ 3 NO.
Are you eligible for state and federal grants and loans? [ ] Yes [ ] No. Please describe.
SMALL SYSTEM ISSUES
Are you under rent control, which precludes any rate increase?
Are you under DPU or FHA restrictions/constraints?
Page of Pagee
-------
GENERAL DATA
Total number connections
% Metered
Consumption (Daily-MGD) Maximum
Minimum
Average_
Maximum Hourly_
MUNIdPALITIES/DISTRICT SERVED BY WATER SUPPLY
Municipality /District
Total Population
Population Served
Avg. Consumption
(MGD)
PERMANENT INTERCONNECTIONS WITH OTHER WATER SUPPLIES
Water Survey
Purveyor
Give location and arrangement for use.
is the maximum dซily flow in MGD for
What
this
interconnection and when was it last used or
tested.
POSSIBLE TEMPORARY
INTERCONNECTIONS
REMARKS: Are interconnection valves operable?
Is there a maintenance plan to keep valves optional?
Last date inspected?
Results of Inspection
* DWS staff locate interconnections in the field
Page of Pages
-------
Distribution System
Maps and Records
(1) Are up-to-date distribution system maps available?_
Do we have a copy? ^^
(2) Are up-to-date records on valve locations kept?
(3) Are there dead end areas in the distribution system?
If yes how many
Are they clearly shown on available distribution system xnaps?_
Is there a program in place to'eliminate dead ends?
Are terminal hydrants available on dead ends?
(4) Are sampling locations indicated on Distribution Map?_
(6) Describe the flushing program in place
Does program address the dead end areas?
(6) Are the locations, type and size of master meters shown on available distribution system
maps?
If not, list them
(7) List the distribution system weakness and problems (river crossings, corrosion, breaks, freezing,
etc).
(8) For Consecutive systems: are source bacteria sampling locations indicated in distribution map?
(9) Do you have a copy of the water quality sampling schedule for WQA monitoring?
Page__of P<
,,'T. il 'i il;, | i ail'.; ;, ,', , , IK
-------
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
What is the method of scheduling maintenance?
Spare Parts Inventory
Is there & spare parts inventory?
Is it adequate to prevent long delays in equipment repairs?
Pump Maintenance
Is a maintenance schedule available.for pumps, valves?_
Chemical feed
Turbine pumps
High & low lift pumps
Are pump maintenance records kept? Yes () No ()
Operation and Maintenance Manual
Are operation details posted for operator daily use for maintenance?
Is an O & M Manual available and accessible to staff?
Does manual conform to DWS policy? Yes No
Is it used?
Does manual provide guidance for operational decisions?
Instrumentation/Process Automation
Are there alarms or instrumentation for process automation? (Such as chlorine, turbidity,
etc.) List
Are adequate Resources Available for Operation and Maintenance What kind? e.g. outside
support/contractors.
Safety and Protective Equipment
Are there adequate safety and personnel protective equipment provided?
Page of Pages
-------
DISTRIBUTION PROTECTION CROSS CONNECTION PROGRAM
1. Does the PWS have an approved cross connection program?
Yes No
If yes, does the PWS have delegation?
i , i
If no, by what date does the PWS plan to submit their cross connection implementation plan?
Is a third party used to survey or test as part of your programs?
If yes, Name & contact person
I !
2. Have all industrial, commercial, and institutional facilities been surveyed by the PWS?
Yes No
If no, what is the estimated completion date for surveying all facilities?
! ' , ' ", ' '! "T^"ซIUIL. j u
3. How many employees are currently assigned to the cross connection program?
4, Were all reduced pressure backflow prevention devices tested twice a year by the PWS?
Yes_No
If no, explain
i! . ; . : '; i ! ,' '
5. Were all double check valve assemblies tested once a year by the PWS?
Yes No
If no, explain
6. Are there any outstanding cross connection violations? Yes No
If yes, explain
7. Is DEP assistance needed?
PWS Owned Croes Connections.
Are backflow prevention devices installed at all DWS OWNED locations? Select
No___Yes or____NA(not applicable)
Are devices approved, permitted? Select No___Yes, or__NA(not applicable)
Are cross connections being inspected each year?
Select NO__YES, or NA(not applicable) Page of__Pagei
-------
H
i
O
U
CO
td
cu
I
CO
sซ
CO
2
O
e
CO
8
.H V
H C
10 -H
P.J
CO \
c-o
M 0)
C
0) 10
IS
4J
Q)
E
(0
O
ซ
a
a.
.1
cu
o
w
0)
f-l
H
ฃ
0)
a
a!
o
0)
0)
H
II
o a
CO >i
H (Q
งc
C 0
10 -H
1**J
i
H
H
O
(0
64
4J
(U
E
4J
10
0
fr^
o
JJ
0)
o
3
o
CO
o
^J
ฃ
^s Q)
H tfl
yvf ^
H CO
u
Md
"^^
^J ^J
C 9
0) xi
E -H
4J ^
<0 4J
0) W
U-H
EH 0
E
Q>
4J
CO
>i
CO
c
0
*^*l
^J
0
A
H
ฃ4
jj
(0
H
Q
U
ซ
P
CO
CO
g
O4
ง
H
10
ง
H
s
E
9
5
X
5
M
CO
cu
o
CM
E
H
C
E
(0
0)
(0
CO
c
o
9
10
Q
C
M
-P
ซJ
^H
P<
4J
C
W
10
a
H
c
H
t
a
A
o
>
0
f
ซ
C tn
mo\
t*
CU
-------
EMERGENCY PLANS
i
1. Is the Emergency Response Plan Phone and Contact List from Annual Statistical Form H
Posted? Is an emergency plan available and workable?
", . i i i
How many level I, n, and HI incidents has 'the system had in the past year? ini
""""
If there were incidents, were they all reported to DWS?
,; i 1
la the system experiencing any of the following water quantity/quality problems? inadequate
supply, no back up source, Hazardous spill, boil order, emergency declaration, also distribution
or system problems such as pipe breaks or cross connections.
WATER QUANTITY/CONSERVATION
1. Does this system have adequate plans for meeting its water quantity for the next twenty
years? (this should be in PWS master plan). If not, what do they plan to do?
2. Does this system have a (Water Management Act) WMA withdrawal registration and/or
permit?
3. Check annual statistical information on water consumption to determine if their demand
agrees with WMA amount.
4. IB this system in compliance with its water conservation plan included in the WMA
withdrawal permit?
6. Is there a WMA permit requirement to delineate Zone n or adopt land use controls?
6. Submittal dates met or. being pursued?
-------
WATER QUALITY
1. List violations and actions taken for the last twelve
months.
2. Give the number and type of water quality complaints during the past
year?
3. Have the causes of these complaints been determined?
Explain.
4. Has the Water Department investigated and/or taken any corrective action with respect to
these complaints? ;
5. Does the Water Department have a complaint trailing
log?
6. Does the water receive treatment, if so is the treatment designed to correct any of the
problems noted above?
Page of Pages
-------
*
1
5
i
i
MJ
0
in
i
INSTALLATION DATA |
K
i
o
H
II
U 6
5 -
g'~ To ซ^
w vi ฃ
StMpte
Cock
Raw/Finish
il
II
il
IS
*<ป
o
i
*ปป
si?
2fฃ
e
S
i
u.
u
T3
RECHARGE AREA |
_t
ฃ
'
0
I
K
ti
X
S
1
a.
I
">
B
+*
O
O.
j:
V U
u
i
a
1
Is
tk (/)
ง
X
I
i
1
I
a
.0
u
o
tl
*
ซ "8
! !
! !
_ %
ป
o
2) Are al I areas properly maintained? __
If Nor state problem
i
*>
^
ปป
4) Are any sources legally abandoned? If Yes, any plans to return?
Remarks:
VERIFY SOURCE STATUS INFORMATION
APPROVED PUMPING RATE
+ KEY: Flood- f, Drought-d, Underground Storage Tank-T. Saltstorage-s, Subsurface disposal -ss, Solid Uaste-sw. Hazardous Uaste-hw, Agrlculture-agr, Industrial-ind.
Other-o
CM
-------
WELLHEAD PROTECTION
'SOURCE(s)
(may be completed for one or more sources at once)
1. Is there a sanitary well seal? yes no
Distance sealed cap on well above ground ft.
Is there a well log/specification that indicates thai; a proper sanitary seal was installed?
2. Zone I
a. What is the Approved Pumping rate gpd (If available)
b. Zone I radius in feet
c. (Interim Wellhead Protection Area) IWPA radius in feet
3. DWS Evaluate progress toward source protection.
4. DWS Evaluate land uses from Annual Statistics.
DWS note land uses in Zone 1/IWPA that might change SOC/VOC waiver designation (Le.
VOC or pesticide use in Zone I).
6. Does water supplier inspect the Zone II annually? Required by 310 CME 22.21(4)
7. Does water supply need underground injection (UlOreferral?)
UIC Referrals: Within a Zone I or Zone H/IWPA, industrial facilities managing hazardous
materials (e.g. auto repair garage, dry cleaner, machine shop, furniture stripping, etc) should
be referred to the UIC Program for a possible inspection. UIC inspectors address
unauthorized discharges to the ground (e.g. via a floor drain leading to a dry well or septic
system) in such facilities. The threat may be less in sewered areas as determined on a case-
by-case basis.
Page of Pages
-------
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY EVALUATION
SURFACE SOURCE
A) Name of Source
B) Terminal Reservoir?_
C) Total Surface Area
D) Total Storage Capacity..
E) Watershed Area in Sq. Miles_
G) Pumped Gravity
(1) What portion of the watershed is owned by the purveyor?_
*a) What are the potential sources of pollution? (Sewage facilities, industrial waste
facilities, farm pr^mals, fertilizer, pesticides, roadway spills, timbering operations, sand
and gravel operations, recreational activities, etc.
b) List potential sources within 100 feet per 310 CMR 22.20_
(2) What sources of pollution have been causing periodic problems?_
How frequently?..
(8) What is being done to correct the problem?_
(4) How frequently is the watershed inspected?
(5) **Has a watershed protection plan been completed for surface supply?_
* Review Annual Statistics - Land Uses
Required under 310CMR 22.20(9)
Page of Paj,
-------
RAW WATER IMPOUNDMENTS
(1) Is supply taken from a multi-purpose reservoir? (used for recreation, flood control, power
production, etc.)
(2) Is the reservoir area fenced and/or posted?
(3) How is the raw water quality affected by heavy rainfall?
(4) Is the reservoir subject to algae related problems?
If yes, is Aquatic herbicide used in reservoir or on dam?
'" INTAKE STRUCTURES'
(1) How many intakes are provided?
(2) Is the intake stationary or movable?
(3) At what depth(s) is the intake(s)?
(4) What is the maximum intake capacity?
(5) a) Is the intake(s) screened and in good condition?^
Date last checked:
(6) Condition of pumphouse or dam?_
Remarks:
Page of Pages
-------
s
i
ซง
is
ง2
Ssง
u _ *
ST3 ซ
III
*ป p
ssi
^ a u
ru e.
*ป- c
. o *
ed
Jsฃ
sf
B
u
ป
'
tu
u.
1
i
|
O UJ
U.
to
te
1
tw
1*.
-i E
1SJ5
-1 U <
High Level
Control/
Alarm
ฃ
l&
(a to-
111
a > i)
1 ^
111
CL 6 2ซ
U L.
cs
tl
u
I
1
u
I
k
!
ฃ"
ฃ
i
ซ
fe
I
-------
ii
_
ง
i
Sc
w
ac
S
*
tn
I
S
i
I
u
-
i
ง
i
u
a
i
g
i
i
u
S
ง
S
u
a
i
S
f
ISCHARGE
0
|
3
rl
h. V)
s
s
ฃ
ฃ
1
1
i
u
tl
N
l/>
I
1
1
,
S
>.
1
i
in
o
ฃ
_
1
fe
U
1
t %s
O. WUJ
I
!
40
I)
tl
1
tl
*l
a
in
f
1
i
|
a
S
F
|
s
>
)
Js
I
z
1
o
1
e.
A
pg
*i<
||
-------
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY EVALUATION PWS ID
CHEMICAL FEED EQUIPMENT
Purveyor:
Source :
Plant Name:
s
1
Open t loo
1
i
o
I
e
|
g
3
X
]
if
II
M
c ^
<ซ
.1
o
I!
ill
i
f
Point of
Application
of Unit
Chemical (s)
ง
o
0
il
a
e
H
ฃ
H
0
O
s
tH
0
a
H
0
fi-
fS
0
4J
1
N
0
a
a
2
o
H
O
u
0
Ja
o
5
ง
10
0
a
0
0
0
w
iH
0
U
H
0
U
0
je
o"
u
H
0
O
o
fH
8
a
H
ปH
I
JS
0
1
0
0
h
0
oป
0
o
4J
a
u
H
1
U
0
u
Is there adequate chemical contaminant?
1
o
f
a
0
!
0
2
0
a
H
If phosphates are used is a chlorine residual maintained in feed?
o
0
u
3
O
4J
S
a
H
-------
TREATMENT
Chemical Feed
1) Do chemical feed facilities provide adjustable feed ranges that are easily set for operation at
all required dosages?
2) How is the feed rate determined?
Are feed rates easily measured?
Arฉ feed rates checked and adjusted?
How is the chemical feed equipment being calibrated and at what frequency is it calibrated?
3) Who tnamfaiTiB and/or operates chemical feed? Name and Grade
4) Are monthly chemical treatment forms currently being completed and reported to DEP?
'5) DWS will evaluate operator for performing chlorine residual test
Page___of___Page
-------
Purveyor:
Type of Chlbrination:,
Location:
Chlorinator Equipment Inspection (Gas)
1 PWS I.D. #
"YES NO UNSAT N/A
p:/mnee
12/93
Access to chlorinator room from outdoors
Doors of chlorinator room open outward
Chlorinators in separate room
Observation window present
Air inlets near ceiling
Exhaust ports near floor
Mechanical ventilation
Switches for fans and lights outside room
*Adซguate heating ino^hlorination room (min 60F)
Spare cylinders stored in same room
If so, adequate room for movement, storage etc.
Cylinders are restrained in position
Alarm system for alert if C12 leaks
Bottle of ammonia present
Gas mask present (SCBA) Positive Pressure
Gas mask located outside chlorinator room (SCBA)
*Operator protective clothing on hand
*Standby chlorinator
*Separate injection line for standby
*If not, is extra corporation cock installed
*Is standby equal in capacity to regular
Is capacity estimated to be sufficient to produce
free residual of 2 ppm after contact time of 30
minutes at max. flow rates and max. demand
*Pacing
*Are chlorinators set to start and stop with main
pumps
Ventilation of chlorinators to outdoors and above
grade
Automatic Switch cover
Number of Cylinders hooked up adequate to prevent
c!2 icing
Cylinders on scale (s)
Scale (s) flush with floor
ism/charts
Page of Pages
-------
Purveyor:
PWS I.D.
CHLORINATOR EQUIPMENT INSPECTION (GAS) PAGE TWO
YES NO DNSAT N/A
Standby non-electric water feed pump for
chlorinators
Does feed pump engage automatically at
power failure
* Approved means for residual testing
*Sampling point located at least 100 feet
downstream from c!2 injection point
Chlorine residual recorders
*Spare parts present
*Tools on hand
1. Size of Cylinders?
2. Are Chlorination
maintained?
If no explain
facilities
properly
HYPOCHLORINATORS
1. Type of hypochlorite used?
2. % of available chlorine ?
3. Is hypochlorite diluted?
4. What is hychlorite storage capacity?.
Is it properly stored?
5. Is a stand by pump available?
*Hypochlorinator also
NOTE: Use chemical feed equipment sheet for additional
hychlorinator reviews.
P: /naeedham/charts
12/93
Page of Pages
-------
o
H
0)
O
CO
0
10
2
4J
10
I
1
**
ง
ซ' ^S
< M
i:'"Eซ
""' <
v|
ฃ
JM
L3
CU
ta
CO
^y>
3
Cj
o
M
3
CO
g
4-1
H
C
D
O
H
4J
(0
a)
*J -0
H 0)
C (0
9 01
(0
u n
c
0
4J
O (0
a> e
4J-ซ
U 1
-i
B
0 (0
4J4J
O C
J*4 O
a. u
0
o
(0
H 0
rr* f*i^
^ I
0 :
H
0
M
>i
-1
(0
* 0
^*J
-H ซ0
< c
o
s
0 4J
Uffl
o
M
6^ C3
(0
h
a
CO
V
a
1
2
P
C
D
4J
*M C
o a>
E
C4J
o to
H 0) 0)
P h e
(OHO)
O A
Sc u
H CO
*
I
0
0 to
^ -S
s
o
W
> ^
o c
&
OU
0
ง
A
4>
H
ง
SH a
-*ซ 0
10
ซe
a
a
ซ
a
>;
^ <ป. 0
ซ
-------
g
ฃ
f
s
tJ H
O. O
g
S
X
H
D fa
W0 g
W M
ss
u
ง
i
a
ซ z
I
h c
5 ซJ
O.H
CO Al
Ifl
H
ti
1
ซ
ง
H
ง
8
V
I
ac
O)
CM
ec
ซ
Ct,
X
H
as
o
II
o ซ
H 4J
3 ฎ
5 Q
Bt
ee
fa CO
e G
5 ^S
o
9
W
ic
X^
"'
*ซ
-------
ill""!1 iflrfn : ilt"*1"! i"!111'|! f1!, " I'l1!,,,1!*
H
EH
<
s
i
CO
sc
0
H.
