Evaluation
of the
Ohio Water Supply Program
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region V
Division of Air and Water Programs
Program Support Branch
Water Supply Section
July 1972
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL mOTIICTlCN AGENCY
-------
Preface
This report presents the Environmental Protection Agency's findings,
conclusions, and recommendations, with supporting data and explanatory
text of the study of the Ohio public drinking water supply program.
The information contained herein has been condensed and the
significance of the findings is further discussed in a companion report,
Evaluation of the Ohio Public Water Supply Program - Summary. The
• ' Summary highlights important results and areas of major need for those
who have an interest in Ohio's drinking water but do not wish to study
IvC
£^ the detail of the complete report.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table of Contents
Page Number
Preface . i
Table of Contents ii
List of Tables iv
List of Figures v
Summary of Findings and Conclusions 1
Community Water Supply Study of 1969 1
Community Water Supply Recommendations 4
Community Water Supply Surveillance Effectiveness 5
Community Water Supply Program 8
Semi-Public Water Supply Program 10
Recommendations 11
Introduction 23
Background 24
Water Supply Definitions 26
Purpose of Evaluation 2?
Scope 29
Evaluation Criteria 35
Findings 37
District Surveillance Data 37
Inspections 37
Chemical Analysis 51
PHS Standards Run 52
Monthly Reports 53
Bacterial Sampling 5^
Bacterial Quality 5^
Special Fluoridation Studies 55
Field Study 55
Evaluation of Operator Training 61
Evaluation of Fluoridation Records 64
Discussion 65
-------
Page Number
Public Water Supply Law, Regulations and Policy 65
Department of Health Public Water Supply Program
Organization 70
Community Water Supply Program 70
Semi-Public Water Supply Program 73
Community Water Supply Activities 73
Water Supply Unit Resources 73
Water Supply Unit Activities 76
Operations Section 77
District Surveillance 77
Records 77
Fluoridation 78
Cross Connection Control 81
Wastewater Discharge Permits 81
Special Studies and Activities 82
Plans Review Section 83
Water Quality Section 86
Laboratory Support 88
Sanitary Chemistry Laboratory 88
Water Bacteriology Laboratory 90
District Operations
Nortwest District - Bowling Green yk
Southwest District- Dayton 97
Northeast District- Cuyahoga Falls 97
Southeast District- Nelsonville 99
Procedures arid Practices 99
Inspections 99
Inspection Training 101
Water Supply Surveillance Records 101
Master-Metered Water Supplies
Plans Review
Certification of Operators
Cross Connection Control 105
Chemical Results 105
Water Supply Inventory 105
Fluoridation 106
Division of Sanitation • 107
Department of Natural Resources Water Supply Activities 11^t
Appendix A Operations Records 118
Appendix B Water Quality 139
Appendix C Manpower Needs for Community Water Supply
Activities 179
-------
I
I
I
I
I
List of Tables
Table # Title Page
• 1 Development of Municipal Water
Supplies in Ohio 25
2 Sample Composition by Size 32
3 Sample Composition by Source 33
k Operating Conditions at Selected Fluoridated
Water Suprly Systems in Ohio 59
5 Adequacy of Fluoridation at Selected Water
Supply Systems in Ohio ........*. 60
Installations in Ohio and Six Other States .. 62
7 Water Supply Unit Professional Staff
Qualifications 75
8 Summary of Flan Approvals 1971 8^
9 Number of Plans Approved 1961-1971 85
10 Northwest District Office- Percent of
Time Spent on Water Supply 95
• 6 Comparison of Operating Conditions at Fluoridation
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
1
1
1
1
1
^H
1
•
|
•
|
•
1
1
1
Figure Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1^
15
16
List of Figures
Title
Distribution of Water Supplies Selected
Community Water Supply Surveillance in Ohio
Community Water Supply Surveillance in Ohio -
Community Water Supply Surveillance in Ohio -
Community Water Supply Surveillance in Ohio -
PHS Standards Run
Community Water Supply Surveillance in Ohio -
Community Water Supply Surveillance in Ohio -
Community Water Supply Surveillance in Ohio -
Inspection Record, 1971 by District by
Chemical Analysis Record, 1971 by District by
PHS Standards Run, 1971 by District by
Monthly Reports, 1971 by District by
Bacterial Sampling Record, 1971 by District
Bacterial Quality, 1971 by District by
Performance of Fluoridation at Selected
Ohio Department of Health, Division of
V
Page
31
_x '
38
39
_X X
ko
kl
[t-")
[\-z
! 1 ! i
LL i~-\
~f D
LQ
L+q
1 X
50
.-xv'
63
w _x
71
{ '
-------
Figure Number Title Page
17 Water Supply Unit Organization 72
18 Department of Health Organization Chart .... 7^
19 Northwest District Organization Chart 96
20 Southwest District Organization Chart 98
21 Ohio Department of Health- Division
of Sanitation Organization Chart 108
22 Division of Sanitation Programs Delineation 109
23 Organization of the Ohio Department of
Natural Resources 115
VI
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Summary of Findings and Conclusions
Recognizing that the health of over 10.6 million people in Ohio is
directly dependent upon the condition of their drinking water, Dr. John
Cashman, Director, Ohio Department of Health, requested that the Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) evaluate the Department's Water Supply
Program. This report presents the EPA's findings, conclusions and
recommendations, with supporting data and explanatory text of that
evaluation.
Approximately 8-7 million people in Ohio are served by 812 "community"
water supplies. Another 2,000,000 rural residents obtain their drinking
water from individual water systems. In addition, there are an unknown
number of semi-public water supplies at restaurants, service stations,
recreational facilities, amusement parks, etc.
The effectiveness of the Ohio Water Supply Program was judged pri-
marily on the bases of Health Department District Office surveillance
records and past studies of water supplies in Ohio. Records of 20 per-
cent of the community water supplies under District Office surveillance
were examined for inspections, chemical analyses, bacterial sampling,
bacterial quality, and monthly operating reports. The study of water
supplies in Ohio from which data is drawn to indicate the condition of
community water supply facilities is the "Community Water Supply Study,
Cincinnati, Ohio, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, 1969."
Community Water Supply Study of 1969
The Community Water Supply Study of 1969 (CWSS) included detailed
analysis and study of 33 community water supplies in the Ohio portion
1
-------
of the Cincinnati metropolitan area. These water supplies were con-
sidered to represent conditions similar to those occurring in many water
supplies in Ohio. The principal findings of the CWSS were:
Water Quality - Bacteriological
Twenty-four percent of the community water supplies examined
did not meet the bacteriological quality standards one or more of
the 12 months preceding the study. These supplies served about
27,600 people (about three percent of the total population
served).
Fifty-eight percent of the community water supplies ex-
amined did not meet the bacteriological sampling standards for
the 12 month period preceding the study. These supplies served
about 111,000 people (about 11 percent of the total population
served).
Water Quality - Chemical
All of the community water supplies examined met the mandatory
chemical drinking water standards.
Twelve percent of the community water supplies examined did
not meet one or more of the recommended drinking water standards.
These supplies serve about 21,500 people (about two percent of
the total population served) with aesthetically inferior water.
No water supply had chemical data taken on an annual basis
for more than ten of the 2"6 parameters listed in the 1962 Public
Health Service Drinking Water Standards (IMS).
-------
Only nine percent of the water supplies examined provided
fluoridated water. These supplies served 28,000 people (less
than three percent of the total population served).
Facilities
Major facility deficiencies found \\rere: inadequate source
protection - 52 percent of the water supplies examined, serving
84,000 people (eight percent of the total population served);
inadequate treatment capability - 21 percent, serving 29,000
people (three percent of the total population served); low
pressure areas - 12 percent, serving 4,400 people (less than one
percent of the total population served); inadequate maintenance -
21 percent, serving 30,000 people (three percent of the total
population served).