1
ฃj
2
&4
1
g
PH
ฃ
CJ
FUBLK
**
0
s
5^
q
"
C4
1
CO EH
cงซ3
W Q O
H W OS
ง45
Cu *M
OS *v
ill
Cฃ Cd
M|H
63
sc
M
EH
as
o
M
ง5
p
0
EH
H
i
H
t"J
Zi
g
H
CO
^
|
O
IS
W
c
^J
g
H
j^
o
is
0
ปH
1=
K
"is
o
Jj
ฃU
o
o
13
ซ
*O
0
C (0
0 40
o
ซ 0
3is4J
2ซ Q
ซ o
1^*
*S
0
O
o
a
a
0
A **
a
s ซ
< i
s
in S
4J
M
O
1
jPj
^JJ
k
(^
QซfH
-------
m
a
i
ง
ss
s|
*w
' as
a 2
DH
Q P
SS
iง
*H
og
SH
ffl **
D
Co
01
III
Backwash
C
|
t
1^
Supporting
Gravel
k
o
c
1
IE
^
;ซ
li
_X **
'-SS3
^as
^^
a Sea a AY
m^ปTK
(ssqouf )
(BaqauT)
q3daQ
ปuaT3T??aฐD
(mm) azjs
a AT 3 33 ? J3
(saqouT)
. -^
k
a.
X
u
v!
J
I
1
ง*
u
k
ซ
1
1
e
|
ฐtj
*S
1
ซ
1) Describe t
eป
ซ*
8
1
J
e
1
"2
J
k
V
f
1
k
"S
|
^
1
IM
|
?
operating coป
1
_c
i
c provided i
fe
S
1
"5
k
1
1
c-
e
I
f>
t
*ซ
e source of backrasn HI
JB
I
I
i
1
i
o
a
ir>
ป
J
fe
ซ
tested on
&
5
X
tf
I
1
ซ
S
-------
1"
SDWA COMPLIANCE
LEAD AND COPPER RULE COMPLIANCE
: , ,',!'! " i, ,P !''!'
1, Have you submitted a lead and copper sampling plan? Do you keep it current noting any
changes in sampling locations?
2. Have you completed your required monitoring?
, . , . : j
S. Did you exceed the lead or copper action levels? If you exceeded the lead level have you
completed the required initial public education?
4. If you exceeded the lead and/or copper action level have you completed your "Desk Top
Evaluation" (Form 141-C) and submitted it to your DEP regional office? Does your system
need help with this? L and C Staff Referral if required.
6. If you exceeded the lead and/or copper action level have you completed the required water
quality parameter monitoring and source water monitoring for lead and copper? (NOTE: Tb
water quality sites as determined by the population served must be sampled twice during the
monitoring period during which the exceedance occurred.)
Page of Pay
-------
PWS Name: PWSID:
FINDINGS
DWS STAFF must describe performance
Describe areas which exceed, meek or ari'-defictentMn;"m&&tmjฃ DWS regulations, 'guldennes and
policies: " 'When applicablfi, indicate type of technical assistance as followtgi by BEP azii/or a
Mol>2izadon partner (giving organization name/address/telepl^ person).
Section 1: ADMINISTRATION
Section 2: OPERATIONS AM> MAINTENANCE
Section 3: TREATMENT
Section4: DISTRIBUTION
Section 5: DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM PROTECTION: CROSS CONNECTIONS
Sections: EMERGENCY PLANS
Section 7: WATER QUANTITY
Section 8: WATER QUALITY
Section 9: RESOURCE PROTECTION
Section 10: FUTURE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
Page 2 of Pages Date: / /
-------
-------
DRAFT 4/26
FORM 1 - INVITATION LETTER TO DEBRIEFING MEETINGFOR SYSTEMS
WHERE VIOLATIONS ARE FOUND" -
meeting isicbeduied, or meeting to ;
NOTE:|: 'Violations"i-are violations ^ or statute, ie./ conditions
which endanger the delivery of fit and pure water to all consumers.
REGION LETTERHEAD
Town:
PWS Name:
PWS ID. #:
Date:
Address
Attention:
RE: COMPREHENSIVE COMPLIANCE EVALUATION: Sanitary Survey Stage 1
On , a Comprehensive Compliance Evaluation (Sanitary Survey Stage
1) of the above referenced public water system (PWS) was conducted by the Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) Division of Water Supply (DWS). A sanitary survey is an
on site review of the water sources, facilities, equipment, operation and maintenance of a
public water system for the purpose of evaluating the adequacy of such source, facilities,
equipment, operation and maintenance for collecting and distributing safe drinking water.
Attached you will find the following:
1. Comprehensive Compliance Evaluation - "Sanitary Survey Report"
2. "Findings"
3. "Compliance Plan"
During the course of the sanitary survey the Department discovered violation(s) of regulation
or statute, that is, condition(s) in the source, facilities, equipment, operation and
maintenance of the PWS which jeopardize the delivery of pure and safe water to all
consumers (hereafter collectively referred to as "violations"). All violations found at the PWS
are listed in Section A of the attached Compliance Plan. Additional recommendations for
improving your system may also have been identified, and if so, are listed in Section B of the
-------
- :l
Compliance Plan.
Debriefing Meeting and Written Proposal for Compliance
Please review the attached Report, Finding and Compliance Plan.
OPTION 1:
[, and contact (name) of this office at (phone number) by
(date) to arrange for a debriefing meeting. You are requested to bring with
you to the debriefing meeting a written proposal describing how and when you
propose to come into compliance and correct the violations listed in the Compliance
Plan. The written proposal can be created by filling out columns II and III of the
Compliance Plan.]
OPTION 2:
[or: before the debriefing meeting scheduled for (date) at (time)
(place) . You are requested to bring with you to the
debriefing meeting a written proposal describing how and when you propose to come
into compliance and correct the violations listed in the Compliance Plan. The written
proposal can be created by filling out columns II and III of the Compliance Plan.]
At the debriefing meeting we will discuss the Department's evaluation of your system
including the violations listed in the Compliance Plan, the actions necessary to achieve
compliance, and your written proposal.
Plan for Future Compliance
At the meeting, your input on the system's future compliance efforts is essential. Together
we will work out a final Compliance Plan specifying how and when your system will come
into compliance by completing columns II and III of the Compliance Plan, describing the
actions to be taken and a schedule for correcting the identified problems. If we can agree
on the final terms to be inserted into columns II and III, DEP will ask you to sign the
compliance schedule and a consent order which incorporates the terms and requirements of
the schedule.
j
Alternatively, the Division may issue a Notice of Noncompliance with a Compliance Plan for
all violations found at your system, or a unilateral administrative order requiring that
necessary corrective actions be taken within reasonable deadlines. Noncompliance with the
terms of such an order or the terms of a NQN may result in further enforcement action,
including the imposition of penalties of up to $25,000 for each day after the effective date
of the order or Notice during which each violation continues or is repeated.
Attendance at the Meeting
In order to ensure the attendance of the persons who are primarily responsible for taking
the appropriate actions in response to this survey, please invite to the debriefing meeting
the chief operator, water commissioners, and chief financial officer (or person(s) responsible
-------
for budgeting). The Division strongly urges you to make every effort to ensure the
attendance of the responsible officials for your system. The attendance of these officials will
expedite the drafting and implementation of your system's written proposal to come into
compliance in response to the survey findings.
The DWS staff in this region looks forward to meeting with the responsible officials for your
public water system to help you achieve and maintain compliance with the drinking water
regulations and improve the overall quality of your system. If you have any questions please
contact the above mentioned DWS staff person.
Sincerely,
DWS Water Supply Chief
Region
enc: Comprehensive Compliance Evaluation - Sanitary Survey Report
Findings
Compliance Plan
cc: DEP/DWS Boston
City/Town Board of Health
Town Manager/Board of Selectmen
-------
jr ;'!,
-------
DRAFT 4/26
FORM 2 - letter
1) CONFIRMING DEBRIEFING MEETING HELD AT THE SITE where compliance
schedule "FIELD NON" ISSUED, i.e.,
2) FOR SYSTEMS WITH VIOLATIONS
3X1THE COMPLIANCE $CHEDUL^^^$TO AT?THE
tes for taking acti(^rBlGi||S pR^SIGNED BY PWS
NOTE: 'Violations" are violations of regulation or statute, Le., conditions
which endanger the delivery of fit and pure water to all consumers.
REGION7 LETTERHEAD
Town:
PWS Name:
PWS I.D.#:
Date:
Address:
Attention:
RE: COMPREHENSIVE COMPLIANCE EVALUATION: Sanitary Survey Stage 1
On , a Comprehensive Compliance Evaluation (Sanitary Survey Stage
1) of the above referenced public water system (PWS) was conducted by the Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) Division of Water Supply (DWS). A sanitary survey is an
on site review of the water sources, facilities, equipment, operation and maintenance of a
public water -system for the purpose of evaluating the adequacy of such source, facilities,
equipment, operation and maintenance for collecting and distributing safe drinking water.
Attached you will find the following:
1. Comprehensive Compliance Evaluation - "Sanitary Survey Report"
2. "Findings"
3. "Compliance Plan"
During the course of the sanitary survey the Department discovered violation(s) of regulation
or statute, that is, condition(s) in the source, facilities, equipment, operation and
maintenance of the PWS which jeopardize the delivery of pure and safe water to all
consumers (hereafter collectively referred to as "violations"). All violations found at the PWS
-------
are listed in Section A of the attached Compliance Plan. Please note that the attached
Compliance Plan is also a Notice of Noncompliance (NON) pursuant to M.G.L. C.21A,
ง16 and 310 C.M.R. 5.00. Additional recommendations for improving your system may also
have been identified, and if so. are listed in Section B of the Compliance Plan.
Debriefing Meeting
After the sanitary survey was completed the representative of the Division of Water Supply
met with (name) (title) from your public
water system. At the debriefing meeting the Division's evaluation of your system, including
the violations and any recommendations identified by the Division to improve your system
were discussed. (name), representing your public water system,
acknowledged receipt of the Compliance Plan/NON at that time. Enclosed with this letter
is a copy of the signed Compliance Plan/NON discussed at that meeting. Please note that
the NON requires, among other things, the submission of quarterly written progress reports
on the identified violations.
j
Nowithstanding this Notice of Noncompliance, the Department reserves the right to exercise
the full extent of its legal authority in order to obtain full compliance with all applicable
requirements. Noncompliance with the terms of the NON may result in further
enforcement action, including the assessment of administrative penalties of up to $25,000 for
each day after the effective date of the NON during which each violation continues or is
repeated, or the issuance of a unilateral administrative order requiring the necessary
corrective action within a reasonable time period. Noncompliance with the terms of such
an order may result also in further enforcement action, including the imposition of penalties
of up to $25,000 for each day after the effective date of the Order during which each
violation continues or is repeated.
.->:.: ,. ' " :; j,:
The DWS staff in this region look forward to working together with the responsible officials
for your public water system to help you achieve and maintain compliance with the drinking
water regulations and improve the overall quality of your system. If you have any questions
please contact the above mentioned DWS staff person.
Sincerely,
DWS Water Supply Chief
_^^_____ Region
_^^^^^ซWMI_ |
enc: Comprehensive Compliance Evaluation - Sanitary Survey Report
Findings
Compliance Plan
cc: DEP/DWS Boston
City/Town Board of Health
Town Manager/Board of Selectmen
-------
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
In the^ Matter of: ^ )
>-*4. v -.^ N /v .*., ., f *"_'_/_ " _%_ *", J AO
PWS ID# " V .; )
Model Consent Order
PARTIES
1. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
(hereinafter referred to as the "Department") is a duly
constituted agency of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts having
its principal office located at One Winter Street,Boston, MA,
02108, and a regional office located at "'"""''< f ifc. .
2. The {choose emef <5ity/'J!owri/^ra1:er76oBipany7Water District
of "'&'--^ ; ":, '---" - , - (hereinafter referred^to as "PWS") is a
^'c^ioose oine |-' duly constlitiJted politicail -sjibdivisaoii of the
^ammonwealfcfc/duiy ;-ponstftซtซd corporation, doing fctts-in-ess in
Massachusetts./ duly constituted Water; District ^having its
principal offices located at" " ;
STATEMENT OF FACT AND LAW
3. The Department has primary enforcement responsibility of the
requirements of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C.
งง300f et sea, (hereinafter the "Act"), and the regulations
promulgated thereunder by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (hereinafter "EPA").,
4. The Department may issue such orders as it deems necessary to
ensure the delivery of safe and pure drinking water by public
water systems to all consumers. M.G.L., c.lll, ง160. The
Department may also require by order the provision and operation
of such treatment facilities as it deems necessary to insure the
delivery of a safe water supply to all- consumers. M.G.L. c. Ill,
ง5G.
5. Pursuant to the authority granted to the Department in M.G.L.
c.lll, ง160, the Department's Division of Water Supply has
-------
promulgated the Massachusetts State Drinking Water Regulations at
310 CMR 22.00, applicable to all public water systems.
6. PWS is a Public Water System as defined by 310 C.M.R. 22.02,
42 U.S.C. ง300f(4), and 40 C.F.R. ง141.2.
7. On I,,"','..,...,,....' ..'.ii.n.foSglrJr) a representative of the Department
conducted a .s'ahrtary Survey (sometimes referred to as a "Sanitary
Survey Stage 1" or a "Comprehensive Compliance Evaluation") of
the entire PWS system. A Sanitary Survey is an on site review of
the water sources, facilities equipment, operation and
maintenance of a PWS for the purpose of evaluating the adequacy
of such sources, facilities, equipment, operation and maintenance
for producing and distributing safe drinking water. 310 C.M.R.
22.02.
8. As a result of the sanitary survey, the Department identified
violations of the drinking water regulations, deficiencies in
meeting the Department's Guidelines and Policies for Public Water
Systems and general sanitation standards which imperil the
delivery of a fit and pure supply of water by the PWS to all of
its consumers (hereinafter referred to. as "violations") .
9. The Findings of the Sanitary Survey and draft Compliance Plan
were sent to the PWS. The Sanitary Survey Findings is attached
to and incorporated into this Order as Attachments A.
10. On ." , PWS attended a meeting with representatives of
the Department to discuss the Findings of the Sanitary Survey,
and the required actions necessary to achieve compliance.
,
'ftfse ^paragraph jLl^fToIr' systems- which. iaavie agreed to a schedule.
if^, Tซปซ, tfi v^ *ป, uh SV *? A "^ XX ซ. V\f V. V -vJvlA V V V ^
SCJse paragraph 12* for systems t which hav^ not agreed to a schedule
at: thejaefcriefifig jneetijng, toxrt are willing to sign a consent
order .
i , .'Wivi'Swa ',,.,,11 ,, ,i
11. At the meeting PWS and the Department agreed on a Compliance
Plan specifying the necessary corrective actions, and reasonable
deadlines by which the necessary corrective action for each
violation will be accomplished.
12. At the meeting PWS and the Department were not able to agree
upon a Compliance Plan specifying the necessary corrective
actions and the deadlines by which the necessary corrective
action for each violation should be accomplished.
... ,. j, .
DISPOSITION AND ORDER
13. In order to facilitate long range system planning, conserve
resources and expedite compliance, and pursuant to the authority
-------
-3-
granted to the Department by M.G.L. c.lll, ง160, M.G.L. c.21A,
ง16, 310 C.M.R. 5.00 and 310 C.M.R. 22.00, the Department hereby
issues and the PWS hereby consents to the following Order.
14. All violations and recommendations, necessary and
recommended corrective actions, and mutually agreeable deadlines
for completing the required actions, are listed in the Compliance
Plan appended hereto as Attachment B. The Compliance Plan is
hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Consent Order.
The parties hereby agree that the deadlines listed in the
Compliance Plan constitute reasonable time periods by which the
actions required shall be accomplished.
15. This Consent Order shall constitute an admission by PWS of
the violations listed in the Compliance Schedule.
Uotฅ:-lf PWS'*s object to this paragraph it aay -be omitted. The
following, may alfO_fcฃ substituted: ^
ttTEis^b>naent, brdlf shall not c6h'sti'fciVie'"ah admission:of
liability" on the part of the Ptfs.ซ
16. Each undersigned representative hereby certifies that he or
she is fully authorized to enter into this Consent Order and to
legally bind the respective parties to the terms and conditions
of this Order.
17. This Consent Order shall be binding on the PWS and all its
heirs, successors and assigns. No change in ownership of PWS
shall alter the responsibility of PWS under this Order. PWS
shall not violate this Consent Order emd shall not allow or
suffer its employees, agents, or contractors to violate this
Consent Order.
18. Nothing in this Consent Order shcill be construed as, or
operate as, barring, diminishing, or in any way affecting any
legal or equitable right of the Department to issue any future
Order with respect to the subject matter of this Consent Order,
or in any way affecting any other claim, action, suit, cause of
action or demand that the Department may have with respect
thereto.
19. lllllHllli If any event occurs beyond the reasonable control
and withollF'tSe fault of PWS and any entity PWS controls, which
causes or contributes to a delay in PWS achieving compliance with
this Consent Order which could not have been avoided with the
exercise of due care, foresight or due diligence on the part of
PWS, PWS shall notify the Department in writing within 15 days of
the occurrence. Such notice shall include the cause of the
delay, the anticipated length of the delay, and measures taken or
planned to be taken to minimize the delay, and may include a
-------
-4-
request to revise the Compliance Schedule deadlines for
implementing the required measures. If such a request is made it
shall include a proposed revised Compliance Schedule for
implementing the required measures. The Department may extend
the performance dates in question for a period of time up to the
length of the anticipated delay. Upon approval of the request to
revise th,g Compliance Schedule, PWS shall implement such measures
approved by the Department, including any requirements to avoid
or minimize any delay.
20. Optional, but, p|ปปse use- If you ซse ^l^tra^rapJt 3.9
Unanticipated or increased costs associated with the
implementation of the ,required actions, or changes financial
circumstances of PWS shall not be considered circumstances beyond
the control of PWS for the purposes of this Consent Order.
21. PWS shall be responsible for procuring all federal, state
and local permits, licenses and approvals necessary to perform
the work required by this Consent Order and agrees to exert its
best effortsto obtain all such necessary permits, licenses and
approvals in a timely fashion. All work required by the terms
of this Order shall be performed in accordance with applicable
federal, state and local laws, regulations and approvals.
.. ,, '1 , , , !;.'. ''"'!'
22. Any written submittal required of PWS pursuant to this
Consent Order shall be delivered or mailed to:
Department of Environmental Protection
r?\x?"/' f^ - ' Region
Division of Water Supply
23. This Consent Order shall be considered a Notice of
Noncompliance issued pursuant to M.G.L. C.21A, ง16 and 310 C.M.R.
5.00. PWS is advised that if it fails to comply with this
Cqnsent Orjier, M.G.L. C.21A, ง16 and M.G.L. c. Ill, ง160 provide
for civil administrative penalties of up to $25,000 for each day
after the effective date of this Consent Order during which each
violation covered by this Order continues or is repeated.
24, Commencing on "^x^f ?*'-' ?:-^fttetfeV < and continuing - every
three months thereafter, PWS shall sublit "a quarterly progress
report to the Department summarizing the progress made in
completing the required actions set out in Attachment A to this
Order.
; ; :: . . ., : . , . |
25. The Department expressly reserves its right pursuant to
M.G.L. c.lll, ง165, and 310 C.M.R. 22.18 to inspect the system
and enter any system facility to monitor PWS's compliance with
this Consent Order, M.G.L. c.lll, ง160 and 310 C.M.R. 22.00.
-------
-5-
26. If any term of this Consent Order shall be held to be
invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Order shall not
be affected by such validity or enforceability.
27. The effective date of this Order shall be the date of the
last signature below.
For the Department
of Environmental Protection,
Name: Date
Title:
For
Public Water System:
Name: Date
Title: ^
Attachment A: Sanitary Survey Findings
Attachment B: Compliance Plan
-------
'I'F.i,!!!1!'1 "i,! "MiVi: ' 111"1 |l;'f " '! "'
PWS NAME PWS ID#
SANITARY SURVEY COMPLIANCE PLAN ' |
For use when violations are discovered during a survey
Oฐ - (date) a Sanitary Survey was conducted of the above public water system. During that
survey violations of regulations or statute were identified, and are listed in section A of the table
below. Additional recommendations for improving the system may also have been identified and are
listed in section B.
1) TO SCHEDULE A DEBRIEFING MEETING - This paragraph can be used when a debriefing
meeting has not yet been scheduled, or will not be scheduled.
You must submit a written proposal to the^Departm^l^
propose to, come into PomP''ance;andvCorrงc^ the^^
5""; '''''''**'; *:" :{date).:You mav use c6(a^^i^f^j^^^^S^^^u^^^^^^
I
2) WHEN DEBRIEFING MEETING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED.
You must submit a written proposal to the Department setting forth how and when you
propose to come into compliance and correct the violations fisted below, at a debriefing
meeting scheduled for _/_ (date) at ' - ^ ftime) at J (location).
Jf you are unable to attend, please contact {name) : ' *of the Division of
Water Supply immediately at (phone) *& jnake/reschedule the
debriefing meeting.
3} WHEN A DEBRIEFING MEETING WA S HELD ON SITE - This paragraph may be used when the
debriefing meeting is held at the PWS site, and the supplier agrees upon the necessary
corrective actions and reasonable deadlines by which the actions are to be accomplished.
(Using the "NON approach" when the debriefing meeting is done at the site.)
i i
The Findings of the Department's Sanitary Survey were discussed., with the" above
r'!!rned Pyblic, waJer^ystem at the end of the'survfy and/or a debrfefing meeting held
on ..'. - "" '"'' "j 4 update). The following action plan to remedy the violations and
achieve compliance was agreed upon by the Public Water Systern a/idjhe Department,
Actions necessary to correct the violatlons/ound during the survey "are listed in column
II of the table below, and the deadlines by whfch the corrective actions are to be taken
-iA listed in column JH. .--,,-
, ';. i .i '
This Compliance Plan [is ] or [is not ] (check one) a Notice of Noncompliance pursuant to
M.G.L. C.21A, ง16, and 310C.M.R. 5.00. Section B of this Compliance Plan is not a Notice of Non-
compliance.
REMEMBER: IF this Compliance Plan is also a Notice of
Noncompliance (NON): It must contain all the required
elements of a NON, including reasonable deadlines for coming
into compliance or deadlines for submitting a written proposal
for coming into compliance.
PAGE of __ Date: / /
PWS INITIALS "
-------
PWS NAME PWS ID#
SANITARY SURVEY COMPLIANCE PLAN
For use when DEP has only Recommendations
This paragraph may be used to schedule a debriefing meeting for PWS's to discuss the Department
Recommendations.
On (date) a Sanitary Survey was conducted of the above public water system. During that
Survey conditions at the system were identified which could be improved by implementing the
Department's recommendations listed on Section B of the Compliance Plan attached to this letter.
Please contact (name) at (phone) to schedule a debriefing meeting
to discuss the Department's Sanitary Survey and Findings, including it recommendations.
PAGE of Date: / /.
PWS INITIALS
-------
PWS NAME
PWS ID#
SANITARY SURVEY COMPLIANCE PLAN
SIGNATURE PAGE
For use when Section A of the Compliance Plan has been filled out
For Public Water System:
Signature
Printed Name
Signature
Printed Name
Title
Date
Title
Date
Signature
Title
Printed Name
Signature
Printed Name
Date
Title
Date
For the Department of Environmental Protection:
Signature
Printed Name
Title
Date
PAGE
of
PWS INITIALS
Date: / /
-------
PWS NAME pws
SANITARY SURVEY COMPLIANCE PLAN
SIGNATURE PAGE
for use when Section B of the Compliance Plan has been filled out
I hereby acknowledge receipt of the findings and inspection report of the sanitary survey conducted
by the Department of Environmental Protection's Division of Water Supply, including this compliance
schedule, with its recommended actions to improve the system.
For the Public Water System:
Signature Title
Printed Name Date
Signature Title
Printed Name Date
'Signature
Printed Name Date
For the Department of Environmental Protection:
Signature ; Title
Printed Name Date
PAGE of Date: / /.
PWS INITIALS
-------
-------
a 05
| 1
<ฃ
O
^^
^^
i
Cu<
> Z
ง0
* *H IBM
CC 05
*"**S 1
H- ป
"""""* Cam
13
C/) &.
UJ
O
.j
Q.
cE
0
o
UJ
S
z
w
a.
lU
(A
3
50
^
a
>"
:
1
:
- S
"p
Ul
|
q
Ul
1
Z
<
t-
*
0
g
<
' %
ff
-
"
\J "" %,
"' -^ X'A
:. "
Z
;|
O
UJ
, H
O
-2
' S
cc
8
* v.%^
<ซ.ซ.%
^ f S
ฃ
*:$,
r "
,,; " ,
~
,
,* ' - "
'
'V-- --;
*,- ^-*
",fiu
" W
u.
0
0!
C
ง
C
WJ
fiฃ
2
g
_l
.3
ill
cc
V ซ
^
o>
^
C
o
a> UJ
"5- t
i o
X
a>
o
ซ^
i
>;
O)
C
1
~
0)
^
'5
G.
M
09
10
1
JC
O
v>
(D
O
0
Q.
a>
!>
CO
5)
o
Q.
^
ฃ
ra
3
o-
f
1
a.
UJ
O
05 .
"O U
l*f
o SJ
*^ ^B
ง *-
C
ซ ^ "
S
-------
JlilMll ! 'II I :H| '
:!|
"; a.
UJ
2
CO
\pg
2
o
v_
<^11* ^f
> z
IP
>- UJ
ff *ft
SANITAl
E PLAN - J
O
2
Zj
Q.
ฃป
O
o
Hi
t/i
3
w
ง
a
o
3
"':ซr
,o
u.
M1
2
il.DEADLI
:
>NQU.OV
IU
50RRECT
<-n
o
g
<
.CORRHCTIVB
ss)
'"'
-------
CO
a.
CO
z
LU
O
>0
CC L_
<0
I UJ
^ CO
a.
UJ
o
CL
:>
o
o
UJ
CO
a.
to
E
09
CO
O
0)
0
c
s
CO
'to
CO
B3
_*
co
u
'c
o
0)
09
o
Q.
M||
^5
5
jg
Q
ฃL
in
Q
jJ
ซMป
CD
03
=
D
Q.
c
CO
re
en
.c
5
"o
c
o
*J
0)
s
Q.
09
o
CO
09
Q.
TO
ซ5
09
.2
Q.
0
Q.
Q.
(0
09
0
**
re
2
"CD
^
o
09
_o
"5
CO
O
>
tut
CO
O
z
i
7"*
o
Q.
O
^rf
'c
o
ffl
a.
Ul
<
O
CO
a.
u.
O
UJ
O
-------
%
Q
CO
if i i:
S i,
CO
z
g
<
D
Z
LU
o
o
UJ
^;
> o
z 0
w z
UJ
O
<
_j
Q.
^
O
o
i
E
03
4-*
V)
o
4->
o
c
to
w .
'55 C
V) O
tO OT
tw
(U
If"
jr To
u to
* Q)
31
> a.
0 0
Q. a.
... a.
ra
ง 0>
en ฃ
^*
Q
o"~
U.
a
JC
ซ.
"re
O!
15
o
*^
2
k.
.y
o
w
o
**.
ffi
"o
sg
go
ro "5
S.I
II5
?ง
S งL
,=
5
"o
c
'<ฃ2
1
O
^
J
4-4
03
|
a
.ฃ
o
4ซ*
w
ง
mendati
g
u
0)
cc
(O
u
03
in
to
03
K
!?
Q
' .ซ*
IS
c
03
recomm
03
V)
1
O
ra
c
c
c.
c/)
0)
^/J
Q
>
Ul
CO
o
< rf
'~p
2
^1
j-
I
ut
5
o
U)
RECOMMEND
ut
O
cc
a.
: jg
O
1-
V)
Z
2
J""
o
i o
UI
Q
Ut
O
O
Ul
cc
*
THE SYSTEM
,".''
,* -\ ,
N
.5)
o
ฃ
id
UJ
u.
UI
s
':
ACTIONS*-
J
^
rogress reports.
Q.
ฃ
1
Q.
Ul
Q
V
a
'3
o
a.
T3
C
re
M
M
ฃ
0)
o
Q.
o
o
E
0)
re
ft)
ol
UI
<
O
u.
O
ui
O
-------
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
In the Matter of: )
>_ '?-,"*- ' 'ป; - .,'-', ) AO -
PWS ID# )
Model Consent Order
PARTIES
1. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
(hereinafter referred to as the "Department") is a duly
constituted agency of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts having
its principal office located at One Winter Street, Boston, MA,
02108, and a regional office located at ^ ' ''
2. The (choose oriel City/Town/Water Coapariy/Wat,er"t)istfic;f:
of "*', (hereinafter referred to as "PWS") is a
(choose ,one] duly; constituted political subdivision of the
Commonwealth/duly constituted corporation doing business in
Massachusetts/ duly constituted Water District^having its
principal offices located at \
STATEMENT OF FACT AND LAW
3. The Department has primary enforcement responsibility of the
requirements of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C.
งง300f et seg. (hereinafter the "Act"), and the regulations
promulgated thereunder by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (hereinafter "EPA").
4. The Department may issue such orders as it deems necessary to
ensure the delivery of safe and pure drinking water by public
water systems to all consumers. M-G.L. c.lll, ง160. The
Department may also require by order the provision and operation
of such treatment facilities as it deems necessary to insure the
delivery of a safe water supply to all consumers. M.G.L. c. Ill,
ง5G.
5. Pursuant to the authority granted to the Department in M.G.L.
c.lll, ง160, the Department's Division of Water Supply has
-------
promulgated the Massachusetts State Drinking Water Regulations at
310 CMR 22.00, applicable to all public water systems.
6. PWS is a Public Water System as defined by 310 C.M.R. 22.02,
42 U.S.C. ง300f(4), and 40 C.F.R. ง141.2.
j.
7. On -'-'' " "" '::::y->'"/&jtt'e)': a representative of the Department
conducted a Sanitary Survey (sometimes referred to as a "Sanitary
Survey Stage 1" or a "Comprehensive Compliance Evaluation") of
the entire PWS system. A Sanitary Survey is an on site review of
the watersources, facilities equipment, operation and
maintenance of a PWS for the purpose of evaluating the adequacy
oฃ such sQurces, facilities, equipment, operation and maintenance
for producing and distributing safe drinking water. 310 C.M.R.
22.02. ' ' . ' ' i , , " '
8, As a result of the sanitary survey, the Department identified
violations of the drinking water regulations, deficiencies in
meeting the Department's Guidelines and Policies for Public Water
Systems and general sanitation standards which imperil the
delivery of a fit and pure supply of water by the PWS to all of
its consumers (hereinafter referred to as "violations").
I , f ;, , , , |; ,1 ,. ,
9, The Findings of the Sanitary Survey and draft Compliance Plan
were sent to the PWS. The Sanitary Survey Findings is attached
to and incorporated into this Order as Attachments A.
10. On '''^T'^?-;:;"^!yf-';sH?; pws attended a meeting with representatives of
the Department to discuss the Findings of the Sanitary Survey,
and the required actions necessary to achieve compliance.
[Use("paragraph11 for systems which have Agreed to a schedule!
tjse".""paragraph 12 for systems" which have not agreed to a schedule
ฃt'the^d.ebrieฃing .meetijig, but are willing to sign a consent
.order."**
11. At the meeting PWS and the Department agreed on a Compliance
Plan specifying the necessary corrective actions, and reasonable
deadlines by which the necessary corrective action for each
violation will be accomplished.
rememberT'tlSB" $ ;i'l *OR>1.'2 "- hot both:
M. ป 'V"i,,,,ij]i>aw*. g*". ** 11 -. fcV-, **?-. . *-. rtwA A*-. > /
12. At the meeting PWS and the Department were not able to agree
upon a Compliance Plan specifying the necessary corrective
actions and the deadlines by which the necessary corrective
action for each violation should be accomplished.
, . i ,.'''' i .:
DISPOSITION AND ORDER
13. In order to facilitate long range system planning, conserve
resources and expedite compliance, and pursuant to the authority
-------
-3-
granted to the Department by M.G.L. c.lll, ง160', M.G.L. c.21A,
ง16, 310 C.M.R. 5.00 and 310 C.M.R. 22.00, the Department hereby
issues and the PWS hereby consents to the following Order.
14. All violations and recommendations, necessary and
recommended corrective actions^ and mutually agreeable deadlines
for completing the required actions, are listed in the Compliance
Plan appended hereto as Attachment B. The Compliance Plan is
hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Consent Order.
The parties hereby agree that the deadlines listed in the
Compliance Plan constitute reasonable time periods by which the
actions required shall be accomplished.
15. This Consent Order shall constitute an admission by PWS of
the violations listed in the Compliance Schedule.
Note: If PWS 's" object to this paragraph" it;"siay bV
following may also be substituted:
'"This Consent Order shall not "constitute 'an
liability on the part, of the PWS'."y ' ,,,.v.,,v,,,,,,,,._.r.,..,,,,
16. Each undersigned representative hereby certifies that he or
she is fully authorized to enter into this Consent Order and to
legally bind the respective parties to the terms and conditions
of this Order.
17. This Consent Order shall be binding on the PWS and all its
heirs, successors and assigns. No change in ownership of PWS
shall alter the responsibility of PWS under this Order. PWS
shall not violate this Consent Order arid shall not allow or
suffer its employees, agents, or contreictors to violate this
Consent Order.
18. Nothing in this Consent Order shall be construed as, or
operate as, barring, diminishing, or in any way affecting any
legal or equitable right of the Department to issue any future
Order with respect to the subject matter of this Consent Order,
or in any way affecting any other claim, action, suit, cause of
action or demand that the Department may have with respect
thereto.
19. ppti:b'nal:i If any event occurs beyond the reasonable control
and without the fault of PWS and any entity PWS controls, which
causes or contributes to a delay in PWS achieving compliance with
this Consent Order which could not have been avoided with the
exercise of due care, foresight or due diligence on the part of
PWS, PWS shall notify the Department in writing within 15 days of
the occurrence. Such notice shall include the cause of the
delay, the anticipated length of the delay, and measures taken or
planned to be taken to minimize the delay, and may include a
-------
-4-
request to revise the Compliance Schedule deadlines for
implementing the required measures. If such a request is made it
shall include a proposed revised Compliance Schedule for
implementing the required measures. The Department may extend
the performance dates in question for a period of time up to the
length of the anticipated delay. Upon approval of the request to
revise the Compliance Schedule, PWS shall implement such measures
approved by the Department, including any requirements to avoid
or minimize any delay.
.
20. dpฃipnalpSHiiH,"
-------
_ c _
26. If any term of this Consent Order shall be held to be
invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Order shall not
be affected by such validity or enforceability.
27. The effective date of this Order shall be the date of the
last signature below.
For the Department
of Environmental Protection,
Name: . Date
Title:
For
Public Water System:
Name: Date
Title:
Attachment A: Sanitary Survey Findings
Attachment B: Compliance Plan
-------
NEW YORK
Procedure for Detailed System Evaluations
of Public Water Supplies
-------
i- EALTH MANUAL
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTH
OFFICE OF LOCAL HEALTH MANAGEMENT
PROCEDURE
3/43/61
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
PROCEDURE: PWS 181 PAGE 1
ISSUING UNIT: Bureau of Public Water Su
SUBJECT: Detailed System Evaluations
Public Water Supplies
POLICY
Public water systems which have their own source of supply and/or
provide treatment will be evaluated on the following schedule:
Community Systems: At least once every five years.
Noncotnmunity Systems: Systems meeting the following special criteria
must be evaluated at least once every ten years:
1. Systems with known violations of Part 5, State Sanitary Code.
2. Systems with surface sources.
3. Elementary and secondary schools.
4. Systems which serve 1,000 people or more, per day of operation.
Systems should be evaluated based on the following priority:
1. Community systems with known code violations.
2. Noncommunity systems with known code violations.
3. Community systems with surface sources.
4. Community systems with groundwater sources serving more than
1,000 people.
5. Noncommunity systems with surface sources.
6. Elementary and secondary schools.
7. All other community systems.
8. Noncommunity systems serving 1,000 people or more per day of
operation.