Operation
None of the 33 water supplies examined conducted an effective
cross connection control program.
Thirty-three percent of the water supplies examined did not
have certified operators.
Twenty-four percent of the water supplies examined did not
have full time operators.
Chlorine residuals taken on 26 of the supplies examined showed
73 percent were not maintaining residuals of 0.2 ppm or greater
throughout their distribution systems despite State Department
of Health policy recommending 0.2 to 0.4 ppm throughout the
distribution system. Daily check samples of chlorine residuals
3
-------
at the treatment plants were not taken by 37 percent of the water supplies
examined.
Community Water Supply Study Recommendations
From the above findings the following recommendations were made:
I. More emphasis should be placed upon the public health sur-
veillance of public water supply systems. This should be ac-
complished by increasing Water Supply Program staffs of State
and local health departments. Increased State surveillance
should be directed to:
a. Adequate quality surveillance in accordance with State
and local policies.
b. Annual visitation and sanitary survey of public water
supply systems by the appropriate regulatory agency. Present
visits often do not include a complete sanitary survey of
the systems visited.
c. Planning for future development.
IT. Operator training should be expanded and water works
operators should be made aware oF the Importance of partici-
pating in available training couses.
III. Effective cross connection control programs should be
developed for the elimination of sanitary defects in community
water supply systems.
IV. laboratory capabilities should be increased for both State
and local facilities.
V. Major shortcomings in water supply operating practices
should be corrected.
-------
VI. More adequate funding for management, operation, and
improvement of water supply facilities should be provided.
VII. Where practical, all community water supply systems
should provide fluoridation.
VIII. The proliferation of small systems should be discouraged.
Where possible, existing small systems should be merged with
large systems and new service areas should be served by the
larger systems.
Since the completion of the GWSS several steps have been taken
within the Department of Health in response to these recommendations.
Laboratory support has been considerably increased with a definite,
scheduled chemical sampling program established and routine analysis
expanded from nine DWS parameters to 16 parameters with 13
additional parameters routinely determined. Plans have been made to
perform all DWS parameters routinely. Another major step taken was the
preparation and adoption of a modern State cross connection control
regulation. Inspection frequency was also increased.
Community Water Supply Surveillance Effectiveness
Examination of District Office records of 20 percent of the water
supplies listed in the "1968 Municipal Water Supply Inventory" (every
fifth water supply was selected) revealed the following status:
Inspections
Thirty-two percent of the community water supplies were not
inspected in 1971. Data was unavailable on seven percent of the \\/ater
supplies due to misplaced records. Seventy-three percent of the
5
-------
master-metered supplies were not inspected in 1971. The inspection
program was concentrated on water supplies serving more than 5)000
people (?9 percent done in 1971)•
Bacterial Water Quality
More community water supplies failed the PHS Drinking Water Standards
one or more months in 1971 (2.k percent) than met the standards for
the 12 months of 1971 (23 percent). Bacterial quality could not be
judged for 53 percent of the water supplies examined due to less than
six months of adequate sampling or inadequate record keeping. Sixty-
five percent of the supplies serving more than 5)000 people have
unknown (in the District Office) bacterial quality due primarily to
the practice of not recording such information in two Districts.
About 50 percent of the supplies serving fewer than 5)000 people and
9^ percent of the master-metered supplies have unknown bacterial
quality due primarily to inadequate sampling.
Bacterial Sampling
Sixty-seven percent of the community water supplies examined
failed to meet the bacterial sampling standards two or more months
in 1971' Complete records could not be found on 19 percent of the
water supplies examined. Seventy-four percent of the supplies
serving fewer than 5,000 people and all of the master-metered community
water supplies failed to meet the bacterial sampling standards two
or more months in 1971- Data was unavailable for 38 percent of
the supplies serving more than 5)000 people due to record keeping
procedures.
-------
Chemical Analysis
Seventy-three percent of the community water supplies examined
were provided with chemical analysis in 1971. All of the surface
supplies and 95 percent of the supplies serving more than 5iOOO
people were provided with analysis. Analysis was not provided for
73 percent of the master-metered supplies. Data was not available
on five percent of the supplies examined.
| PHS Standards Run
_ Sixty-four percent of the community water supplies examined
were provided in 1971 with analyses of 15 or more of the 26 parameters
I listed in the 1962 Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards.
Eighty-four percent of the supplies using surface water received
• these analyses. Seventy-nine percent of the master-metered supplies
_ did not receive these analyses. Six percent of the supplies examined
' did not have data available on the parameters analysed.
• Monthly Reports
Fifty-five percent of the community water supplies examined
I provided monthly reports for 11 or 12 months of 1971. Seventy-
nine percent of the supplies serving more than 5?000 people and
• 88 percent of the supplies using surface water provided monthly
• reports for 11 or 12 months of 1971. Sixty-seven percent of the
supplies serving fewer than 1,000 people and 79 percent of the
I master-metered supplies provided monthly reports for less than
11 months of 1971.
I
I
I
-------
Community Water Supply Program
The funds expended for community water supply protection in Ohio
are inadequate to accomplish effective surveillance. The Division of
Engineering administers the program with funds estimated at $126,000
(FY 1971 including District Office staffing and travel). Laboratory
support, administered by the Division of Laboratories, is good, with
funds estimated at $8^,000 (FY 1971). Including laboratory support,
about 2.5 cents per capita served per year is spent on protection of
community water supply. A study of the 1970 budgets for State and
territorial water supply programs showed that Ohio ranked 53rd out of
56 programs based on per capita expenditure.
Staff limitations, particularly in the District Offices, have pre-
vented the Water Supply Unit from fulfilling its responsibilities. The
Community Water Supply Study of 1969 found many deficiencies in supplies
and their operation. Due to the fact that only 2.9 man years of pro-
fessional staff were available in 1971 for surveillance work, surveillance
was often performed in a cursory manner, seriously reducing the effectiveness
of the program. The evaluation of surveillance performance parameters
reveals gross inadequacies in bacterial quality surveillance and monthly
operational reporting.
The Department of Health has been reluctant to issue orders for
correction of water supply deficiencies. Primary reasons for this appear
to be lack of specific regulations on design and water quality required,
lack of expeditious administrative and judicial process, and lack of
well oriented legal aid and assistance in preparing cases for action.
-------
Current community water supply regulations deal with the processes
for plans review, operator certification, and cross connection control.
Standards for bacterial, chemical, radiochemical and physical drinking
water quality are not specified in the regulations. Design standards
for plans are not specified in the regulations. State law apparently
does not authorize the Department of Health to establish drinking
water quality standards. No provision is made for the orderly develop-
ment of new community water supplies. Considering the definitions of
public water supply and community water supply (see pages 26 and 27),
it is apparent that the present water supply inventories do not include
many of the smaller water supplies.
The Division of Engineering's community water supply policy is
contained in a number of documents and memoranda issued over several
years. The lack of a single complete policy documen; makes agency-wide
knowledge of the policies and uniform application difficult.
There are 2^-1 community water supplies that are required by
Division of Engineering policy to obtain bacterial analyses from
non-State laboratories. There are 165 supplies thai; presently use
^l:i'2i laboratories which are certified every three ye^rs by th^ Division
of Laboratories. The State provides excellent bacterial auo r '•:• rinlcal
analysis service. The chemical analysis service has improved markedly
in the past two years. Certification of non-State laboratories
providing surveillance analyses (the required annual or quarterly
chemical samples as distinguished from the daily or weekly chemical
samples ["operational analysesj ) is not provided.