9. All other noncommunity systems.
OBJECTIVES
To ensure that an adequate and safe supply of water is delivered to all
consumers.
To provide guidance and assistance to suppliers of water.
To ensure compliance with applicable codes, rules and regulations.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MANUAL
Procedure WS 181
3/23/81
Transmittal Letter TL 81-3
Subject: Detailed System Evaluations of
Public Water Supplies
Page 2 of 3
PROCEDURE
FIELD
BPWS
FIELD
1. Schedules detailed system evaluation.
, I 'i
i ! i , , ,i
2. Reviews all appropriate files on the public water
system including correspondence, annual inspection
reports, monthly operating reports, violations,
water quality, plan review, etc.
, I, ,;, . H ,| N
3. Determines special sampling needs and contacts
Bureau of Public Water Supply (BPWS) for approval.
! ;'
4. Reviews special sampling requests and contacts
DL&R to arrange for analysis.
I i
5. Notifies FIELD of approval or disapproval for
special sampling.
-' ': ' ' .,!. .! [, , . , . i
6. Conducts detailed system evaluation and completes
appropriate portions of evaluation forms (including
inspection report form).
a. Community Systems - GEN 218 - GEN 200
:| ' i
b. Noncommunity Systems - GEN 223 - GEN 201
7. Collects microbiological samples, routine surveillance
samples, and special samples as previously approved.
8. Discusses evaluation findings with responsible person:
a. Orders immediate correction or abatement
of imminent health hazards, confirmed in
writing to the supplier ofwater within
48 hours of learning of the hazard, with
copies to the Regional/Area office and the
BPWS.
b. Orders correction of serious violations and
schedules re-inspection.
9. Transmits written report to supplier of water citing
as a minimum:
a. All code violations.
1 ' ''' ' i '
b. Operational problems.
c. Available water quality analyses.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANUAL
Procedure PWS 181
3/23/81
Transmittal Letter TL 81-3
Subject: Detailed System Evaluations of
Public Water Supplies
Page 3 of 3
FIELD (Cont.)
REGIONAL/AREA
OFFICE
FIELD
REFERENCES
d. Compliance schedule for code violations.
e. Accomplishments of the water system.
10. Forwards one copy of the written report, detailed
system evaluation form and inspection report form
to the Regional/Area office. An additional copy
of these reports should be submitted to the Public
Service Commission if the system is a privately
owned community water supply.
11. Forwards a copy of the written report, Detailed
System Evaluation form and Inspection Report Form
to the BPWS.
12. Conducts follow-up inspection within prescribed
schedule to assure compliance with Part 5.
a. If Code violations are corrected, notifies
supplier of water in writing. Transmits
one copy of letter to both Regional/Area
Office, BIWS, and PSC if applicable.
b. If Code violations are not corrected,
initiates appropriate enforcement action.
Form GEN 218 - Detailed System Evaluation
Form GEN 223 - Small Water System Detailed System Evaluations -
Groundwater Sources.
Form GEN 200 - Public Water Supply Annual inspection
Form GEN 201 - Noncommunity Public Water Supply Annual Inspection
Part 76_ - Administrative Procedure
EHM Procedure PWS 180- - Annual Inspections of Public Water Supplies
-------
-------
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Bureau of Public Water Supply Protection
Sanitary Survey
Public Water Systems
PART I Section A. Identifying Information SURVEY DATE
1. Name of Public Water System Station No. j j i" i i """"
2. Location i o prnr,
c*y, ww, Tซซ, County 13" Prฐ9
ซ**MMMM>Mlซซ>liliai>MaMaMMMซii*>iMMaiMMMMMซซMMa>ปMaM^ J.
Section B. Personnel Information
X'aTchleTOpe'rator """
b. Title and Grade
c. Home *.*ปซ* c*' ""'"
.....Address
d. Telephone No. Hom*
5. Emergency Contacts "ซ"
"- "--fasi'
b. Night
" ~"MiT"D'ay~YF
6. Water supplier personnel present during evaluation on (Date) | i | i | i
Nปmป Tt!ป
Nซnn riib
Nปmซ Tilt
7. Other Certified Operators
....to.
a.
b.
^ _____
e.
f. "
g.
h.
8. Remarkss
PART II. General Data
I 1. System Name
Station No.
Section A. Source Transmission Mains
2. Number from each source
3. Size
Length
Diameter
Ft.
In.
boH-1033 (8/91) p. 1 of 13
Ft.
In.
Ft.
In.
-------
1
4. Protected fromJTeezing
5. Biowoffs on iowjjoints
6. Relief valves on high points
Yes
n
"n
n
No
n
n
Yes
n
n"
n
No
D
IQI
Yes
D
zzni
No
inz
7, Planing frequency
8. Cleaning method
"B. Distribution System
9, Total storage (gallons)
10, No. of storage facilities
11.1s at least 1 day's storage provided?
Yes No
n n
12. Normal maximum pressure
Ipsi
13. If maximum pressure is over 100 psi
are pressure-reducing valves used?
Yes
D
No
D
14. No'rmal minimum pressure I I I psi
15. No. of rechlorination stations
Section C. Miscellaneous Information
16. No. of emergency sources L.
Names:
17, No. of abandoned sources
Names:
Yes
No
18. Are abandoned sources
19. Remaps
D D
PART 111. Wells or Infiltration Galleries
Section A. General Information
#1
i. Name of well or inf ittration gallery
2, Is this for regular or auxiliary use? Q R Q A Q R LJ A.....
!| ' IW4W******"*"*"*"*"* .,.....ซ.....*..ซ*..*ซ>ป""" """*
/ \
No
/
4. Does this source receive any treatment?
Yes No
n n
Yes
n n
Yes No
n n
Section B. Protection (Do not usa this section for springs or surface sources.)
"ii .!; ,' ' ''';, :. ;:; : , Yes No ' Yes No
S, a Are Watershed Rules & Regulations in effect? LJ LJ L_! LJ...
Jito""Day""Yr Mo Day Yr
b. If yes, when where they last updated? i i i i i I i I
Yes No
.P D.
Mo Day Yr
I I I
DOH-1033 (8ซ1) p. 2 of 13
-------
S. What is the distance to the nearest , , ,
a. Subsurface disposal system 1 1
b. Sanitary sewer 1 1
c. Storm sewer 1 1
d. Waste lagoon
e. Surface water
Yes
7. Is it subject to 1 00 year flooding? f~]
8. Is it subject to chemical spills? LJ
i i
9. Is the yield constant? I I
1 0. Is the site properly drained? I I
1 1 . How much land from the source is
JR.
JR.
Ft.
Ft.
Ft.
No
n
n
n
n
i
tes
n
n
n
n
Ft.
Ft.
Ft.
Ft.
Ft.
No
D
J
J
n
I
ft!S
C
c
c
I 1 (ซ
Ft.
Ft.
LJ R-
Ft.
i No
n
n
n
Ml..
ft.
ft.
1 2. How much land from the source is
controlled by local ordinances or WR&R? I ft-
Ac
1 3. How much land from the source is fenced?
Yes No
14. Is the source located in a well house? I I I I
1 5. (DRILLED WELL ONLY) __
Is the well casing properly sealed and grouted? | | | |
1 6. a. Does the well vent face downward? LJ LJ
b. Is it screened? I I I I
17. a. Is the well located in a pit? I I I I
b. If yes. is the pit floor dry and well drained? I I I I
III It II
I I ซ
Yes No Yi
n n c
an L
a a c
a a c
a a :
a a L
i ซ.
,ift-
3S NO
j n
: a
: a
: a
j n
i] n
18. What is the distance from the floor
to the top of the casing?
in.
in.
in.
Section C. Construction (for ground sources only)
19. What is the type of well?
Q] Drilled
D Dug
LJ Driven
Drilled
Dug
Driven
Q Drilled
D Dug
II Driven
20. What is the diameter of the well?
21. a. Is the source an infiltration gallery?
Yes
n
No
n
Yes No
a a
Yes
No
a
b. If Yes, what is the diameter of
the collection basin?
LLK
LJJit
Yes
No
22. Is a low water shutoff provided?
Yes No
n n
Yes
n
No
n
n
23. Is a discharge pressure gauge provided? II II
.......................... ป.....'...ซ.* ... ..*>..ปป.ป.. .Ti,,,,I....... ......,.,ซ.................ป.........ซซซ..... .....--.-ซ
24. Is a gate valve gfoyided? LJ LJ
P. P
crrr
n
25-!? ?L9.ti?.9.!Ly.?ily.e.^ .P. i=i -
26. a. Is a blow-off provided on the discharge piping? LJ D LJ LJ
P
P
_
P
P
n
n
?. t .Y??1'? ? 9.9n.n.???ฎl.^irฎc?|y. t0^..!?"?.?!^.8.?.?...^. LJ..
DOH-1033 (8/91) p. 3 of 13
D D
n
-------
27,Js a raw water sampling cock provided?
28. Is a well alarm system provided?
Yes No
W"""Q
n""""n"
Yes
"D"
_
No
n
_
Yes
_
No
29. a. Is the source metered?
b. Are daily records kept?
n
"n
Section D. Wall Maintenance (for ground sources only)
30. When was the well last reconditioned? __
31. What chemical was used in
the last reconditioning?
Section E. Well Pump (for ground sources only)
32. What is the capacity?
^
33. Does the pump cycte more than 4 times /hour?
34. Ar* air relief valves provided?
;.' . , / , - , ,,
35. Is the pump on a routine maintenance schedule?
Ii i i .ซ
pen jpm
/es No Yes No
n n n n
n n n n
an an
Ii i
1 1 CP^1
1 1
Yes No
n n
n n
a a
36, What is the general condition of the:
c. Switch gear
: : !
Section F. Auxiliary Power (for ground sources only) '
Yes No Yes No Yes No
37. lsauxillaiyjDowersupply_providedonsite? LJ LJ L_l 1 1 1 II 1
38. Is it engaged manually or automatically?
39. What fuel does the generator use?
MA MA MA
n n n n n D
Q Gasoline Q Gasoline | [Gasoline
Q Diesel Q Diesel Q Diesel
Q Propane Q Propane Q Propane
. , , i . , i .
40. How often is auxiliary power tested?
41 . Are the exhaust gases properly vented?
Section G. Remarks
Yes No Yes No Yes No
n n n n n D
, . . . : i,,::;'
. '" . "' " '! ' '
:'. . ; , ! ; , ", >..' : H ;: ,! ;.
DOH-1033 (8/91) p. 4 of 13
-------
PART IV. Pump/ng
Section A. General Information
1. What is the pump station name?
>D T D T D
2. Is it used for distribution or transfer pumping? I I r i r i r j i i
E
3. What is the type of use? 1=
T
n
_ 1 .ซ._ (""~n
I Rtituiflr | 1 RssuUr I I Regular
""Ifcaiafv 1 1 Auxฃ*nf 1 1
J L.m-J i n J
n r"~i r i
1 EfntfVflncy j I Emtfccncy I 1 Emcfscncy
J li n J 'iMMir-1
4. Are gate valves located on suction and Yes No Yes No Yes
discharge sides of each pump? LJ \] \ 1 LJ [~1
5. Is check valve located on discharge side of pump? | | j ( CJ LJ L J
6. Is total flow from each station metered? E
7. What is total pumping capacity from each 1
station? 1
No
D
U
] n an an
l"" l l
l I8*" M
Yes No Yes No Yes
8. Does pump cycle more than 4 times/hour? r i r i PI Fl I 1
MA MA M
9. Is the pump on manual or automatic control? 1 II 1 1 II 1 j 1
gptn
No
a
A
n
10. If automatic, what type of control?
Yes No Yes No Yes
1 1 . Is pump station clean and dry? LJ | | | | [ | | |
12. Is proper drainage provided? I I I I I I I I I I
No
a
a
13. Is pump station subject to 100 year flooding? LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ
h 4. Is pump station fenced? LJ [J LJ LJ LJ
Are a sufficient number of pumps provided? | | LJ | | | | | |
1 6. Is there a low pressure shutoff or alarm provided . . . , , .
at each station? I II I I
1 7. Is a standard pressure gauge installed on each r
n a
in an a
a
n
n
a
18. Is a compound gauge installed on the suction Fl f~l Fl Fl I II I
line of each pump? LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ
19. Are pumps on a routine maintenance schedule? n I I [
20. What is the general condition of the:
a. Pump
b. Motor
c. Switch gear
a a
Sections. Auxiliary Power Yes No Yes No Yes
21. Is auxiliary power supply provided on site? LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ
MA M
22. Is it engaged manually or automatically? LJ LJ L_
23. What fuel does the generator use? L
E
A M
i a a
a
No
a
A
] Gasoline LJ Gasoline [_J Gasoline
] Diesel LJ Diesel LJ Diesel
] Propane | | Propane [~~] Propane
24. How often is auxiliary power tested?
Yes No Yes No Yes
1 ire the exhaust gases properly vented? L~] L~l CU O f~1
No
DOH-1033 (8/91) p. 5 of 13
-------
Section C. Ramarki
PART V. Finished Water Storage
Suction A. Treatment Flint Storage
1. Plant name .
2. Storage volume Jin millions)
|ga.. | | | |gal.
3. Type of storage LJ EM* [_| BmMd
r~|Grtu)dlMl | | Grand Iml
DEWow grand 1 1 Btbw grand
II
4. Type of use L] Ctor"rt [_j oซซr*a
D8"9"* ฃ]ปซ**
5. Is common wall shared with unfinished water? YJ?? **ฐ ^J?8 ^2.
6. Is storaฃe facility covered and protected? LJ LJ 1 II 1
I I I Igai-
QE**d
[""I Ground towl
I |B*bwgreu)d
r-JCtar-
I iBaclondi
Yes No
n n
n n
7. Are there any noticeable teaks in the storage facility? LJ 1 1 1 II 1 1 II 1 ^^
8. Are deposits from purification chemicals present? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
9. Is a water level Indicator provided? L
Section B. Distribution Storage
10. Name of distribution storage facility
: ''.' >. -; -
11. Usable volume (in millions)
n n n
| gal I) | |gal.
12. Type LjEtawtod QEIซv*ซd
" ' ' '' 1 1 ' ' 1 1 "" ..1
1 1 Below grand F 1 B^IBW ground
Yes No Yes No
13, Is storage facility covered? LJ LJ I II I
':,;::; I i,:::;, , , :,: i, :; , r~i r~~l I I [""""I
14, If uncovered, is effluent adequately disinfected? I II I I II I
Yes No Yes No
15. a. Are roof hatches accessible? LJ I I LJ I I
b. Locked? CD CU d C3
16, Does the overflow have a screen or a hinged flap? 1 1 1 1 LJ 1 1
17. Is the site fenced? EH d EH CH
18. Are access ladders Inaccessible to the public? LJ LJ I II I
19, Does the storage facility have a separate drain? f~~] L"U EH l~~l
20. How often Is water in storage tank turned over? l_
; i i / i
21. Is a chlorine residual maintained in tank? LJ LJ I II I
22. Is there adequate surface drainage around tank? I I I I I I I I
008-1033 (8/91) p. 6 of 13
n nw
n D
gal.
[ [ EtoaUd
| | Ground lปvปl
I I Betowgroind
Yes No
n n
n n
Yes No
n n
n n
n n
n n
n n
n n A
i / r ^P
n n
n L
"j '"
-------
Yes
23. Is elevation adequate to maintain 20 psi? L_
|24. Are level controls provided? L
25. Is the level monitored 24 hrs/day? \_
6. Is an altitude valve used? L_
27. Are valve pits vandal proof? L
28. Is cathodto protection of tank provided? L
29. Are anodes periodically checked and replaced? L
30 a Inspection date of exterior paint
b. Inspection date of interior paint
31. a. Date last painted (exterior)
b. Date last painted (interior)
Yes
32. Was acceptable paint used in the interior? I
33. Has a maintenance contract been provided? I
Section C. Hydropneumatic Storage
34 Name of facility
35. Usable volume
Yes
36. Is a pressure gauge provided? I
^37. Pressure range, PSI
' Yes
38. a. Is an air volume control provided? [~
b. If Yes. what type?
Yes
39. Is a sight glass provided? I
Section D. Remarks
PART VI. Transmission & Distribution System
Section A. Distribution Transmission Mains
1 . Plant name
2. Number of transmission mains
Ib. diameter
Yes
4. Are mains adequately protected from freezing? L
re relief valves provided on high points? I
No Yes
n n
n n
n n
n n
n n
n n
No Yes
D D
n n
**
No Yes
n n
-
No Yes
n n
No Yes
n n
i
ft
LUin- L
j No Yes
i n n
in n
No Ye
n c
D C
D L
D C
D C
D C
n c
No Ye
n c
n c
U8" LL
No Ye
n :
No Y<
n :
No Ye
n c
UK- [_[_
L>
No Y
D C
D t
s No
] D
] D
] D
] n
] n
] n
] n
is No
] n
J U
8ซ
ปs No
] n
9S NO
] n
3S NO
3 n
:
ft.
LL>
as No
: c
D C
DOH-1033 (8/91) p. 7 of 13
-------
6. Are blowoffs provided on low points?
7. a. Are mains periodically flushed?
b. If Yes, how often?
Section B. Distribution System
8. Is an adequate map maintained?
9. Has a card system bean developed that locates valves, etc.?
10. Are there areas with chronic low pressure problems?
11 . Is tha fire flow adequate?
12. a. Are valves exercised regularly?
b. JfYes, How often? L_
13. Do dead ends In distribution system pose problems?
14. Are blowoffs provided where necessary?
15. a. Is tha system periodically flushed?
b. If Yes how often? I
16. Are mains protected from freezing?
17. Is. a replacement and/or relining program in place?
18, Is 15V. or more of water unaccounted for?
19. Is a water conservation program in effect?
20. Are replacement parts available?
21. Are new piping & repairs adequately disinfected?
22. Describe the general condition of the system.
Section C. Cross Connection Control
23. Is an ordinance in effect?
24. If Yes, is ordinance adequate?
25. Is an effective inspection program in effect?
26. Is a maintenance and testing program in effect?
Section D. Communities that Purchase Water
Community Name
27. a.
b _ ,
d.
a.