9
-------
Effective utilization of computer services has not been obtained.
The large amounts of data which are collected must be processed and
analysed by "hand." Consequently, the data are seldom given proper
attention and are not effectively assimilated to direct program
activities since the process is too time consuming.
Semi-Public Water Supply Program
There are dual responsibilities for semi-public water supply
activities shared by the Division of Sanitation and the Division of
Engineering. Inspection of semi-public water supplies is largely
delegated to County Boards of Health. Water quality analysis requirements
are far less definitive than those for community water supplies. Several
types of semi-public water supplies receive little or no surveillance.
Although there is no inventory of semi-public water supplies, available
records indicate that between 2,500 and 3^000 semi-public water supplies
are presently under surveillance. Adequate surveillarce over these
supplies would require program funds of over $500,000 in inspection
services and laboratory support.
In summary, the Ohio public water supply program is not providing
adequate health evaluation and engineering services necessary to fulfill
its responsibilities to protect the health of the citizens of Ohio.
Community water supply operators are not cooperating with the State in
attaining adequate health surveillance. To properly provide such
services and obtain adequate health evaluation, the following :.-ecommendation£
are made.
10
-------
Recommendations
It is recommended that:
1. The community water supply program be identified in budget
planning, appropriations, and accounting as a line item. A minimum
annual budget of 1600,000 should be provided. The funds should be
used for:
Community Water Supply Activities
(Water Supply Unit and District Offices) $^00,000
Laboratory Support 200,000
$600,000
2. The public water supply program (headquarters and District
Offices) be staffed with a minimum of 20 professional staff on community
water supply activities. This estimate does not include personnel for
the surveillance of water supply waste discharge facilities. (Appendix G.)
3. The District Offices be made responsible to the headquarters
water supply program to achieve adequate surveillance, with at least
three professional personnel assigned full time per District to com-
munity water supply activities.
4. The Division of Engineering increase and im}rove surveillance
of public u-:-.'.(;j" ^ ,vo . - .-. .. the levels s> ''."!','','•' " ;ineering
policy. These levels include:
a. Annual sanitary surveys of each community water supply.
Priorities and time schedules should be established for eliminating
deficiencies.
b. Detailed sanitary surveys every three years for each
community water supply.
11
-------
c. Bacterial surveillance and monthly reporting meeting
State established requirements. This requires co-operation of
water supply operators (see recommendation 6.c.).
d. Complete routine chemical analysis of all community
water supplies.
5. Semi-public water supplies be inventoried. An evaluation of
the semi-public water supply surveillance provided by local Boards of
Health be conducted.
6. Automatic data processing techniques be used for storage,
analysis, and retrieval of water supply data.
7. The water supply functions of data development on raw water
sources and water supply planning within the Department of Natural
Resources and of community water supply activities within the Department
of Health be closely coordinated and utilize the same data storage and
retrieval system.
8. The water supply regulations be revised and expanded to more
comprehensively reflect current recommended water supply practice. The
following specific features should be included:
a. Quality standards for finished drinking water.
b. Mandatory disinfection of all community water supplies.
c. Continuation of certification dependent upon operator com-
pliance with State requirements for the operation of a water supply.
d. Definition of community water supply and semi-public
water supply.
e. Design standards for water supply development.
12
-------
f. Application of quality and design standards to semi-
public water supplies.
9. A uniform State-wide regulation controlling drilling practice
be established with enforcement through licensing and periodic State
evaluation of performance.
10. Policies and regulations be established to provide for and
control the orderly development of new community water supplies.
These policies and regulations should discourage the proliferation of
small independent supplies and should encourage the consolidation of
supplies.
11. A single document be prepared and distributed to all District
Offices and community water supplies which presents all current Ohio
public water supply program policy. Provision should be made for up-
dating this document as policy revisions occur.
12. Legal support sufficient to provide legal consultation and to
take timely action against violations of State water supply laws
and regulations be provided to the Water Supply Unit.
More specific recommendations for implementing various program
ae 'nvif1 PR "r^:
1. Inspections
a. A tie should be established between the Plan Review Section
and the District Offices whereby District Office inspections are
utilized to determine the degree of implementation of approved
plans for water supply construction and development. Where approved
-------
plans are not followed or are not obtained for such construction,
action should be taken to obtain correction of the violation.
b. Each water supply inspector should receive training by
the central office in the conduct of inspections. This training
should be developed by the central office and the District Offices
working in concert. Each inspector should utilize an inspection
form developed and provided by the central office to assure
complete inspection. This should be used regardless of the age or
experience of the inspector,
c. Ratings used on inspection sheets should be clearly
defined. The training referred to in 1.b. should emphasize
interpretation and application of the ratings. The ratings should
be brought to the attention of the operators and should be emphasized
in official communications to those responsible for the water utility.
d. Master-metered supplies should be inspected annually.
District Offices should emphasize that master-metered supplies
are required to conduct bacterial sampling programs and must submit
monthly operating reports.
?. District Crrr-THon'-! (other than inn-peotiona)
a. Standard procedures for effective record keeping should
be developed by the Water Supply Unit and provided to the District
Offices. Water Supply Unit personnel should assint in implementing
these procedures during visits to the District Offices which
should include review of District records. District records .should
provide complete surveillance data at least in the form of monthly
-------
summaries for each water supply (including sample results from
non-State laboratories). At any time the preceding year's record
should always be available in the District records for each water
supply. "Key" records based upon at least one year's past monthly
operational, chemical use, and bacteriological reports should be
developed for each water supply. The "key" records should be
used to check for variations in the monthly reports received.
b. District Office personnel should establish close liaison
with local comprehensive health planning "B" agency environmentalists
and obtain "B" agency support for water supply improvement.
c. Inspectors should be trained and provided with basic testing
equipment (such as ammonia for chlorine leak detection) for dealing
with emergencies. All inspectors should be provided with and trained
to use routine test equipment such as chlorine and pH kits.
d. Inspectors should be familiar with certification re-
quirements and opportunities, and should be familiar with and
involved in training being conducted within the District. In-
spectors should be prepared to provide pertinent timely information
on training and certification on every inspection. In addition,
inspectors should follow up on training received by specific oper-
ators to ascertain the effectiveness of the training and enhance
the effectiveness of the training.
-------
3. Laboratory Support (Chemical)
a. Quality control should be established on a routine basis.
The Chief Chemist should be oriented through a short course in
Analytical Quality Control. As part of the quality control pro-
gram Analytical Reference Service samples should be analysed and
certification by the Analytical Reference Service should be
obtained.
b. To assure consistent and dependable analyses by non-State
laboratories, a chemical laboratory certification program should
be established. This certification program should include
inspection of laboratory facilities, review of techniques and
practices, and the provision of reference samples. In addition,
(l) The chemical laboratory certification program con-
ducted by the Division of Laboratories should not include
direct certification of water supply laboratories conducting
only routine operational control analyses done by the operator.
(2) District Office personnel responsible for conducting
inspections of the water supplies should be trained in in-
specting elementary laboratories, and reviewing analytical
techniques and procedures used for the routine operational
control analyses. One of the duties of the District Office
personnel should be assuring that routine operational
analyses are properly conducted and are effectively interpreted
and used by the operator.
16
-------
I
• (3) Part of the operator's certification requirements
should be the passing of a test designed to ascertain the
• operator's capability to conduct routine operational control
analyses and interpret the analyses' results.
•
•
I
I
At least one qualified individual should be assigned
• full time to develop and initiate the chemical laboratory
certification program and water supply surveillance training
I program in routine operational control analysis evaluation.
c. Metal samples and samples for nitrate and surfactant
m analysis should be properly preserved by the use of nitric acid
• and mercuric chloride respectively.
k. Laboratory Support (Bacterial)
I a. Bacterial surveillance policy should be revised as follows:
(1) Master-metered water supplies serving more than
I 10,000 people should be required to contract for or provide
• for distribution system bacterial sample analyses.
(2) All water supplies providing chlorination should
• be required to maintain daily chlorine residual records for
water leaving the treatment plant. For surface water supplies
| serving fewer thani,QOO people, weekly bacterial samples
M should be required of the source and treatment plant effluent
where the chlorine residual records are satisfactory.
I (3) With the adoption of recommendation A-.a.(2), the
requirement that all surface water supplies provide for bacterial
| analysis by non-State laboratories should be revised to
-------
permit the provision of State laboratory service to the 28
surface water supplies serving fewer than 1,000 people.
5. Fluoridation
a. Where violation of the mandatory fluoridation law is
occurring, action should be taken by District personnel to
determine the reasons why fluoridation has not been initiated
and how the Water Supply Unit can assist in obtaining fluoridation.
b. Where compliance with the law does not appear to be
forthcoming, legal action through the Attorney General's office
to obtain compliance should be initiated.
c. The Water Supply Unit should consult with the Department
of Health, Division of Dental Health and develop a brochure of
pamphlets providing information on the benefits of fluoridation
for distribution to concerned operators.
d. A computer program should be developed to calculate daily
fluoride concentrations from fluoride use and water production data
provided by the operators' monthly reports. These calculated values
should be compared by computer to State standards and operator
analysis. Variation of calculated values from the State standards
and from operator analysis should be reported by the computer, and
this information should be transmitted to District personnel for
action.
e. Results of monthly duplicate fluoride analysis samples
(maintained by the Sanitation Chemistry Laboratory) should be
provided on a timely basis to appropriate Water Supply Unit and
District personnel.
18
-------
f. The operators at all fluoridation installations should
be required to conduct fluoride ion analysis according to Standard
Methods to within - 0.1 mg/1 of the value reported on the State
check sample. Daily finished water fluoride ion analysis, regular
raw water fluoride ion analysis, adequate laboratory equipment
and care of equipment, and complete records on the fluoridation
operation should be enforced at all fluoridation installations.
g. Water Supply Unit personnel should be trained to assist
and should assist operators as needed during "start-up" periods
of new fluoridation installations. District Office inspectors
should be trained to recognize deficiencies in fluoridation
equipment and should be familiar with steps necessary to correct
such deficiencies.
h. All water plant operators feeding fluorides should be
instructed on safe handling and storage practices for fluoride
chemical compounds. District Office inspectors should assure that
the precautionary requirements for handling and storing fluoride
chemical compounds developed by the State Division of Occupational
Health are followed by the operator.
i. Training of operators should be improved with emphasis
on accuracy in fluoride ion analysis, the benefits of continuous
fluoridation, and proper operation of feed equipment. Satis-
factory completion of training should be a mandatory requirement
of the plant operator for approval of his installation to feed
fluorides. District Office inspectors should receive the same
19
-------
training and should assure during inspections that training
has been effective and is being implemented.
j. The Water Supply Unit should enforce the "Recommended
Procedure for Control of the Fluoridation Process" requiring
monthly check samples to be collected from the distribution
systems of fluoridated water supplies and sent to the laboratories
of the Department of Health for fluoride ion analysis. Significant
interruptions in the fluoridation operations should be investi-
gated by the District Office inspectors and all plants employing
new operating personnel placed in charge of the fluoridation
operation should be visited immediately to assure the new
operator has been adequately trained.
6. Water Supply Unit, Operations Section
a. An implementation plan for utilization of the April 1972
cross connection control regulation should be developed. This
plan should outline actions necessary to make the regulation
effective, define the manpower necessary to take these actions,
define the relationships necessary with other State and local
agencies and establish the training necessary for implementation
by the Water and Wastewater Operators Committee of Ohio,
b. One individual should be assigned full time to work on
water supply operator certification and to assist the Operator
Training Committee in the development and conduct of water supply
operator training.
20
-------
c. The definition of areas of the State presently provided
with water supply distribution mains should be completed and kept
up-to-date through co-ordination with the Plans Review Section
and the District Offices.
d. Data handling, analysis and use should be improved by:
(1) The development of computer programs for the storage,
selective retrieval, and manipulation of monthly reported
and inventory data.
(2) The provision of summaries of monthly reported
data on each supply periodically to the District Offices.
(3) The provision of summaries of violations of State
policies and standards on a monthly basis to the District
Offices.
(^) The provision of community water supply inventories,
by District, to the District Offices with annual update provided.
(5) Inventory check by District Offices during inspections
to assure accuracy with corrections reported to the Water
Supply Unit.
(6) The provision of annual summaries of monthly
reported data to reporting operators.
e. Operator training needs should be evaluated and defined.
Past training provided should be reviewed and evaluated for
effectiveness in reaching the operators needing training and for
effectiveness in providing the training needed. Such evaluations
should be conducted in close co-operation with the Operator
Training Committee of Ohio.
21
-------
Introduction
In 1969 the Bureau of Water Hygiene, Environmental Health Service
(now the Division of Water Supply Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency) conducted an extensive study of public water supplies. Every
public water supply system in each of nine designated areas, including
the Cincinnati, Ohio standard metropolitan statistical area, was subjected
to a field inspection and evaluation. On an overall basis, this study
showed that inadequate operating procedures, physical facilities and
surveillance activities are common in both large cities and small towns,
irrespective of geographical location.
In reaction to this study and their own concern, several State
health officers requested that the Regional Offices of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) evaluate their State water supply surveillance
programs. In addition, the Conference of State Sanitary Engineers has
urged the development of a co-operative program for evaluation of State
water supply surveillance activities. In response to this need, the
Division of Water Supply Programs of EPA planned to provide the manpower
and technical assistance necessary to complete ten such evaluations
nationwide in fiscal year 1972. These evaluations were to be made upon
State request under the provision of the Public Health Service Act
which authorizes the Surgeon General to assist State public health agencies^
In September, 1971, the availability of this evaluation service was
made known to Dr. John Cashman, who became Director of the Ohio Department
of Health in April, 1972. Reflecting his interest and concern for the
importance of water supplies to public health, Dr. Cashman indicated
23
-------
that such an evaluation of the State public water supply program would
be timely and requested a project proposal. The project proposal was
prepared and reviewed with Dr. Cashman's staff in December, 1971* The
project proposal did not call for complete public water supply surveys
due to the data available from the Community Water Supply Study of 19&9*
The project was initiated in early January, 1972.
Background
Ohio was admitted to the Union as the seventeenth State in February, l803i
Its population was small, as shown by the census of 1800, with only A-5?365
people registered. Growth was rapid, however, and by 1810 the population
had reached 230,760.
The rapidly growing population created a need for community water
supplies in population centers. Cincinnati was the first municipality
in Ohio to install a community water supply (1821). Table 1 shows the
growth in the number of incorporated municipal water supplies since 1820.
The number of community water supplies, including those serving unincorpo-
rated areas, has grown to 812 (January, 1972). Enumeration of community
water supplies is found in the Water Supply Unit's "1968-69 Water Plan
Inventory of Public Water Systems" and the "Ohio Water Quality Surveillance
of Community Water Supply Systems 1972."
The 1970 census determined that 10,652,000 people reside in Ohio.