DOH-1033 (8/91) p. 8 of 13
!! ,i: i1 ,
-------
28. Remarks
1
PART VII. Disinfection
Section A. General Information #1 #2
1 . Location of facilities
2. Number of units at each location I I I I
t
#3
U
3. Disinfection method
Yes No Yes No
4. Is capacity adequate? CD CD I I I I
5. Are chemicals stored properly? CD CD CD CD
6. Is a 30 day supply on hand? CD CD I I I I
7. Has there been a problem obtaining chemicals? CD CD CD CD
8. Is sufficient stand-by equipment available? CD CD I I I I
9. Are spare chlorinator parts available? CD CD I I I I
10. Is a treated water tap provided? CD CD I I I I
(11. If Yes. what is the contact time at the tap? I I Imin I I Ihr I I Imin I I Ih
12. Contact time before a. Ground water I I |min hr I min
first consumer I I imin nr i , mm n
b. Surface water I I I . I I I. I
I I Imin I I Ihr I min hi
Yes No
n n
D n
n n
n n
n n
n n
n n
r I min hr
r I I Imin I I Ihr
min | hr
13. Type of chlorine residual kit used CD OTA CDoPD L_|OTA[_]DPD CDotA CDDPD
14. Describe the general condition
of the chlorinators
Section B. Gas Chlorinatlon
15. Facility name
1 6. Point of application
17. Purpose Q Pre-treatment Q Pre-treatment | | Pre-treatment
Q Post-treatment Q Post-treatment | [ Post-treatment
Yes No Yes No Yes No
18. Is self-contained breathing apparatus available? (~~| | | | j [~~] | | \~\
Yes No Yes No Yes No
19. Are chlorinators located in a separate room? CD CD CD CD I I I I
20. Is there an outside entrance with panic hardware? CD CD CD CD CD CD
21. Is a sight window present? CD CD CD CD CD CD
22. Is the room properly vented? CD CD CD CD CD CD
Is there adequate forced ventilation? CD CD I I CD CD CD
DOH-1033 (8/91) p. 9 of 13
-------
.- 0. Q ...... 0 Q. .Q O
25, Are controlsjor faji_and j|9.fitputsjde ofjpom? LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ
26. Are gas teak detectors provided? DP D D D D
27. Are cylinders placed on scales while in use? LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ
'."28.JJS gas pjping.slfnp.te aj]d s!iP??Jl?i?? _ LJ UJ LJ LJ J_-
29. Are safety chains used for all cylinders? LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ
30. Is chlorlnator room adequately heated? I I ll I I I I I I I I
3^d^J{l?..ฃ[?E^ฃXll^^Il?Ea'r^?ProY.i^e 0 Q 2. Q. LJ. LJ
J . . .. :
Section C. Hypochlorinatlon
32. Facility name ...
33, Point of application
34. Purpose LJ Pre-treatment LJ Pre-treatment | | Pre-treatment
Q Post-treatment LJ Post-treatment |~~| Post-treatment
35. Hypochlorite used LJ Sodium LJ Sodium LJ Sodium
a. Type Q Calcium LJ Calcium LJ Calcium
Q Common bleach LJ Common bleach | | Common bleach
b. Concentration I I I % I % I 1 I %
36v.Whats^^^ I I J I.....!.....!....8.3...
m%
^ ^
38. Describe the general condition
of the chlorinators.
__ ....;;.... i . .......L:
.. .. - .ป _......_.....
i
11: ' ' : j ... '.'
Section D. Other Methods
39. Facility name
! " ' . . ( : ' .' .:.("
40. Point of application
41. Purpose LJ Pre-treatment LJ Pre-treatment LJ Pre-treatment
Q Post-treatment LJ Post-treatment LJ Post-treatment
42. Descr8>e the overall condition of the __
equipment.
43. Dascrtoe any special safeguards
that should be used with
this equipment ~~ " ~
DOH-1033 (8/91) p. 10 of 13
-------
Secf/briE. Remarks
PART VIII. Treatment Plant Maintenance & Safety
Name of Treatment Facility
Section A. Maintenance
15. Is a preventive maintenance schedule in place for: Yes
11. Is plant generally neat & clean?
2. Is the interior piping maintained & color coded?
Yes
P
_
No I a. Motors
f~1 ! b. Mechanical equipment
c. Structure
D
No
D
3. Are there condensation problems in the
interior of the plant?
16. Ana equipment & tools needed for routine
[~] | maintenance provided?
4. Is masonry work inside and outside of the
plant well maintained?
j 8. Is a separate maintenance staff provided?
Yes
Section B. Safety
9. Are emergency telephone numbers posted next ..
to frequently used phones? LJ
10. Are chemical feed rooms properly ventilated? [~]
11. Are the activated carbon feed and storage rooms ..
separate from the rest of the facility? I I I I
12. Do activated carbon feed and storage
rooms contain:
a. spark proof fixtures
D> n
13. Are eye wash stations located in:
a. Laboratory
b. Chemical storage area
c. Chemical feed area
D
n.
n
n
n
n
14. Are emergency showers located in:
a. Laboratory
b. Chemical storage area
c. Chemical feed area
d. Any area where chemicals are handled/stored
D
23. Remarks
No M 5. Do the chemical storage and feed rooms contain: Yes
rj I a. Goggles Q
fn 1 D- Aprons r~\
=| c. Rubber gloves ii
16. l:> a first aid kit provided?
i 17. Are fire extinguishers
\ a. Provided
i b. Properly located
D
D
No
D
D
D
D
_n
D
118. Are railings provided around all tanks and basins?
LJ 119. la emergency lighting adequate to maintain
I I j routine facility operation? I I
I I 120. Are overhead hazards present? LJ
..LJ.J 21. Are hard hats available and used? __LJ..
n
n
Di 22. Are there any specific safety hazards in the plant?
i If Yes, please describe under Remarks. I I
D '
Hi
DOH-1033 (8/91) p. 11 of 13
-------
PART IX, Emergency Plan
Section A. Gantral Information
Us an emergency telephone list containing
the following available?
a. Ambulance
b. Hospital
c. Doctor
d, Fire
e. Police
f. Power company
g. Local public health/district engineer
h. Responsible official
I 2. List emergency sources available to the public water system.
Yes
D
D
D
D
No
D
D
D
D
13. Are portable auxiliary power sources available?
"Yes"
a
No
Section B. Em*rgซncy Plan
4. a. Does a written emergency plan exist?
5, Does the plan affectively handle the following emergencies?
a. Flooding Q] Q
b. Power outages Q Q
c. Hurricanes Pi | ]
d. Main breaks Q Q
a, Va/idalfsrp | | Q
}, Loss of source fl I I
g. Chemical spills Q Q
h. Other emergencies | | [~~|
Yes No j 6. is all equipment necessary to handle an emergency ^
r~j r~] i at hand or at an emergency equipment stockpile? LJ
i ii f ' '
I I 17. Is the ernergency plan up to date?
i 8. Remarks
n
No
D
'. Laboratory
1. Laboratory that analyzes monitoring samples for
a. Microbiology
Name
Approved
Laboratory
Yes No
b. Inorganic chemicals
c. Organic chemicals
d. Radiological
2, Is a copy of Subsection 5-1.23 "Reporting
Emergency Changes* posted?
j n
n
n
' !' ^ Yes
n
n
n
o
No
n
&OH-1033 (8/91) p. 12 of 13
-------
PART XI. Conclusions and Recommendations
1. State conclusions reached from evaluation; list commendations as well as deficiencies.
f 2. State specific recommendations based on the deficiencies found.
DOH-1033 (8/91) p. 13 of 13
-------
-------
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Bureau of Public Water Supply Protection
Small Water System Sanitary Survey
Ground Water Sources
^^SECTION A. Identifying Information Survey
^^ 1. Name of System 5ta- No-
Date ซ ' I
M D Y
2. Location _ fc 3. Prog. Code
(City. Village. Town) County
4a. Name of Public Water System
b. Address
No. & Street City State Zip Tel. No.
Sa. Owner of Water Supply
b. Address
No. & Street City State Zip Tel. No.
*1 *2
6. Name of well or infiltration gallery
7. Is this for regular or auxilliary use? r ซ _ r--t ^ r~"j p |"~| ^
8. How often is it used? S /
9. Does this
SECTION
1a.Are
b. tfyซ
k 2. What
"
source receive any treatment? r i yas r"~j NO Q yes f~1 No
B: Protection
Watershed Rules & Regulations in effect? QYes Q No CD Yes CD No
ts. when were they last updated? I { } .,. 1 | , f 1 I
M D Y M D Y
a. Subsurface disposal system? j 1 Ft. _J Ft.
b. Sanitary sewer I i I Ft. I J Ft.
c. Storm sewer 1 J Ft. { 1,,,J Ft.
d. Waste laaoon I 1 |pt. L^^J Ft.
""ป r"n| j } ~\ _.
e. Surface water it I Ft. Ill "-
3. Is it subject to 1 00 year flooding?
4. Is it subject to chemical spills?
5. Is the yield constant?
6. Is the site properly drained?
CD Yes CJ No
D Yes Q No
CD Yes CD No
Q No
7. How much land from the source is
owned by the supplier?
8. How much land from the source is
controlled by local ordinances or WR&R?
9. How much land from the source is fenced?
10. Is the source located in a well house?
11. (DRILLED WELL ONLY)
Is the welt casing property sealed and grouted?
I I I I IF..
Ft.
LI
QYes CD No
es Q No
a Yes Q No
CD Yes Q No
QYes Q No
EH Yes Q No
Ft"
Ft.
II Ft.
C3 Yes ED No
CD Yes O No
DOH-1022(S/91)p. 1 ofS
-------
I
12a. Does the well vent face downward?
b. Is it screened?
13a. Is the well located in a pit?
b. If yes, is the pit floor dry and well drained?
14. What is the distance from the floor
to the top of the casing?
D Yes PI No
C] Yes CDNo
CD Yes CD No
CD Yes CD No
in.
CD Yes PI No
r
CD Yes CD No
CD Yes CD No
Yes CD No
In.
Drilled
Dug
f~] Driven
SECTION c. Construction
1. What is the type of well?
2. What is the diameter of the well?
3a. Is the source an infiltration gallery?
b. If Yas, what is the diameter of
the collection basin?
4. Can the water level in the source be measured?
5. What is the static water level?
6. What is the pumping water level?
7. Is a tow water shutoff provided?
8. Is a discharge pressure gauge provided?
. n " pn i
9. Is a gate valve provided?
CD Yes CD No
Q Yes Q No
10. Is a check valve provided on the discharge piping? CD Yes PI No
1 i,' 'i11.. , !' ' ' .... :Ji!i ' " , '"
1 la. Is a blow-off provided on the discharge piping? CD Yes CD No
.: ' '" " ill! , '">! ' ' ' ' "
b. If Yes, is h connected directly to a sanitary sewer? CD Yes {""I No
12. Is a raw water sampling cock provided? f~1 Yes CD No
13. Is a well alarm system provided? i~l Yes | j No
14a. Is the source metered? ฃ3 Yes fl No
b. Are daily; records kept? CD Yes CDNo
EZ3 Drilled
Q Dug
{""1 Driven
Ft.
SECTION D. Weil Maintenance
'.',' ".- >l )!. "":'!3 ' ! . I i .1
1 . When was the well last reconditioned? M Y
2. What chemical was used in
f f 1
MY
DOH-1022(5^1)p.2of5
-------
E. Well Pump
1. What is the capacity?
2. Does the pump cycle more than 4 times/hour?
3. Are air valves provided?
4. Is the pump on a routine maintenance schedule?
5. What is the general condition of the: a. Pump
b. Motor
c. Switch gear
GPM
Q Yes Q No
Q Yes Q No
QYes QNo
Q Yes Q No
QYes QNo
Q Yes Q No
SECTION F. Auxiliary Power
1. Is auxiliary power supply provided on site?
2. Is it engaged manually or automatically?
3. What fuel does the generator use?
4. How often is auxiliary power tested?
5. Are the exhaust gases properly vented?
QYes QNo
QM QA
CD Gasoline
Q Diesel
I } Propane
QYes Q.No
Q Yes Q No
QM QA
i J Gasoline
Q Diesel
fl Propane
Q Yes Q No
SECTION G. Disinfection
1. Location of facilities
2. Number of units at each location
3. Disinfection method (hypo/gas)
4. Is capacity adequate?
5. Are chemicals stored properly?
6. Is a 30 day supply on hand?
7. Has there been a problem obtaining chemicals?
8. Is sufficient stand-by equipment available?
9. Are spare chlorinator parts available?
10. Is a treated water tap provided?
11. If Yes. what is the contact time at the tap?
12. Contact time before first consumer:
13. Type of chlorine residual kit used
14. Point of application
15. Type of compound used
16. Crock size
17. Solution strength
Yes CD No
Q Yes O No
Q Yes Q No
QYซs CD No
CD Yes CD No
CD Yซs CD No
CDYซs CD NO
Min. FT1 Hr.
I \ \ Min.
Hr.
D
Q Yes Q No
Q Yes Q No
Q Yes Q No
Q Yes Q No
Q Yes Q No
Q Yes Q No
Q Yes Q No
I I I Min.) j | Hr.
m^cn*.
CJOTA CDPD
DOH-1022{5/91)p. 3 of 5
-------
18. Describe tha general condition of the chlorinators
SECTION H: Hydroneumatlc Storage
1. Location
2. Usable volume
3. Is a pressure gauge provided?
4. Pressure range, PSI
5a. Is an air volume control provided?
b. H Yes. what type?
6. Is a sight glass provided?
7. Is there a separate inlet and outlet?
Remarks
Q Yes EZ! No
C3 Yes
No
[Yes I ! No
[Yes Q No
Yes C3 No
Yes CD No
CD Yes CD No
SECTION I. Distribution System
1. Are blowoffs provided where necessary?
2. Are mains adequately protected from freezing?
3. Any unprotected cross connections?
4. Are new piping/repairs adequately disinfected?
i" ,, I/, ,j'i
5. Production/consumption measured?
6. Number of emergency sources
CD Yes CD No
CD Yes Q No
Q Yes ED No
CD Yes CD No
Prod.
Consum.
CD Yes CD No
i , ,
CD Yes CD No
CD Yes CD No
CD Yes CD No
Prod.
Consum.
7. Describe the general condition of the system.
DOH-1022 (5/91) p. 4 of 5
-------
Small Water System Sanitary Survey
Attachments, Emergency Plan, Safety, Conclusion and Recommendations
1. Name of system ' Location (C.V.T)
2. Date evaluation completed: I L
M D
3. Summary of existing emergency plan _
4. List specific safety problems
5. Copy of subsection 5-1.23 "Reporting Emergency Changes* posted
6. List specific sanitary code violations found
7. List other deficiencies found
8. State specific conclusions/recommendations based on deficiencies from previous pages.
9. Other comments
DOH-1022(S'91)p. SofS
-------
-------
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Bureau of Public Water Supply Protection
Sanitary Survey
Springs, Surface Sources
Additional Treatments
PART 1. Identifying Information SURVEY DATE
1. Name of System Station No.
2. Location m,,nH/
City, Vain, Town COUnty
i 3. Program Code
I
PART II. General Information
Section A. Inventory Data - Springs
1. Name or number of spring
2. Is this for regular or auxiliary use?
3. How often is it used?
#1
#2
4. Does this source receive any treatment?
5. Is spring considered a surface (S) or
ground (G) source?
, i
LJQ
Ds DG
#3
OR CHA
i / i
Yes No
1t? n n
D* DA
i / i
Yes No
n n
DR DA
i / i
Yes No
D D
Ds
Section B. F'rotectlon Y
11 a. Are Watershed Rules & Regulations in effect? I
" k
b. If yes, when where they last updated?
2. What is the distance to the nearest:
a. Subsurface disposal system
b. Sanitary sewer
c. Storm sewer
d. Waste lagoon
e. Surface water
Yes
3. Is it subject to 1 00 year flooding? Q
4. Is it subject to chemical spills? L.
5. Is the yield constant? [
6. Is the site properly drained? L_
7. How much land from the source is
owned by the supplier?
8. How much land from the source is i
controlled by local ordinances or WR&R? I
9. How much land from the source is fenced? J__,
Yes
i. Is the land posted? f~~
i
to
|
i
'
DaS
No
D
f Yr
1 1
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
No
n
n
a
ซ.
* LL
ft
No
n
^
M
1
-^
/es
E
to
|
fes
C
c
c
c
Ves
E
5
Daj
i
5
No Yes
n n
f Yr Mo D
II II
_jft. |
Uft-
LI"- [_[_
LI ซ. LL
jft. [ |
No Yes
n n
n n
n n
n ' n
Lift i Li
k l l
ซ.
No Yes
n n
ay
Nc
C
Yi
fl
fl
f
f
f
Nc
C
c
c
c
5
]
1
.
t.
>
]
]
]
]
ft.
ft.
ft.
No
n
DOH-3380 (8ซt) p. 1 ot 9
-------
Section C. Construction
1. Is there a proper cover?
2. Is there proper ventilation?
3. Is there evidence of animals?
it: I , . , ;;,ill;; ii-,,, , 1l; .1 ,.
^. Is an, overflow provided?
ilji'iil V ' ""'"'"" i": ii7 "'" '"li1":! ^F - \" ''""~"' ~" "r III 1!!!' i' ^ii,
5. Is there surface water Intrusion?
6. Is the source metered?
#1
Yes
Q
""
No
.D
"a
_
#2
Yes
No
Q. D.
nrcr
a "a"
Yes No
P. P.
"n~n
P. P.
nncr
7. When was trie spring last cleaned?
8. HOW ofl@n Is jt cleaned?
9. Condition of spring basin(s)
a a
a
Mo Day Yr
I I
/ I
D D
D
Mo Day Yr
I I I
I / I
.Q D
IT Q
Mo Day Yr
I I I
I /
Sactlon D. Basin Pump
1. What Is the capacity?
gpm
2. Does the pump cycle more than 4 times /hour?
Yes
D
No
D
gpm
Yes
D
No
D
Yes
n
gpm
No
3. Are air relief valves provided?
4. Are pressure gauges Installed?
5- uฐn a routine
6. What is the general condition of the:
a. Pump
b. Motor
c. Switch gear
n
P.
u
TT
D D
P
n
n
n
Q
D
n
Section EL Auxiliary Power
Yes
Q.