Over 8,720,000 of these people are served by the 812 community water
supplies (1972 listing). This number does not include 65 community
water supplies which were proposed or under construction in January of
1972. In addition to the community water supplies, there are an unknown
-------
Table 1
Development of Municipal Water Supplies in Ohio
Date Incorporated Municipalities Population
Having Separate Served
Supply Works
1820
1830
1840
1850
i860
18?0
1880
1890
1900
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
0
1
3
4
6
11
30
78
172
237
277
319
41 4
^67
521
571
0
24,800
52,900
130,700
221,600
379,700
740,600
1,399,900
2,057,000
2,804,300
3,867,000
4,782,800
4,961,500
5,676,300
6,830,800
8,500,000
Percent of
Entire State
Population
0
2.6
3.5
6.6
9.5
14.3
23.2
38.3
49.6
58.9
67.1
72.0
71.9
71.5
70.4
79.8
25
-------
number of semi-public water supplies which serve millions of people at
restaurants, service stations, recreational facilities, trailer parks,
and similar establishments.
The early experiences of municipalities with epidemics of typhoid
fever and other water borne diseases demonstrated to the people of Ohio
that a distinct health problem presented itself in the use of unsafe
public water supplies. Responsibility for controlling public water
supply development was vested in the Department of Health in 1893« At
this time the legislature required municipalities and private corporations
to obtain approval of public water supply plans from the Department of
Health before the supply could be constructed (Section 3701.18 Revised
Code). The law further stated (Section 3701.22), "The department of
health may maintain a chemical and bacteriological laboratory for the
examination of public water supplies.... The department shall examine
and report each year the condition of all public water supplies." This
latter statement authorizes the general supervision of the operation
of water supply systems. Later changes and additions in the Ohio
Revised Code elaborated upon these responsibilities.
Water Supply Definitions
The following definitions of water supply apply in the State of
Ohio and are used in this report.
Public water supply - any water supply intended for human consumption
at a place or building, except for any water supply which serves only a
private dwelling.
26
-------
Community water supply - any public water supply providing water
to any building housing more than three families or to more than one
separately owned property.
Semi-public water supply - any public water supply providing water
to an establishment to which non-residents have ready access on a
regular or intermittent basis.
Private water supply - any water supply serving a building housing
fewer than four families or serving a privately owned property not
readily accessible to the public.
Ground water supply - any water supply obtaining water from the
ground through wells or other like facilities.
Surface water supply - any water supply obtaining water from surface
water sources such as streams, lakes, or springs.
Master-metered water supply - any community water supply which
obtains water from a ground water supply, surface water supply, or
master-metered water supply.
Purpose of Evaluation
Specifically this evaluation endeavored to:
1". Ascertain the status of community water supply surveillance
through review of pertinent data recorded by District Offices of the
Ohio Department of Health.
2. Determine the adequacy of legal statutes, budget, manpower
resources, regulations and policies, and laboratory support.
3. Make recommendations as to what additions and revisions should
be made in the public water supply program to assure adequate health
protection for the citizens of Ohio.
27
-------
Scope
Surveillance Effectiveness
As previously noted (page 1 ), there were 812 community water
supplies serving 8,720,000 people as of January, 1972, in Ohio.
Enumeration of these supplies alphabetically for the State is found in
the "Ohio Water Quality Surveillance of Community Water Supply Systems •
1972." This listing was not available at the time the Evaluation was
initiated. Consequently, the "1968-69 Water Plan Inventory of Public
Water Systems" which lists community water supplies alphabetically by
county was used to evaluate surveillance effectiveness.
The "1968-69 Inventory" lists 750 community water supplies. It
was determined by the EPA Regional Office that a 20 percent sample of
these supplies would be sufficient to judge the effectiveness of the
Ohio Community Water Supply Program. Since direct surveillance is
provided by the four District Offices, evaluation of the surveillance
provided by the Ohio Water Supply Program was made dependent on data
available from the District Offices.
The sample for evaluation was selected by arranging the county
listings from the "1968-69 Inventory" alphabetically by county for each
District and then selecting every fifth supply (I5*f supplies were thus
selected). This method of selection was considered to provide a random
sample. The size of the sample assured adequate representation of
community water supplies by size and type of source. The method of
V
sample selection assured that supplies from every geographical area of
*.
the State were included. The locations of the supplies selected for
29
-------
study are shown by Figure 1.
The 15^ community water supplies selected were examined for degree
of representation by size (population served) and source. Tables 2 and 3
show the analysis of the sample. This analysis shows the sample
provided data sufficient to judge:
1. Surveillance effectiveness with regard to size and type
of source on a State-wide basis.
2. Surveillance effectiveness with regard to size and type
of source on a District basis (with the exception of surface water
sources in the Southeast District).
3- Comparison of surveillance effectiveness by size and type
of source on a State-wide basis.
k» Comparison of surveillance effectiveness by size and type
of source on a District basis (with the exception of surface water
sources in the Southeast District).
5. Comparison of surveillance effectiveness by District (such
comparison should be tempered by the notation of the differences
in representation of size and type of source classes).
6. Comparison of surveillance effectiveness by District for
ground water sources.
7. Comparison of surveillance effectiveness by District for
each size class.
Program Evaluation
The basic water supply authorizations in the State Revised Code
(law), regulations and program policies were reviewed. The Water Supply
30
-------
Figure 1
Evaluation of Community Water Supplies in Ohio
Distribution of Water Supplies
Selected for Evaluation
.
: L.-.HENRI \
•""-"
("HARDIN "xl \ I *
T"*RION XnLl»OWSl
j
| , Xj CARROLL
x x TUSCARAWA^
COSHOCTON [X
I
| X |^J SHELBY I
r ^ i- _
J CHAMPAIGN
xi MIAMI
x x
| * ,/FAIRFIELO'—
PICKAWA'Y
'— i -w
-J.J ' ^ ---
_.._x
,
;—_J; )
i _ j • — *•• i i ... |
j BUTLER x ? WARIIEN f CLINTON ~7 "
L.
X^ X
i BROWN ADAMS
LEGEND
x water supply systems whose
records were examamined
for surveillance effectiveness
O fluoridated water supply systems
selected for special study
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
Program's activities and staffing were also examined in both the Water
Supply Unit and District Offices.
The Department's Division of Laboratories, Sanitation Chemistry
Laboratory was evaluated and the community water supply chemical sur-
veillance program was studied.
A special study of the fluoridation program was made. This study
included inspection of 16 representative fluoridating supplies for
evaluation of fluoridation practice. In addition, the records for all
water supplies fluoridating or naturally fluoridated were reviewed and
evaluated. '
-------
Evaluation Criteria
The effectiveness of the Ohio Water Supply Program was determined by
review of District Office records on 15^ community water supplies. These
records included folders on each supply, bacteriological sample summaries,
inspection logs and operator report logs. The records were examined in
mid-January 1972. Parameters used for the evaluation of surveillance were
either primarily dependent on the Water Supply Program's activity or on
the operator's response to State requirements for surveillance. The date
of last inspection, date of the last sample collected for chemical analysis
and number of analyses for parameters listed by the PHS Drinking Water
Standards of 1962 are dependent on Water Supply Program activity.
Monthly operating reports, bacteriological sampling, and bacteriological
quality records are dependent on operator activity. These parameters
were evaluated on the basis of Ohio Water Supply Program policies.
Inspections
The Ohio Department of Health has a policy of conducting at least
annual inspections of community water supplies. This policy also calls
for comprehensive detailed surveys of each community water supply every
five years. Comprehensive detailed surveys, however, are not being
done. Inspection records were judged satisfactory if a recorded in-
spection was conducted in 1971.
Chemical Analysis
In October 1970, the Ohio Water Supply Program initiated a program
of at least annual chemical sampling of community water supplies and
quarterly sampling of surface community water supplies. Sampling was
judged to be adequate if a sample was analysed in 1971.
35
-------
PHS Standards Run
The policy of routine analysis for 15 of the parameters of the
Drinking Water Standards was established by the Ohio Water Supply Program
in early 1971. Analysis was considered adequate if 15 or more of the
EWS parameters were determined for the last analysis of record.
Monthly Reports
All community water supplies are required to submit monthly operating
reports prior to the fifteenth of the following month. Performance in
this regard was considered satisfactory if 11 or 12 monthly reports had
been received in 1971•
Bacterial Sampling
Bacterial sampling policy was established by the Ohio Water Supply
Program in May 1967. Bacterial sampling was judged inadequate if the
Ohio Water Supply Program policy was not met for two or more months in
1971.
Bacterial Quality
Bacterial quality data available in the District Offices was ex-
amined for comparison to the 1962 Public Health Service Drinking Water
Standards. If bacterial quality failed to meet the DWS one or more
months in 1971, bacterial quality was judged unsatisfactory. If
bacterial sampling did not meet Ohio Water Supply Program policy for
seven or more months of 1971? or if the bacterial quality records did
not provide sufficient data to judge bacterial quality by the DWS, the
quality was considered unknown.
-------
Findings
District Surveillance Data
The findings of the evaluation of surveillance data are illustrated
by Figure 2, showing State-wide data for the six parameters examined,
Figures 3-8, showing State-wide data for the six parameters by population
served and water source, and Figures 9-1 ^i showing data for the six
parameters by population served by District. With few exceptions the
Figures show serious deficiencies in community water supply surveillance.
Inspections
Failure to conduct critical, timely inspections results in per-
petuation of poor operating practices which expose the people served
to potential health hazards.
Figure 2 shows that 61 percent of the community water supplies
were inspected in 1971. No records of inspections could be found on
seven percent of the community water supplies.
Inspection performance is shown by Figure 3 to be poorest for
the smaller water supplies (those serving fewer than 5^000 people)
with 52 percent inspected. Seventy-nine percent of the larger supplies
(those serving more than 5,000 people) were inspected. With regard
to source, only 27 percent of the master-metered water supplies
were inspected in 1971- Ground and surface water supplies have
better records with 63 and 72 percent, respectively, inspected.
Figure 9 shows inspection performance on a District by District
basis for the sample and by population served. These data, in addition
37
-------
CO
CO
o
•a
CO
co
co
s« =
— ra ^p *- =
zz =55
E
cq
CO
CO
38
-------
«/>
D
-------
a>
3
oa
U CO
n
-------
in
V
CO
CO
CO
co
co
co
co
3»
co
CO
CO
CO
A|
D
-------
«/»
D
-------
r- «/»
- n
h^ •> LJ
D
-------
E
E
o
cj
n
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ohio Surveillance Program
Figure 9 Inspection Record, 1971 by District by Population Served
Not Done '71 HH Data Unavailable ***': Done '77
NUMBER OF WATER SUPPLIES
5 10 15 20 25
l.OOO tO 5,000
GREATER than 5,OOO:
Northeast
Northwest
NUMBER OF WATER SUPPLIES
0 10 20 30 40
50
ALL SUPPLIES.
Southeast
-------
Ohio Surveillance Fiogram
Figure 10 Chemical Analysis Record, 1971 by District by Population Served
Not Done "71 iHi Data Unavailable i^'* Done'/'/
NUMBER OF WATER SUPPLIES
0 5 10 15 20 25
LESS than 1.OOO:
Southeast
Southwest \
Northeast
Northwest\
1.OOO to 5,000:
Southeast \
Southwest
Northeast
Northwest
GREATER than 5,OOO:
Southeast
Southwest
Northeast
Northwest
ALL SUPPLIES:
Southeast
NUMBFR OF WATER SUPPLIES
10 20 30 40
50
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ohio Surveillance Program
Figure 11 Public Health Service Standards Kun by District by Population Served
Completed
Data Unavailable '&»>• Completed
NUMBER OF WATER SUPPLIES
0 5 10 15 20 25
1.OOO to 5.OOO:
Southeast
Southwest
Northeast
Northwest
GREATER than 5.OOO:
Northeast
Northwest
0
NUMBER OF WATER SUPPLIES
10 20 30 40 50
-------
Ohio Surveillance Program
Figure 12 Monthly Reports, 1971 b;y District by Population Served
-------
Ohio Surveillance Program
Figure 13 Bacterial Sampling Record, 1971 by District by Population Served
Failed Stds. *&* Data Unavailable
MetStds.
NUMBER OF WATER SUPPLIES
5 10 15 20 25
GREATER than 5,OOO:
Northwest
0
NUMBER OF WATER SUPPLIES
10 20 30 40
ALL SUPPLIES:
Southeast
Southwest
Northeast
Northwest
-------
Ohio Surveillance Program
Figure 1^ Bacterial Quality, 1971 by District by Population Served
Foiled Stds *$$& Data Unavailable ^-^ Met Stds.
NUMBER OF WATER SUPPLIES
0 5 10 15 20 25
LESS than 1.OOO:
GREATER than 5.OOO:
NUMBER OF WATER SUPPLIES
10 20 30 40
50
-------
to•performance, show program emphasis and the status of records
keeping. The Northeast District had very poor performance with 36
percent of the supplies inspected. The other Districts completed
inspections on 70 or more percent. Program emphasis was placed on
the larger supplies in the Northwest and Northeast Districts, on all
supplies in the Southwest and on larger and smaller supplies in the
Southeast. Eecord keeping was good except in the Northeast District
where no records could be located on Mf percent of the small supplies
or on 11 percent of the 1,000 - 5)000 population served supplies.
Chemical Analysis
Chemical analysis is necessary on a periodic basis to determine
the absence of toxic and aesthetically undesirable chemicals and to
detect any increases in the concentrations of such substances.
Figure k shows that the State provided chemical analyses for
73 percent of the community water supplies. All surface water
supplies and 95 percent of the supplies serving more than 5)000
people were provided with analyses. Only 27 percent of the master-
metered water supplies, however, were provided with such analyses.
Figure 10 indicates the performance by District and population class
for this parameter. The data show that all Districts have practically
complete chemical sampling for the greater than 5)000 population class.
The performance for the other population classes varies from District to
District. The Southwest District has practically complete chemical
sampling records with 86 percent of the supplies sampled in 1971*
The Northeast District shows poor performance with only 58 percent of
the supplies sampled.
51
-------
PBS Standards Run
The PHS Drinking Water Standards list 21 chemical, three physical,
and three radiochemical parameters which are considered most likely
to occur in water and for which standards have been established. In
1970, the Ohio Department of Health determined to obtain complete
chemical data on community water supplies and expanded its analysis
program to include 16 of the IMS parameters, plus 13 other parameters.
This data is important to assuring that toxic chemicals are not
present in significant concentrations and are not increasing in the
State's community water supplies.
Figures 5 and 11 illustrate the degree of progress accomplished
by the increased emphasis placed on chemical analysis. Sixty-four
percent of the community water supplies reviewed had received chemical
analyses under the State's new program. Emphasis placed on larger
and surface water supplies resulted in 76 percent of the supplies
serving more than 5,000 people and 8A- percent of the surface water
supplies having analyses made. Only 20 percent of the master-
metered and 50 percent of the supplies serving fewer than 1,000
people were done.
As shown by Figure 11, few of the Northeast District supplies
(35 percent) were provided with available analyses in 1971. The
other Districts had much better records with 71, 76, and 8k percent
of the supplies provided with available analyses.