...........
n
a What fuel does the generator use?
4. What Is the capacity?
SI How often is auxiliary power tested?
6. Are the exhaust gases properly vented?
Remarks
DOH-XMO (V91) p.2o<9
No
J3.
A
_DL
Gasoline
Diesel
Propane
gpm
Yes
n
No
Yes
D
No
M
A
1
Gasoline
Diesel
Propane
gpm
Yes
No
D
Yes
No
M A
Gasoline
Diesel
Propane
Yes
D
gpm
No
-------
PART HI. General Information
Section A. Inventory Data -Surface Sources
#1 #2
1. Name of the surface source __
2. Is this for regular or auxiliary use? CD R EH A | ]R |
3. How often is it used? I / I I /
4. Does this source receive any treatment? p- f , , T-i?
Section B. Protection ., . , u
Yes No Yes
1 a. Are Watershed Rules & Regulations in effect? C3 EH I I
Mo Day Yr Mo Da
b. If yes, when where they last updated? I I I I I I
Yes No Yes
2. Is there a local ordinance/law limiting use? LJ LJ LJ
3. Is there a solid waste disposal site on the watershed? II I I I I
4. Is there a scavenger disposal site on the watershed? LJ I I I I
5. Is there a water pollution control plant on the I I I I I I
watershed? LJ l_l LJ
6. Is the watershed posted? LJ LJ I I
7. Percent of agricultural use of watershed | I % II
<3. Percent residential development in watershed I I % II
9. Percent of watershed owned by public water system | | | | % |
10. Are the following permitted?
Yes No Yes
a. Fishing D CH I I
b. Boating D D D
c. Swimming Q Q r~]
d. Hiking d EH EH
e. Other D D D
11. Radius of restricted use from intake I I I I ^ II
12. Other sources of pollution ..
#3
DA nR DA
_J [ / I
No Yes No
n an
No Yes No
a an
/ Yr Mo Day Yr
II I 1 I I
No Yes No
n n n
n an
n an
a an
n an
_j % | %
LJ% |JJ o/o
l% ' \ %
No Yes No
a an
a an
a an
a an
a an
i i a. | | i ซ.
. -1T,,.,T1-.,.-
DOH-3380 (091) p.3d9
-------
ovuuuu w. oourcv vva&si vtuaiuy vuimui
mil1
-------
Section E. Pumps
#1
1 .What Is the capacity?
gpm
gpm
2-
pump cycle more than 4 times /hour?
3. Are air relief valves provided?
Yes
D.
_
No
Yes
No
D.
n n
Yes No
Q- D
4. Are pressure gauges installed? LJ LJ_
5-|s the pump on a routine maintenance.schedule? LJ LJ
6. What is the general condition of the:
a. Pump
b. Motor
c. Switch gear
n n
n
D
n
Section F. Auxiliary Power
1- '?.?.'l.iง!!X P.ower lYPPty proyjffed on site?
2. Is it engaged manually or automatically?
3. What fuel does the generator use?
4. What is the capacity?
I How often is auxiliary power tested?
6. Are the exhaust gases properly vented?
Remarks
Yes
M
No
.0
A
[~] Gasoline
LJ Diesel
LJ Propane
Spm
/ |
Yes
Q
M
No
D.
..........
| I Gasoline
LJ Diesel
LJ Propane
gpm
/ I
Yes
n
M
n
No
D
A
D
| I Gasoline
LJ Diesel
LJ Propane
gpm
I /
No
n
OOH-3380 (8ซ1) p.Sat9
-------
-------
PART IV. General Information
Section A. Treatment - Chemical Feed
Feeder 1
1 . Treatment objective
2. Chemical used
3. Feeder type
4. Dosage in ppm
5. Where is chemical fed
to system?
6. Is adequate chemical Yes No
storage available? I ] LJ
7. Is there a 30 day minimum . \ , i
inventory? I I I I
8. Are feed lines color coded? | | | |
9. Do feed lines clog? Q Q
10. Is there adequate dust control? Q Q
1 1 . Frequency of feeder
calibration I /, I
12. Overall condition of feeder
Section B. Aerators
1 . Type of aerator
2. Treatment objective
3. Overall condition
Yes
4. Any operational problems? i i
Section C. Rapid Mix
1. Type of rapid mix units
2. Number of units available I
3. What chemicals are used?
Yes
4. Is there proper mixing? i i
5. Can the energy gradient be varied? Q
6. Overall condition of rapid mix units
Feeder 2 Feeders Feed
. .,
Yes No Yes No Yes
n n an n
an an a
an an a
n a an a
n n an a
i / i i / i i /
No
JJ
No
a
a
er4
No
a
a
a
a
a
__j
DOH-3380 (B/91) (Xซd9
-------
Section D. Flocculation
1. Type of flocculation units
2. Number of f locculation basins provided
3. How Is energy gradient varied?
Speed
Paddles
;, . ! i is!1!' siiaiB ป
4. Is the floe size maintained to the
clarification basin?
Yes
No
5. Is there adequate detention time?
D
Time In minutes
S. Is there proper flow through velocity?
Yes No
n n
Velocity In feet per second (FPS)
7. Frequency of equipment maintenance
8. OveraH condition of basins/equipment
Section E. Clarification
1. Type of darif tors
2. Number of basins provided
3. What fs the detention time?
11 :' I , : i| ,nr ^
X Is there shorNjircuiting?
i,;, ' ", '!'' >!' , , ,' !L '.,( T ' t
5. Is effluent weir flow level and uniform?
fes
n
a
J
NO ' . ; ;;; ' ' ' " ;;|
n
a
1 i"! . : 1;:"ii I.
Is there excessive flocculation
;,,, carryoverfbfilters?
n n
7. Type of cleaning method
Frequency of cleaning
I /
j
Yes No
8, If tubes are used, do they self-clean? i| |I
9. Installation angle of tubes
D7.5"
10. Method of cleaning top tubes
11. General condition of clarification units
DOH-33M
p.7o*0
-------
Section F.
F1. Fitters
1. Type of filter
2. Number of filters
3. Operating rate, gpm/sq. ft.
4. Approved design rate
5. Are fitter runs too short?
Yes No
D D
6. Head loss/filter rate after backwash (gpm/sq. ft.)
7. Head loss/filter rate at backwash time (gpm/sq. ft.)
Yes No
n n
backwash flow rate gauges
head loss gauges
flow rate gauges
8. Are the following installed?
9. Condition of wash troughs
10. Is the backwash rate adequate?
11. Is there adequate bed expansion during backwash?
12. Is there a surface (air) wash provided?
13. Is backflow protection provided for the surface
wash water?
n
F2. Media
Filter #1
Fitter #2
Filter #3
1. What type of media is used?
2. What is the depth of the media?
in.
3. Are dead spots present?
Yes No
D D
in.
Yes No
n n
in.
Yes No
n n
4. Are cracks injhe media evident?
5.1
of uneven media layering?
Q
6. A re mud balls present?
n
7. Date media last analyzed
Mo Day Yr
I I I I
8. Uniformity coefficient
9. What is the effective size?
1 ฐ- w.hatLfethe.particle;shape ofthe',medja?_
11. Is additional media stored on the site?
Yes No
D D
DOH-3380 (Ml) p.8o(9
n n
n n
n
Mo Day Yr
I I
Yes No
n n
Mo Day Yr
I I
Yes
No
n
-------
F2. DIatomaceous Earth Filters
1. Is ft pressure or vacuum?
2. What Is the precoat rata?
5. What Is the body feed rate?
Fitter #1
P V
D D
LU
Yes No
3, Does the precoat have adequate thickness? r~I ri
4. Is theijpreooial^waterlEgtabje? LJ LJ
6, Is the body teed rate adequate?
7. What type of backwash Is provided?
Filter #2
P V
n
UJ
Yes No
D a
a a
a a
Filter #3
P V
D D
Yes
B
_
..uu.
_
No
a
Section G. Backwash Waste
Section H. Clarification Sludge
1. Describe type of treatment process.
2. Does the treatment process have DEC approval?
3. Is the wash water recycled?
If yes, where?
Condition of disposal facility
Yes
n
n
No
n
n
.'
Yes
D
D
No
n
n
,
. . i
Yes No
n n
n_Q|
, .^
,j
, . , ,
2. Is alum reclaimed?
Yes
n
No
D
Yes No
D D
Yes
n
No
D
3. How Is the sludge ultimately disposed of?_
;:f IF
4. Is the supernatant recycled?
Yes
No
D
5. Does the treatment process have DEC approval? r~| r"j
Condition of disposal facility.
Yes
n
No
n
n n
Yes
D
n
No
"n
OOH-33M (W1) pL9o<9
-------
H
(U
tn
(0
ft
CO
W >H
M W
I-H >
Oj OH
CU ED
D co
CO
r^
Pi rt
w 3;
E~* E"*
cn cd
CN <; <
\ ft EH
ro W <;
0 Q P
^0 EC t>H
OJ EH J
4J ' J ft
J M CN
00 > 1
O\ rH
OA )H O3
O rH
Q >H H
H EH
I-H
CO U ft
S -rH
ft N
> E
CO
4J
ft CQ
H >,
X! CO
CQ
M
CO
C H
3 rH
O rH
rH
*
CO
T3
0
CJ
! N
EH (0
O
(0
CO
^P t i
H <;
EH
CO 0)
>H U
CO -H
^>
^H M
EH 0
M CO
^ EH
i-^ ^i ^^^^
S M H
S flS PH
SO EH
H CJ -H ffi
EH MS
CO W ft [x
^H ^> ^g
CO rH |<
EH
O U o
s <; o
H rH >,
P JJ
H
CO rH
CO T3 tO
E O 0
goo
ฃ
E tO E
Q) M CU
JJ CD JJ
CQ O CQ
CO ft CO
^_^
r^
T3
ง ^
_. ป
E
ง
o ^ -^
& >i rH
-" m
H
U M
& 4J
CO ^ CQ
CU 3
m c
Q M
CU
o jj 'O
o fd C
0 Q H ^
O o\ฐ
rH CU C "-
ft o
^^. ^ "H ^-^
C >i EH JJ T3
O fO (0 t3
-H Tl > -^
(0 CQ CQ CQ JJ E tC
rH C C C U -H
3 O O O tO t)
ft r-H rH r-H CO M
O rH rH i-H P CO
ft (0 fO (0 '*~- E
01 01. 01 e E
rH -^ ซ CU O
H jj a
tO O CQ
jj o >, cu
CU 0 CO JJ -~
cd to o\ฐ
P
G
"i 'en
E CU
\ CQ rH
>. tC
>, -H
>1 * JJ
JJ C S
o -H O ft ro CO
o o -in to o "-a
in to jj u \ -H
ft ft ID CQ CQ
OS E CO Crt CU CO
CQ O 3 C71 ปH CtJ
C CQ fC " rH
O C fl M CO ft
-H O O O JJ ft
JJ -H U JJ 10 3 T3
U JJ CQ P CO CO
CU U S M
C! 3 rH fl C ,-H CO
C T3 -H O -H (0 JJ
o o to -H tn c cu
CJ M P JJ CU OS
ft 3 CQ CO
co cu X! as jj
U E U) -H E CU G
H CU fO M CO CO CO
> JJ M 4J 4J U
rH CQ CO CQ CQ M M
CO >, > -H >, O CU
co co < p co PU ft
,,
^^
XI
"N^
*x^
..
CO CO
W W S
S (3 rH
O 0 0
CQ
it 1 III ,_f
MH <4H XI
fO tO JJ
JJ 4J -
CO CO
CO
jj
to
P
in in
(T> (Ti fl
\ -\ O
00 00 -H
oj eg 4J
ro ro CO
o o ft
CO
C
Q)
4J > M
-H M O
CO 3
H CO C
> 0
4J M JJ
CQ fO fO
ffl JJ TJ
I-H -H -H
C rH
4H nj to
0 CO >
CO 4J tO
JJ CQ JJ
(0 tO (0
P J P
CO
2
rr"[
2ฃ
y
o
u
v^
CO
W
EH
O
-------
S.
fO
w
IS
o
o
o
en
cr>
o\
cr>
o\
(TV
in
0>
ro
o
T3
0)
c
H
O,
0)
ro
Q
M Q
O M
CO
ti S
O 04
4J
to
c
M
4J
c
0)
4-1
QJ
H
0)
U
O
CO
H
ง
U
to
(U
0)
M
-H
Q
M
o
Pi W
f~> PJ
o ><
CO H
cu
H
o
o
H
U
o
CO
0)
H
4J
CO
4-1
(0
4J
CO
00
CQ
W
a)
u
2
Oi
H
4-)
U
0)
n
<ง
(U
4J
m
Q)
-------
0)
CY
Z=EMERG
Ed
Ed
O
O4
CO
CO
Ed
ft!
I
LL PLAZA
Ed
H
CN
H
M
r-l
r>j
H
U
o
Ml
o
in
CN
m
o
Ti
tt)
0.
0)
to
Q
CO
>n
CO CTi
is
Ed ON
Q in
ft!
Ed
cu
D a)
co e
o
a .3
U
w CT>
ON W
CTl ON
*
Q Q
HH HH
C C
O O
H -H
4J 4J
fC (0
o o
H -H
n^ t|..|
H -H
4J 4J
(U 0)
U U
EH Q
-------
0
01
U)
ch
v^
en
cs
(T)
O
0
0)
c
VI
M
CU
JJ
(Q
Q
ง
CO
^i a\
to en
en
O en
S n
C4en
Q en
}-t Q'
O M
U-4
CO
01 IS
c
CD
ฃ
Q
U
E
0)
JJ
CO
^t
CO
CO
4J
c
0)
o
U
E
0)
.U
CO
^fc,
CO
m
o
0)
rH
a
E
rti
CO
(0
co
H
CO
H
f**
EH
0)
rH
(0
H
m
m
0)
m
CO
I
cu
cu
45
4J
O
jj
-------
LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY INSPECTION/SANITARY SURVEY
DEMO SYSTEM PWS ID: 9939999
INSPECTION/SURVEY DATE: 03/28/95 STAFF: JONES
CODE REQUIREMENT
03/29/95
COMPLIANCE
1) WATER SOURCE PROTECTION (5-1.12,14)
This is a sample of comments section for each que
stion.
2) NEW CONSTRUCTION/MODIFICATIONS/REPAIRS (5-1.20...22)
ป 1 ซ
ป 1 ซ
3) EMERGENCY PLANS & RESPONSE (5-1.23,25,26,33)
ป 1 ซ
4) TREATMENT MAINTAINED (DISINFECTION) (5-1.30)
ป 1 ซ
5) TREATMENT MAINTAINED (OTHER TREATMENT) (5-1.30)
ป 1 ซ
6) ADEQUATE SYSTEM PRESSURE (5-1.27)
7) CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL (5-1.31)
ป 1 ซ
ป 1 ซ
8) WATER PLANT OPERATOR CERTIFICATION (5-4)
ป 1 ซ
9) OPERATION REPORTS (5-1.72)
ป 1 ซ
10) PUBLIC NOTIFICATION (5-1.50...52)
ป 1 ซ
11) WATER QUALITY COMPLIANCE (5-1.50...52)
ป 1 ซ
COMPLIANCE KEY: 1-Compliance, 2-Code Violation, 3-Unknown,
4-Not Applicable, 5-Disinfection Waiver
Disinf. Waiver Effective: / / Expires: / / Reviewed:
Reduced Microbiological Monitoring Date: / /
Cross Connection Devices: Installed: 4 Tested: 4
-------
-------
EPA REGION IV
Onsite Inspection Report Form
-------
-------
EPA Region IV On-Site Inspection Report Form
ON SITE INSPECTION REPORT
(Part I: To be completed by State, Indian Land, and/or PWS)
Date:
Name of PWS:
Mailing address:
County:
Phone:
PWS IDS:
Physical location and directions:
Name, address, and phone no. of Owner or Person Legally Responsible;
Name(s) of Operators:
Certification/type(s):
Last Sanitary Survey completed:
PWS source(s):
PWS TYPE
D Community
D Non-Community
Q Transient Non-Community
Q Non-Transient Non-Community
SERVICE DATA
Service Area:
D Residential
D Industrial
D School
D Other:
Population (Year round):
Summer: Winter:
Connections:
Factoring method or actual
calculation:
Water (gal/day)
in house use:
consumer use:
raw water pumped:
water lost:
Purchased from:
Sold to:
In past 5 years have there been any?
Interruptions in service D
Reports of waterborne disease D
Complaints about water quality P
RESERVOIRS, LAKES, AND STREAMS
Name(s):
Lat:.
Long:.
Area:.
Volume:
Rate of flow (gal) :.
Frequency of intake inspection;
Date of last inspection
STORAGE TANK(S)
Number and type of material:
ground level:
underground:
t ower:
Volume (gal):
gravity
pressure
Total days supply (all sources)
WATER TREATMENT DATA
Daily output (gal/day):
design average
maximum
-------
WELL INFORMATION
Well Number
123
Latitude
Longitude
Well housed
Date drilled
Total depth (ft)
Rate of flow
Pump set at
Type of pump
COMMENTS:
DISTRIBUTION DATA
System Number
123
Type
Origin
Material
Interior Diameter
Length
COMMENTS:
Not* i
If more than three wells or three distribution systems exist please
use as many copies of this page as are necessary.
-------
MONITORING AND RECORDS
VIOLATIONS
Type of violation
M/R:
MCL:
Public Notice (M/R)
Public Notice (MCL)
Month and year
Contaminant
Federal or
State
HIGH SERVICE PUMPS
Pump number
12 3
Type
Make
Model
Capacity
Date installed
Last
Maintenance
COMMENTS:
If more than three pumps exist please use as many copies of this
page as are necessary.