-------
I
I Monthly Reports
• Monthly reports provide the State with detailed data on the day-
to-day operation of community water supplies. The analysis of such
• reports can indicate the development of operational problems and
provide data on the status of community water supplies. Failure to
| provide such reports to the State indicates a failure of the water
supply program to establish the need and value of such reports in
the minds of the operators.
Figure 6 shows that 51 percent of the supplies report regularly
to the State. This response of community water supply operators
to the State water supply program varies appreciably depending on
the size and source of the supply. Thirty-three percent of the
supplies serving fewer than 1,000 people and 20 percent of the master-
metered water supplies provided regular reports. On the other hand,
78 percent of the supplies serving more than ^>,000 people, and 88
percent of the surface water supplies provided regular reports.
Figure 12 shows that performance varies from District to District
for each population class. The basic pattern of better reporting
for larger supplies generally applies, however, to each of the
Districts. On an overall basis the Southwest District has the best
record, with 59 percent reporting regularly. The other District
records are somewhat poorer with kk, k8, and 53 percent reporting
regularly.
-------
Bacterial Sampling
The determination of bacterial quality is dependent on the
collection and analysis of adequate numbers of bacterial samples.
Failure to obtain adequate bacterial samples as specified by the
DWS (Ohio Water Supply Program policy) makes the determination of
bacterial quality impossible.
Figure 7 shows that 67 percent of the supplies failed to meet
the sampling standards. Only *\k percent were known to meet the
standards. The status of the remaining 19 percent was unknown due
primarily to poor record keeping of non-State laboratory data.
No master-metered water supply conducted adequate bacterial sampling.
The percentage of supplies meeting the sampling standards for 11
or 12 months of 1971 is very low for all classes.
Figure 13 illustrates the data by population class and the
entire sample for each District. Sampling performance is poor for
all Districts. In addition, poor record keeping is noted for the
Northeast and Northwest Districts. Of particular importance is the
fact that even the greater than 5:000 class showed very poor compliance
with the State's bacterial sampling requirements.
Bacterial Quality
Failure to meet bacterial quality standards indicates a serious
potential health hazard and calls for prompt corrective action.
Determination of safe bacterial quality is the primary surveillance
mechanism used to assure the delivery of safe quality water.
-------
I
I
I
I
Figure 8 demonstrates that bacterial quality consistently meeting
the DWS was reported for only 23 percent of the community water
supplies. Twenty-four percent failed the EWS one or more months in
1971. For the remaining 53 percent the bacterial water quality was
unknown due to inadequate sampling and poor record keeping.
Figure 8 also shows the data divided into three population classes
and three source classes. The large percentages of data unavailable
for the greater than 5^000 and surface classes are due primarily to
poor record keeping of data received from non-State laboratories. The
| large percentages of data unavailable for the 1,000, 1,000-5,000,
_ ground, and master-meter classes are due primarily to inadequate
* sampling. Particularly striking is the small proportion of community
I water supplies for which bacterial quality was known to be consistently
satisfactory.
I Figure 1^f provides a comparison of performance for the bacterial
_ quality parameter on a District by District basis for the population
™ served classes and the entire sample. Poor record keeping and inadequate
• sampling are indicated by data unavailable figures. The data show very
poor record keeping and inadequate sampling for three Districts (52, 61,
• and 73 percent data unavailable). Where data was relatively complete, kj>
percent of the supplies exceeded the bacterial quality standards one
™ or more months in 1971.
• Special Fluoridation Studies
Field Study
Data collected on the community water supplies fluoridating in
the State of Ohio indicated 15 (9^ percent) of the 16 installations
55
-------
selected for investigation evidenced a fluoride ion content in the
distribution system at the time of the survey within the 0.8 -1.3 mg/1
range required by the State. One (six percent) of the facilities
(Yellow Springs) was underfeeding, i.e. the fluoride ion level in the
samples collected from the distribution system was less than 0.8 mg/1.
The operating conditions observed during the time of the survey
of the 16 fluoridation installations inspected are summarized as
follows:
1. Analytical Control of the Fluoride Ion Level
Practices to analytically test and control the fluoride ion
level in the distribution systems varied considerably. Only
six (38 percent) of the plant operators or laboratory personnel
conducted fluoride ion analysis within - 0.1 mg/1 of the duplicate
sample analysis performed by the EPA, Water Supply Division.
Daily finished water fluoride ion analysis, required by the
State Department of Health, was conducted at 11 (69 percent) of
the installations and regular raw water fluoride ion analysis
was being conducted at only nine (56 percent). Adequate analytical
equipment and facilities were available, and care of equipment
was judged satisfactory at 13 (81 percent) of the plants visited;
however, one operator was not using one of the Standard Methods
for fluoride ion analysis. Records of the fluoridation operation
were acceptable at '}l+ (88 percent) of the facilities surveyed.
2. Fluoride Chemical Feed Equipment and Facilities
Fluoride chemical feed equipment and facilities were found
deficient at three (19 percent) of the 16 installations
56
-------
I
I surveyed and only 11 (69 percent) of the feeding arrangements
were acceptable, i.e. protected against overfeeding, preferred
H point of chemical application, protected against backflow, and
• good housekeeping in the feeder area. Five (J>6 percent) of the
installations in operation longer than one year were reported by
I the operators to have had one or more interruptions in fluoridation
of one or more days duration in the past 12 months. Maintenance
• was judged satisfactory at 15 (9^ percent) of the facilities
• surveyed.
3- Fluoride Chemical Compound - Storage and Handling
• Storage arrangements for the fluoride chemical compound fed
were unsatisfactory at seven (kk percent) of the 16 installations
I surveyed. Five (31 percent) of the operators interviewed did not
• have available suitable safety equipment to handle the fluoride
chemical compounds; and two (12 percent) of the operators were per-
I mitting unsafe reuse of the chemical shipping containers or were
not disposing of the empty containers satisfactorily.
| k. Operator Training and Interest
mm A trained operator with a genuine interest in feeding fluorides
is essential to the satisfactory operation of a fluoridation in-
I stallation. (Special training courses were conducted in Ohio for
the operators of the water supply systems required to fluoridate
| under the recently passed State Fluoridation Law - the effect of
mm the training is discussed below.) Three (19 percent) of the
facilities surveyed were operated by personnel not completely
I
I
I
-------
familiar with the fluoride chemical feed equipment at their plants.
Three (19 percent) of the operators questioned were not adequately
trained in the use of the fluoride ion test equipment provided and
the procedures to follow in conducting a fluoride ion analysis.
The operator at one (6 percent) of the plants visited did not favor
feeding fluoride to public water supply systems.
5. Surveillance
Frequent check samples of fluoride ion levels in the distribution
system and regular inspection visits to the water fluoridation in-
stallation by State water supply surveillance personnel must be
conducted to assure the facility is operating. The State Department
of Health's requirement is for one water sample per month to be
collected from the distribution system of fluoridated water supplies
and submitted to the State Laboratory for fluoride ion analysis. A
review of State Laboratory records for 1971 revealed the required
monthly check samples had not been received from six (37 percent) of
the installations selected for survey. Fourteen (88 percent) of
the 16 plants had been visited in the past 12 months by a
representative of the State Department of Health's water supply
surveillance agency. Inspection visits to the water supply systems
surveyed averaged one visit in six months.