-------
ON SITE INSPECTION REPORT
(Part II: To be completed during on site visit)
Name of PWS:
PWS Source: .
PWS ID #:
SPRXNQS AND INFILTRATION GALLERIES
RESERVOIRS, LAKES, AND STREAMS
How is access
coritrpliecl?
" p Ownership
P Ordinances
D Fencing
O Uncontrolled
Sources of potential pollution:
Watershed survey? O Yes D No
Date Agency
to water source Sources of potential pollution:
Describe supply intake:
Describe seasonal or other conditions
which change water quality:
Overall service rating:
Satisfactory D
Unsatisfactory D
Not Applicable D
Comments:
Watershed survey? D Yes D No
Date Agency
Surface treatment of contained
water? D Yes O No
i
Area around intake restricted?
O Yes D No Radius (ft)
Multiple intakes at different levels?
D Yes D No
Intakes screened? O Yes D No
Frequency of intake inspection:
Describe seasonal or" other conditions
which change waterquality:
Raw water measurement for:
Turbidity PH _
Temp TC __
Giardia cyst
Overall service rating:
Satisfactory D
Unsatisfactory D
Not Applicable D
Comments:
-------
MONITORING AND RECORDS
Number of bacteria samples taken
per month:
Is sampling procedure
adequate? D Yes D No D NA
Are copies of monitoring results,
system records, and plans:
retained on premises? D Yes D No
available to surveyor? D Yes D No
Samples taken during survey?
D Yes D No
type
results
Laboratory certified by state for:
Bacti/Turb? D Yes D No D NA
Chem/Rad? D Yes D No D NA
Overall service rating:
Satisfactory D
Unsatisfactory D
Not Applicable D
Comment s:
WATER TREATMENT DATA
Plant schematic readily available and
up to date? D Yes D No
Types of treatment:
D Aeration D Coagulation
D Flocculation D Sedimentation
D Filtration D Disinfection
D Fluoridation
D Corrosion Control Inhibitors
D Other
Mixing, coagulation, flocculation and
sedimentation:
Are chemical dosages based on
laboratory data? D Yes D No
If not then what?
Chemicals used.
Filtration:
Type _
Media
Backwash determining factor(s):
D Turbidity D Time
D Automatic setting D Headless
D Other
Average time between backwash:
Violation of finished water turbidity
in past year? D Yes D No
Standby equipment? D Yes D No
In good working order? D Yes D No
Spare parts available? D Yes D No
Missing or altered data? D Yes D No
If "yes" explain:
Possible falsification of system
files? D Yes D No
(if "yes" explain):
Disinfection: D liquid D gas
Method in use:
D Chlorine gas/liquid D Ozone
D Na hypochlorite D Iodine
D Ca hypochlorite D UV
D Chloramines D Ammonia
D Other:
Dosage
Point of application
Contact time between injection and
first point of use?
Residual monitored? D Yes D No
TTHMs evaluated? D Yes D No D NA
Overall service rating:
Satisfactory D
Unsatisfactory D
Not Applicable D
Comments:
-------
MT,:.'! ...... :'! p yes 'P No ...........
Overall service rating:
Satisfactory P
Unsatisfactory P
Not Applicable P
Comments:
DISTRIBUTION DATA
Cross connection control program?
; '"j'P Yes P No ' ......... "^
Adequate maintenance program?
P Yes P No
Plans of system available & current?
;: ; P Yes P No
Adequate pressure throughout the
distribution system (min 20 psi)?
P Yes P No
Interconnection with other system?
P Yes P No
pescribe: ______
Overall service rating:
I-:!1" :" Satisfactory ....... P
:;| ! 'Unsatisfactory" P
Not Applicable P
Comments : _
Chemicals and supplies
stored properly?
Adequate ventilation
in necessary areas?
Adequate safety equipment
provided and required?
Breathing apparatus
r ,,',', I. .I,ปif ' Mil 11,
Chlorine doors posted
with warnings?
Chlorine doors open
outward to outside?
Fan in chlorine room
with vent to outside?
Leak detector in
chlorine room?
Chlorine feed and
storage isolated from
other facilities?
Chlorine cylinders
adequately restrained?
Chlorine leak kits
available?
Emergency plan for
all areas?
Employees familiar with
emergency plan?
Backup power?
Cont ingency/Emergency
Operating Plan?
Staff completed safety
training?
il
Overall service rating:
Satisfactory '" "
Unsatisfactory
Not Applicable
P Yes P No
P Yes P No
; , ,, ' ,, '{i,
P Yes P No
P Yes P No
i. . - , ""si ' i"
P Yes P No
t!
P Yes P NQ
fi.
P Yes P NO
P Yes P No
i
P Yes P No
P Yes P No
P Yes P No
i
P Yes P No
P Yes P No
P Yes P No
P Yes P No
P Yes P No
P
P
P
Comments:
-------
SECURITY
(Please place "X" in appropriate boxes)
Patrolled Fenced Locked
Wells
Springs and infiltration galleries
Stream intakes
Reservoirs and lakes
Pump houses
Treatment facilities
Storage tanks
Manholes and vaults
Chemical storage shed
Access to all facilities restricted to authorized personnel?
Overall service rating:
Satisfactory D
Unsatisfactory D
Not Applicable D
D Yes D No
Comments:
COMPREHENSIVE OVERALL RATING FOR ENTIRE FACILITY
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Not Applicable
D
D
D
-------
.I'l 11 ' I I 111 ill " i,,.'. .'.
ADDENDA. - RECOMMENDATIONS - SUMMARY
, I
Pleas* make drawings and schematics on back oฃ thim paaซ>
Notet If system has a diagram or schematic readily available please
attach to back of this pag-e.
Survey conducted by:
6thers present:
!:i'|!!'ป , *T ,,-
8
-------
ON SITE INSPECTION REPORT SUMMARY
Sys t em Name:.
PWS ID:
Address:
.Inspection Date;.
Class:
Official Party:
Address:
Operator:
Address:
No. Connections:.
_Tel. :.
Tel. :.
Tel. :.
_No. Meter:
.Population:.
Field Chemical Analysis: pH:.
_C12:
Source:.
_Water Rates:
OVERALIj GENERAL RATINGS:
SPRINGS AND INFILTRATION GALLERIES O SAT O UNSAT
RESERVOIRS, LAKHS, AND STREAMS Cl SAT O UNSAT
MONITORING AND RECORDS D SAT dUNSAT
WATER TREATMENT DATA El SAT Q UNSAT
STORAGE TANKS d SAT d UNSAT
DISTRIBUTION DATA D SAT O UNSAT
SAFETY . CI SAT D UNSAT
SECURITY d SAT a UNSAT
COMMENTS\RECOMMENDATIONS:
ON/A
E3N/A
ON/A
C3N/A
a N/A
ClN/A
O N/A
a N/A
PROJECT MANAGER \INSPECTOR:.
TEL:.
-------
;; ON SITE INSPECTION REPORT SUMMARY
'.I.PAGE 2 "
1 I-'-:
System Name:
COMMENTS\RECOMMENDATIONS (cont inued)
PROJECT MANAGERNINSPECTOR:
TEL. :
10
-------
EPA REGION VIII
Sanitary Survey Form
-------
-------
U.S. EPA REGION VIII
DRINKING WATER BRANCH (8WM-DW-FWSIE)
999 - 18TH STREET, SUITE 500
DENVER, COLORADO 80202-2405
Phones: 1-800-227-8917, (303) 293-1413
SANITARY SURVEY
ADMINISTRATIVE DATA
1. Date of Survey: PWS ID No.:.
2. Classification:
3. Name of PWS: .
4. Mailing address:
5. County: Telephone:
6. Physical location and directions:
7. Name of Surveyor:
8. Prior Survey (By whom and date):
9. Date of VOC vulnerability & score:
10. Date of GWUDISW assessment & score:
11. Name and phone No. of Owner or Person Legally Responsible, e.g. Mayor, or City
Manager:(circle which)
12. Name(s) and phone no(s). of Public Works Director, City Engineer, and/or Water
Plant Superintendent: (circle which)
13. Name(s) and phone no(s). of Operators:
14. Certification(s) type and date
15. Person contacted for survey and phone no.:
The following abbreviations will be used throughout this document
NI = No Information NA = Not Applicable NR = Not Requested
(Attach any available maps or diagrams of system to this report.)
Rev. 4-93 bj/jll
-------
, HHttS1.!1!1 SB?:! -'" I I'Wt'1 IBS ',J
'> . I,;! !';' f ......
ซ ...... il'I! ...... H
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
I
SERVICE DATA.
Service Area(s)
Owner type (circle which) Private Mixed public/private Federal gov't
State goy't Local gov't Native American
Population... High Low Aver, daily
Period of open Per. qual'd as FWS .
No. of Connections Watered?
Water usage (gal/day)
Water lost (gal/day).
(For ccrnmunity systems only) Water usage per person/day
Water sold to (Name(s) of consecutive system(s) & FWS ID#)
Have there been any interruptions in service ...
a. during the past year?
b. during the past 5 years?
c. ; "wijen, i where, why and how long?
Have there been any reports of waterborne disease?.
If yes, give details
SOURCE DATA
FOR COC3SECUTIVE SYSTEMS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Water purchased from (syst. name & PWS ID#)
Water source type: Ground Surface
Does this PWS have another PWS consecutive to it?
If so, name and PWS ID# -
If a water hauler is involved...
a, does he haul only water?
c.
d.
e.
f.
if his source is a surface source, is there a disinfection residual
remaining at the time of delivery?
how often does he disinfect his tank? \
1 '!:I.*l!l|j|iiijl! ii'fi'1:iil|||||ปi':111 , i ', '!!!">' 'i,,i',. ! ,,",,:"', :' i -;' ,'", ซ, ;ซ: :f , i|, ' ...,', '",,"-- ,- T;.:V ^^^^^^~ !"!,; |^^^^^^^^^^
what other customers does he have?
is there backflow prevention on his tank's hose?
are there dust caps on the fill points?
Does this PWS have booster disinfection?
Include map, if avail able, or make drawing of distribution system.
-------
WELL INFORMATION
1. Nature of recharge area
2. How is access to recharge area controlled?
3. Has there been a survey of the recharge area?
Date Agency
Are abandoned wells possible sources of pollution?
Comments
5. Other nearby sources of potential pollution
6. Formation and/or rock type (if available) ,_
7. Describe emergency response plan (potential pollution)
CURRENT AND ABANDONED WRT.T.S
1. Name/Number of well
2. Location: Latitude longitude
Section Township Range
3. Is the well housed? Pitless adapter?
If pit vault present, is vault... open covered
4. Date drilled
5. Well depth (total in ft)
Hole size (in) Casing size Depth
Perforations: Size Total #
Depth
8. -Pump set at ______ Type of pump
9. Yield/Design rate of flow (gpm) _
10. Well head properly sealed?
11. Subject to flooding?
12. Casing 12 in. above ground?
13. Vent 18 in. above ground?
14. Vent facing downward & screened?
15. Vforking sample cock?
16. Is there emergency power?
Comments ~C
SPRINGS AND INFILTRATION
-------
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
16.
7.
8.
~,9."
10.
11.
; 12.
13.
Longitude
Township
Name/Number '
location: Latitude _
Section
Yield' (gpn) ___^
; rn .^Ti ~" " ~ :
Describe supply intake
Subject to surface"infiltration?
Subject to flooding?
Nature of recharge area
How is access to water source controlled?
Sources of potential pollution:
Range
Has there been a watershed survey?
Date Agency _
How is collection chamber constructed?
Are there seaspnal or other conditions which change water quality?
''Describe . ,
i
Describe emergency response action
STREAMS
Name/Number
Location: Latitude
Section
Longitude
Township
Range
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Nature of watershed
How is the watershed protected?
Rate of flow (in gal)
Sources of potential pollution (nature and distance from intake)
Has there been a watershed survey?
Date
Agency
Is there surface treatment of contained water?
Is the area around the intake restricted?
Radius (ft.)
Are there multiple intakes located at different levels?
:'- ' ' ' i i itii! i- . . : .
Describe
Are the intakes screened?
12. Frequency of intake inspection and date of last inspection
-------
13. Are there seasonal or other conditions which change water quality?
14. Describe emergency response plan
Comnents
RESERVOIRS AND LAKES
1. Name/Number
2. Location: Latitude Longitude
Section Township Range
3. Nature of watershed
4. How is watershed protected?
5. Area and volume
6. Sources of potential pollution
7. Has there been a watershed survey?
Agency
8. Is there surface treatment of contained water?
9. Is the area around the intake restricted?
Radius (ft.)
10. Are there multiple intakes located at different levels?
Describe
il. Are.the intakes screened?
12. Frequency of intake inspection and date of last inspection
13. Are there seasonal or other conditions which change water quality?
Describe
14. Describe emergency response plan (potential pollution)
-------
I
TRANSMISSION DATA. (KSW WATER)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5,
Name or designation
Point of origin
Point of termination
Date in service
Length
Diameter
Material
6. Pressure range
8.
Controls and/or PRVs (describe)
ARVs(number)
Condition
Flow Rate (gpm)
Have there been any breaks in the last two years?
If yes, describe
Is tfea pump station subject to flooding?
Is there emergency power?
Pumps
Number
Type
Standby
Flow Rate
Condition
Comments
-------
STORMS DMA (RAW WATER)
TANKS AMD CISTERNS ,. . . ,
1. Name or designation
2. Number and type of material: Ground level
Underground
Tower
3. Volume in Gal: Gravity Pressure tank
4. Total days of supply (all sources) '
5. Date(s) in service
6. Is the site subject to flooding? . .
7. Is the unit structurally sound and properly maintained?
8. Are overflow lines...
a. turned downward?
b. covered or screened?
c. terminated at least 3 diameters above ground?
Are air vents...
a. turned downward?
b. covered or screened?
Are drainage lines and cleanout pipes...
a. turned downward?
b. covered or screened?
c. terminated at least 3 diameters above ground?
9. Can the tank(s) be isolated from the system? :
10. Is all storage covered or enclosed?
11. When was the tank last cleaned? .. . .. . ...-.-...,..
12. If repaired, was it disinfected?
13. Describe emergency response plan
-------
" : rซr
RESERVOIRS
1. Name/Number oฃ well
2. location: Latitude
' : -Section '
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Longitude
Township
Range
How is reservoir protected?
Area and volume
Sources of potential'pollution
Is the area around the intake restricted?
Radius (ft.)
Are there multiple intakes located at different levels?
Frequency of intake inspection and date of last inspection
9. Describe emergency response plan (potential pollution)
4.
5.
6.
WAIER TRKATMKNT DKEA.
1. Plant/Office Location and Directions
2.. Location: Latitude . Longitude
Section Township
Range
3. Date plant put on line
Latest modificatiqns
Plant schematic readily available and up to date?
Daily output (gal/day)
Design Average
Maximum
Types of pre-treatment
a. What is the purpose: Disinfection by-products control or particulate removal
(scratch out inappropriate term)
b. Chemicals and/or additives used:
c. Are chemical dosages based on lab data?
d. Do processes appear adequate?
Conroents ~C ^
8. Filtration
a- Type _
b. Msdia
c. Length of filter runs
d. Backwash determining factor(s): Turbidity
Head loss Time
e. Gallons used per backwash
Automatic setting
Other
8
-------
9.
f. Percentage loss of finished water for backwash:
g. Has there been any violation of finished water turbidity in the last year?
Conments
Disinfection
a. Method
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g-
Dosaqe
Point of application
What is the contact time between injection and first point of use?
Is disinfectant residual beina monitored?
Have TEHMs been evaluated?
Is there standby disinfection equipment?
In good workinq order?
If not, are critical spare parts on hand or available?
h. Is there an emergency power source for the disinfection equipment?
i. Have there been any interruptions in disinfection in the past year?
10. Is the facility subject to flooding?
11. Describe emergency response plan
TOftNSMISSICN DA33V, TREATED WKTER
1. Service area or designation
2. Point of origin
3. Point of termination
4. Date in service
5. length Diameter Material
6. Pressure range Flow Rate (gpm)
7. Controls and/or PRVs (describe)
8. ARVs (number)
9. Condition
10. Have there been any breaks in the last two years?
If yes, describe
11. Is the pump station subject to flooding?
12. Is there emergency power?
13. Pumps
-------
Number
Type
Standby
Flow Rate
Condition
Comments
STORAGE DATA, TREATED WATER
TANKS AND CISTERNS
1.
2.
3.
"4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Name or designation
Number and type of material: Ground level
Underground
Tower
Volume in Gal: Gravity
Pressure tank
Total days of supply (all sources)
Date(s) in service
Is the site subject to flooding? .
Is the unit structurally sound and properly maintained?
Are overflow lines...
a. turned downward?
b. covered or screened?
c. terminated at least 3 diameters above ground?
Are air vents...
a. turned downward?
b. covered or screened? .
Are drainage lines and cleanout pipes...
a. turned downward?
b. covered or screened?
c. terminated at least 3 diameters above ground?
Can the tank(s) be isolated from the system?
Is all storage covered or enclosed?
When was the tank last cleaned? _______
If repaired, was it disinfected?
10
-------
13. Describe emergency response plan
Comments *C
11
-------
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
DISIRLbUTJ-ON DATA.
' '1. Lines
Main Lines
Dist Lines
Svc Lines
Origin
Material
Inside Diam
Length
Pressure zones
Area
Pressure
Range
Control
Auto
Manual
Remote
Cross connection control
Location
Type
Size
Last Tested
Date of cross connection control training for operator
'Dead'."ends
Is tjjgre an adequate maintenance program?
Describe
Is there interconnection with any other system?
Describe
Are plans of the system available and current?
Describe emergency response plan (ruptures)
12
-------
SAFETY AND SECURITY DATA
1. Security
ftells
Sprinqs & Infilt. Galleries
Stream intakes
Reservoirs /Lakes
Pump houses
Treat, plant
Storage tanks
Manholes & vaults
Storage shed for chems
Fenced
Locked
How Often
Patrolled
2. Is access to all facilities restricted to authorized personnel?
Comments *C
Chlorine Safety
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
11.
12.
Is there ongoing chlorine safety training for all water system personnel
Describe
Are chlorine room doors...
a. posted with warnings? - ,
a. do they open outward?
b. do they open to the exterior of the building?
c. are they all equipped with crash bars and viewports?
Is there a leak detector in the chlorine room with an audible alarm?
Are chlorine feed and storage areas isolated from other facilities? .
Are chlorine areas adequately ventilated?
Are all chlorine cylinders adequately restrained?
Are self contained breathing units...
a. readily available for use in chlorine emergencies?
b. Where are they stored?
Are water system personnel adequately trained in the use
and maintenance of the self-contained breathing apparatus?
Are chlorine leak kits available?
Are all personnel trained in proper use of chlorine leak kits?
Comments
13
-------
Chemical safety
1.
2,
7.
8,
"I.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Are all treatmentChemicals and maintenance supplies properly stored?
Ace oxidizers, corrosives, and flamrnables ...
stored in separate areas and in closed, marked containers?
Are flammablesstored in appropriate containers...
and cabinets away from combustion sources?
Is there adequate ventilation in the areas...
where solvents, aerosols and chemical feeders are in use? ___
Are adequate masks, protective clothing and safety equipment.
provided and required?
Are all personnel trained in proper handling of all utilized chemicals and
materials? '.
Are they familiar with the MSDS sheets?
Are bulk storage areas physically isolated from treatment areas...
to prevent spills from entering treated or untreated water?
9. Is the fire department familiar with the facilities and their contents?
MONITORING AND RECORDS
Number of b^cteril sampiฎs
Sample siting pi^f submitted to EPA?
Is sampling procedure adequate?
required
......
Corronents ~
Are copies of monitoring results, system records and plans...
- Retained on the premises?
- Available "to the surveyor?
Violations (w/in last 2 yrs) Date: ; Type(s)
Agency action
System response
Samples taken during survey
Type Results '.
Are all system records and plans properly filed and available to the Surveyor?
Next tests due.
Inorganic chemicals
CJrganic chemicals
vocs ; :
sees ;
Total trihalomethanes
Radionuclides
Comments ""C
14
, illliiiim * A : ,,,,1 ^.'.i'li ;.. , ;.i hJinliliiiniilin. .....
i; ^ , jil ..... ..... li: v 1,1,'J. . I !..:. ;., i;i i -iih, ..... ..'.in , ., I;;:'., :i.. !*!'! ' :!., , , : i i, ............ KL^ V) II' ..... ,ih. ..... lijiiili.!:' Jilji.. .1,: !".. .nJ?., :|
-------
15
-------
16
-------
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII
999 18th St. Suite 500 (8WM-DW)
Denver, Colorado 80202-2405
ASSESSMENT OF GROUND WATER UNDER THE DIRECT INFLUENCE
OF SURFACE WATER AND SUBJECT TO SURFACE WATER
TREATMENT RULE
Name: PWS# 5600000
Source Name: County:
Date: [ ]C [ ]NC [ ]NTNC Index Points Scoi
A. TYPE OF SUBSURFACE WATER SOURCE (Circle One)
Well, equal to or grater than 50 ft. deep 0
Well, less than 50 ft. deep 5
Spring. 5
Infiltration Gallery 10
B. HISTORICAL MICROBIOLOGICAL CONTAMINATION (Circle )
History or suspected outbreak of Giardia
or other pathogenic organisms associated with
surface water with current system configuration. 50
Record of total coliform acute MCL violations
over last 3 years 30
Record of total coliform monthly MCL violation
over last 3 years
One Month 5
Two Months 10
Three Months 20
Regulatory agency verifies complaints about
turbidity or suspected waterborne disease 10
C. HYDROGEOLOGICAL FEATURES (Circle)
Distance between a surface water source and
casing or nearest collector lateral
Over 200 ft 0
100 - 200 ft 5
Less than 100 ft 10
Intake is located on floodplain at approximate
altitude of stream 20
Surface runoff drains toward intake 15
Exposed aquifer that is coarse alluvial,
cavernous, or fractured is used for water supply 15
-------
D. WATER INTAKE STRUCTURE (Circle)
Poorly constructed well, or spring collection
chamber (uncased, or casing not cemented to depth
of at least 20 feet below land surface) 15
Poor sanitary seal, or seal without
acceptable material 15
Intake open to atmosphere 15
' ,1 I '!' ' 'I1'1 "'' , " '! ;," ' ,!"
Leaks of source collector that allow entry
of surface water 15
TOTAL SCORE
COMMENTS:
Analyst: Mike Sposit
re.vised 10/22/91
-------
The GWUDISW assessment, will be incorporated into sanitary
survey visits. This assessment form is designed-'for the first
round screening based on the field observations and record review
of a PWS. , , .
If a PWS scores above the criteria EPA Region VIII set
above, the PWS has 3 options to proceed: , -
The first option,is to improve or modify intake
structure(s), if item D .makes up most of thepoints.
The second option is to collect and analyze at least 2
particulate samples (one collected in dry season, and one
collected in wet season).
The third option is to monitor the source water quality
daily, from Monday to Friday, for at least 4 consecutive
calender quarters.
A PWS, which scores above the set criteria,uhas.to either do
the particulate analysis and/or start a water quality monitoring
program immediately, but no later than 6 months of this
assessment.
The most convincing data for the determination are the
particulate analyses. We should recommend a PWS do the
particulate analyses. And it is the responsibility of a PWS to
collect the samples for particulate analyses.
A PWS, which scores above the set criteria, will be a
GWUDISW and start to monitor as specified in the SWTR; unless the
PWS can prove otherwise (through particulate analysis, source
water .monitoring, or improvement).
Based on the test or monitoring results, EPA will make the
finail determination about the water supply source.
REVISED 10-22-1991
-------
-------
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII
999 18th St. Suite 500 (8WM-DW)
Denver, Colorado 80202-2405
VULNERABILITY INDEX FOR VOLATILE ORGANIC .CHEMICALS
IN PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES IN REGION VIII
Name: ... PV7S# 5600000
County: [ ]C [ ]NC [ ]NTNC [ ]GW f ]SW
Index Points Score
LOCALLY KNOWN HAZARDS
Chemical analysis of any
regulated VOC exceeding MCL
Tn water supply 50
Chemical analysis of
any VOC detected
Tn water supply ...50
Significant VOC spill
in last three years ....15
Significant VOC spill
more than three years ago 10
LOCAL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
CERCLA, RCRA, or LUST site
that generates VOCs within two points
metropolitan area per site
metropolitan area No.sites i
Use, disposal, or storage
of VOCs within metropolitan
area.. 10
WATERSHED PROTECTION
Unprotected 15
Public and agriculture are
denied access to watershed 12
New industry is denied
access to watershed 9
New industry, public, and
agriculture are denied
access to watershed * 6
New industry, public,
agriculture, and transportation
are denied access to watershed 0
-------
Index Points
Score
POPULATION OFSYSTEM
(rounded to nearest thousand)
d to 1,000.7 1
1,000 to 2,000 etc. 2
'i " , ''] I f'-Hllli ' -" ,
lii ""i! ' ,
MISCELLANEOUS
Large water system nearby 5
CHARACTERISTICS OF GROUND-WATER SYSTEMS
Infiltration gallery
or spring. .. 10
Well depths (feet)
0 to 100 10
100 to 200 7
200 to.500,.... ,.,.,.... 3
More than 500 6
Poorly constructed well (uncased,
or casing not cemented to depth of
at least 20 feet below surface). 10
Stream in vicinity of wells,
gallery, or spring -5
Coarse alluvial, cavernous
or highly fractured aquifer
used for water supply 3
TOTAL SCORE
it;' 1:
Tfie vulnerability index is the total of all index points for each
city. A vulnerability assessment is required every 3 years for water
systems with more than 500 service connections; an assessment is
required every 5 years for systems with fewer than 500 service
connections.
Specal vulnerability test for Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) and 1,2
Dibromo-3-Chloropropane (DBCP). Note: Nationwide about 10 years ago,
300 millpn Ibs. of these two VOC's were used annually.
1 .1 Is'' i " ] ' 'I':!' '''i1!"1!!, ' ' ' ','""'','' ' i '' ' ' . ' "',"' 'i!1 n'1 i'i ' / J 11"' '', ' , ii.
Is PWS vulnerable to EDB(gasoline additive/pesticide)?
Is PWSvulnerable to DBCP (pesticide)?
If vulnerable, state why:
ND ป Not Detected
\alyst __Mike Sposit
revised 05/21/91
]Yes
]Yes
]No
]No
Date _May 21, 1991_
i l|! l.lllBiLi
-------
Ref: 8WM-DW-PWSIE
February 9, 1995
1~
c/o 2"
3~
4~, 5" 6"
RE: Ground Water Under The
Direct Influence Of
surface Water (GWUDISW)
PWS ID# 7" 8"
Dear 9":
This letter concerns the ground water source that supplies
water for your public water system.
The Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) requires that each
ground water source, including wells, springs, and infiltration
galleries, be assessed to determine if it is influenced by
surface water. If a ground water source is determined to be
under the direct influence of surface water, the system has to
either provide filtration or meet the filtration avoidance
criteria (40 CFR Section 141.70).
The most recent on-site sanitary survey of your water system
included the first screening in the process of assessing the
influence, if any, of surface water on the ground water source.
This first assessment indicated the possibility that your ground water supply
source(s) might be directly Influenced by surface water.
In order for us to make a final determination, we must
acquire further information.
The most conclusive information can be obtained by
conducting a microscopic particulate analysis - or MPA.
The method is used to determine if certain surface
water indicators - microscopic particulates - are
present or absent in the ground water source.
In some cases other options exist:
It is possible that structural improvements of the
surface facilities will assure that the source will be
protected from the influences of surface water.
A third option involves water quality parameter (WQP)
monitoring. Under this option, you must moni-tor WQPs
(four parameters) for at least a year and submit the
-------
data to EPA for determination. If interested, please
contact us for more information on this option.
Our preferred option is MPA testing. With MPA, a minimum of
three raw-water samples from each source are required in order to
make a determination. At least two of the samples must be
collected in the wet season - from late March to late June - when
the spring run-off occurs and the ground water source is most
susceptible to surface water influence. The third sample can be
collected during a dryer period.
The MPA sampling, or one of the other options, should be
H, j " .'(, ; jiir 'MS .-! % ,. SB,? ,.,. f- .-. '. , . .
completed by September 1996. Please advise us as to how you wish
"' .to proceed.
: ",,, ' .;,:;;. ' ' : I '..
The collecting of MPA samples is a technical process and
requires special equipment. For these reasons, EPA is offering
technical assistance in the form of --providing people and
equipment forMPA sampling. The laboratory cost for the analysis
ofthe samples is the responsibility of the public water supply
owner/operator.
!it should be emphasized that we are not requiring you to use
EPJl's teclmical assistance or to use a particular laboratory.
:;"; Ybii shoulCI understand", however, that it is your responsibility to
provide, in a timely manner, the necessary data to make a final
determination about your ground water source.
If you elect to arrange for the MPA testing yourself, be
sure that you'check-with the laboratory you select prior to the
actual sampling. We are enclosing a list of MPA laboratories for
your information. This reference does not -imply any endorsement
or certification from EPA.
If you select one of the other options, you must advise us
so that we can monitor your structural improvements and/or concur
in your WQP testing.
If you wish to take advantage of EPA's technical assistance,
you may contact Chuck Lamb at 1-800-227-8917, ext. 1428. He will
be glad to answer your questions or explain the options to you.
If you desire, he will arrange an appointment with you to sample
your source(s) for MPA.
You may also contact Mary Wu on ext. 1698 or (303) 293-1698
for more information.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
FCD: February 9, 1995,
Tony Medrano
Chief, PWS Implementation and
Enforcement Section
Clarnb, Cf 1, C: \DATA\WP\GWA\MPA1ST. LTR
-------
SYSTEM CASE STUDY for GWUI
Date
Location: *ws 56
Source: Evaluator:
Aquifer Type:
Unconsolidated: Silt Sand Sand/Gravel Gravel
Cobbles Boulders
Consolidated: Sandstone Limestone (karst) Volcanic (lava)
Fractured Bed Rock
Identify rock type - Sandstone, Limestone, Shale, Siltstone,
Granite, etc.
Note: Multiple Aquifer Types?_
Source Type:
Spring Infiltration Gallery Well
Collection Device:
Direct Collection Box
Ave. daily discharge gpm Max. daily discharge gpm
Is source used seasonally or intermittently? No Yes
Microbiological Quality:
Basis of potential source contamination from
Giardia/Cryptosporidium and estimated distance from source water?
Surfacewater Type Distance ft.
Septic System Type_ Distance ft.
Wastewater Type : Distance ft.
Other__ Distance ft.
Has there ever been a waterborne disease outbreak associated with
this source? No Yes If yes explain.
Have there been bacteriological MCL violations within the last
five years associated with this, source? No Yes If yes,
describe.
Have there been consumer complaints within the past five years
associated with this source? No Yes If yes, describe
nature.
Comments: Frequency: Remedial Action:
Bill Jollcy
Wyoming Stale Vctcrinaiy Lab 1174 Snowy Range Rd. Laramie. Wyoming 82070 (307)742-6638
-------
ป-0ปii> UJCUC L-jLOn I
Does this source meet construction specifications including
good sanitary practices regarding location, construction, seal,
etc. to prevent the entrance of surfacewater?
Points to check: surface seal, casing, depth of casing, and
flooding. Acceptable .Unacceptable
Fife No..
MPA Environmental Support Data
PWSNo. .
Dale:
Weather ComllUons:
Last Rain; Dntc I I
Time
Inches
Spring Ron Off: Date Started _/__/__ Ended __/_/__
Note: .
Current Temperature: Air ซ C Typo of Day: t 1 Cold [ \ Warm t 1 Diy [1 Wet
: i
Sutlacowntcr: Distance to Groundwater Source feet
Condition of Stream: { ] Clear I J Muddy I J Low I 1 High I J Slow [ ] Fast
Approximate Altitude of Stream; fcot
Subsmface Water Table:
Area Geology:
.feet Condition of Soil: [] Wet U Dry
Pumping Rate; gpm % of Design or maximum
1
,j
Surface Area around well site: Evidence of [J Cattle [] Sheep [] Wildlife [] Other
Notes:
Relinquished 8y!
Rellnqulihed By:
Relinquished By:
Afflllitlon:
Affiliation:
Affliction:
Oate/Ilme:
Oat*/ lime:
Oite/tlme:
rt limplei rectlved In good condition?
Received by:
Received by:
Received by:
Affiliation:
Affiliation:
Affiliation:
Date/lime:
Dale/ lime:
Date/Time:
Rcnwrks:
':::: l:1...
-------
ENCLOSURES TO NEW SYSTEM PACKETS
NC-GRD
BACTI SAMPLING
BACTI SAMPL TRNG GUIDE
CERTIFIED LABS (MAY 91)
CHLORINE RES TEST KITS
DISINFECTION
PUBLIC NOTICE
- LEAD
- PN FOR PWS
- MAND LANGUAGE
REGULATION (40 CFR)
SODIUM & INORG
NC-SURF
BACTI SAMPLING
BACTI SAMPL TRNG GUIDE
CERTIFIED LABS (MAY 91)
CHLORINE RES TEST KITS
DISINFECTION
NEPHELOMETRIC TURBID.
PUBLIC NOTICE
- LEAD
- PN FOR PWS
- MAND LANGUAGE
REGULATION (40 CFR)
SODIUM & INORGAN
TURBIDITY FORM
COM-GRD
BACTI SAMPLING
BACTI SAMPL TRNG GUIDE
CERTIFIED LABS (MAY 91)
CHLOR. RES. TEST KITS
CORROSIVITY
DISINFECTION
DISTRIB. SYS MAT SURV
PUBLIC NOTICE
- LEAD
- PN FOR PWS
- MAND LANGUAGE
RAD GUIDELINES
RAD SAMPLE ANALY
REGULATION (40 CFR)
SODIUM & INORG
THM MONITOR
VOC
NTNC-GRD
BACTI SAMPLING
BACTI SAMPL TRNG GUIDE
CERTIFIED LABS (l^fi^ 9f)
CHLORINE RES TEST KITS
DISINFECTION
PUBLIC NOTICE
- LEAD
- PN FOR PWS
- MAND LANGUAGE
REGULATION (40 CFR)
SODIUM & INORGAN
VOC
COMM-SURF
BACTI SAMPLING
BACTI SAMPL TRNG GUIDE
CERTIFIED LABS (MAY 91)
CHLOR. RES. TEST KITS
CORROSIVITY
DISINFECTION
DISTRIB. SYS MAT SURV
NEPHELOMETRIC TURBID.
PUBLIC NOTICE
- LEAD
- PN FOR PWS
- MAND LANGUAGE
RAD GUIDELINES
RAD SAMPLE ANALY
REGULATION (40 CFR)
SODIUM & INORG
THM MONITOR
TURBIDITY FORM
VOC
NTNC-SURF
BACTI SAMPLING
BACTI SAMPLING TRNG GUIDE
CERTIFIED LABS (tf$& 9t)
CHLORINE RES TEST KITS
DISINFECTION
NEPHELOMETRIC TURBID.
PUBLIC NOTICE
- LEAD
- PN FOR PWS
- MAND LANGUAGE
REGULATION (40 CFR)
SODIUM & INORGAN
TURBIDITY FORM
VOC
CONSECUTIVE
BACTI SAMPLING
BACTI SAMP TRNG GDE
CERTIFIED LABS-5/91
CHLOR RES TEST KITS
DISINFECTION
PUBLIC NOTICE
- LEAD
- PN FOR PWS
- MAND LANGUAGE
REGULATION (40 CFR)
6 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1999-720-869/94261
-------
------- |