Table 4, Operating Conditions at Selected Fluoridated Water Supply
Systems, summarizes the operating conditions observed at the installations
inspected during the time of the survey. Table 5» Adequacy of Fluoridation
at Selected Water Supply Systems, summarizes the adequacy of the operating
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table k
Operating Conditions at Selected
Fluoridated Water Supply Systems
in Ohio
Parameter Evaluated
Percent of Fluoridated
Water Supply Systems
Surveyed
Fluoride Ion Content in the Distribution System
Fluoride Ion Level 0.8 -1.3 mg/1
Fluoride Ion Level <0.8 mg/1
Fluoride Ion Level >1.3 mg/1
Analytical Control of the Fluoride Ion Level
Operator Analysis - 0.1 mg/1 EPA Value
Daily Finished Water Fluoride Ion Analysis
Regular Raw Water Fluoride Ion Analysis
Adequate Analytical Equipment & Facilities
Adequate Care for Laboratory Equipment
Adequate Records
Fluoride Chemical Feed Equipment & Facilities
Adequate Feeding Equipment & Facilities
Adequate Feeding Arrangements
Feed Interrupted <1-Day in Past 12 mos.*
Adequate Maintenance
Fluoride Chemical Compound - Storage & Handling
Adequate Storage Arrangements
Acceptable Safe Handling Provisions
Satisfactory Disposal of Shipping Containers
Operator Training and Interest
Adequately Trained to Operate Feed Equipment
Knowledge of Test Equipment & Procedures
Accepts and Interested in Fluoridation
Surveillance
Monthly Check Samples to State**
Installation Inspected by State in Past 12 mos.
* 1k Installations Rated. Kent & Sidney Started Fluoridating V?1 and
7/71i respectively.
** Per 1971 State Health Department Records
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
conditions observed at each facility during the time of the survey.
Evaluation of Operator Training
Eight (50 percent) of the 16 installations selected for survey had
a representative attend one of the four Environmental Protection
Agency's "Fluoride Determinations in Water" training courses conducted in
Fiscal Year 1971 for Ohio water plant operators. Comparing the operating
conditions of the installations surveyed in Ohio with the operating con-
ditions of 68 installations surveyed in six other States (Table 6)
reveals the Ohio installations were decidedly better. Ninety-four
percent of the fluoridated supplies in Ohio had a fluoride ion content
in the distribution system within the State recommended range, compared
to only hj> percent of the fluoridated supplies surveyed in the other
six States. The average increase for each of the parameters evaluated
was 16 percent. This is a reflection of both a more comprehensive
fluoridation control program in Ohio and attendance at the training courses.
Further comparison of the data for the supplies in Ohio which re-
ceived EPA training versus the data for the supplies in Ohio which did
not receive EPA training (Figure 15) reveals less significant variation
of performance attributable to the training courses. The supplies re-
ceiving training provided more frequent checks of fluoride content,
practiced better fluoride chemical handling and storage, and were more
dependable in providing check samples to the State. Supplies not re-
ceiving training practiced better fluoride chemical container disposal
and were better trained to operate feed equipment. Figure 15 does
point out several areas in which training is lacking.
61
-------
Table 6
Comparison of Operating Conditions at
Fluoridation Installations in
Ohio and Six Other States
Parameter Evaluated
Percent of Fluoridated
Water Supply Systems
Surveyed
Ohio Six Other States
Fluoride Ion Content in the Distribtion System
Fluoride Level Within Recommended Limits*
Analytical Control of the Fluoride Ion Level
Operator Analysis - 0.1 mg/1 EPA Value
Daily Finished Water Fluoride Ion Analysis
Regular Raw Water Fluoride Ion Analysis
Adequate Analytical Equipment & Facilities
Adequate Care for Laboratory Equipment
Adequate Records
Fluoride Chemical Feed Equipment and Facilities
Adequate Feeding Equipment and Facilities
Adequate Feeding Arrangements
Feed Interrupted <1 Day in Past 12 months
Adequate Maintenance
Fluoride Chemical Compound - Storage and Handling
Adequate Storage Arrangements
Acceptable Safe Handling Provisions
Satisfactory Disposal of Shipping Containers
Operator Training and Interest
Adequately Trained to Operate Feed Equipment
Knowledge of Test Equipment & Procedures
Accepts and Interested in Fluoridation
Surveillance
Check Samples to State as Required
Installation Inspected by State in Past 12 mos.
78%
67%
62$
6k°/0
7^%
77%
Fluoride limits recommended by State concerned
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
in •>
1
sai|ddns
00
•o
CN
-------
Evaluation of Fluoridation Records
Evaluation of past fluoridation data reported (November 1968 -
October 1971) shows that community water supplies in Ohio which
reportedly fluoridate produce water with a fluoride content between
0.7 and 1.5 mg/1 about 95% of the time. About 90% of the supplies
which reportedly fluoridate consistently produce water with a fluoride
content between 0.7 and 1.^ mg/1.
-------
I
I
I
I
Discussion
I Public Water Supply Law, Regulations, and Policy
The Ohio legislature has established a number of general laws re-
• garding public water supply. These laws are summarized below in the
_ order of their importance to surveillance. Each lav/ is also given a
* title to facilitate reference to the law later in the text.
I General Supervision, Section 6111.13, states the Department of
Health shall exercise general supervision of the operation and maintenance
• of public water supplies and water works systems throughout the State.
Control over all features of construction, operation and maintenance of
• systems for supply treatment, storage and distribution which do or may
• affect the sanitary quality or fluoride content of the supplies is
specified. A fluoride content of 0.8 to 1.3 ppm is required of water
• supplies serving 5^000 °^ more people as of January 1, 1972.* The State
may reimburse the cost of installing fluoridation equipment upon request
• by the municipality and verification of proper facility installation by
• the Department. It is further specified that the Department shall
investigate the public water supplies throughout the State as fre-
• quently as deemed necessary by the Department and whenever requested by
local health officials. The Department may adopt and enforce orders
and regulations governing construction, operation and maintenance and
may require plans and descriptions of existing works.
I* Fifty-six supplies required to fluoridate had not done so
by January 1, 1972.
I
I
I
-------
Plan Review, Section 3701.18, states that plans for provision,
installation, or changes of water supply facilities must be approved
by the Department. The only exceptions to this law are private residences
or dwellings,, and industrial water supplies not intended for human
consumption.
Laboratory Service, Section 3701.22, provides that the Department
may maintain a laboratory for chemical and bacterial examination of
public water supplies. This section further states that the Department
shall examine and report each year the condition of all public water
supplies.
Analyses Required, Section 6111.14, states every public water supply
shall have analyses of the water made at such intervals and in such manner
as may be ordered by the Department. Records of results of analyses .-
shall be maintained and reported as required by the Department.
Private, Auxilliary, or Emergency Water Supply Connections, Section
6111.15, provides that such connections to a public water supply shall
be approved by the Department.
Improvement Orders, Section 6111.20, provides for orders to the
mayor or managing officials of a water supply not producing water of
reasonable quality,due to incompetent supervision or inefficient operation,
to secure operation producing water of reasonable quality.
Water Supplies Operated for Profit, Section ^905, establishes a
Public Utilities Commission which governs water supply utilities operated
for profit. Section ^933.25 provides that a certificate of public con-
venience and necessity must be obtained from the Commission before such
66
-------
a water supply utility can be established or expand its operation.
Local Health Department or Township Trustees Complaint, Section
6103.17i states that on written complaint from local health departments
or township trustees the Department must investigate conditions and
may order improvement.
Water Supply Contracts, Sections 6103.20 - ,2h provides that boards
of county commissioners may contract to provide water to consumers outside
sewer districts. These sections also provide that counties and munici-
palities may contract with one another for the provision of water supply
with the approval of the Department.
Enforcement procedures for 6111.13, -1^ and .15 are defined in
6111.16, .17, .18, ,19, .20, .21, .23, .2k, .25, .26, .27, .30, and .99-
These procedures call for notice to owner, public health council hearing,
order for improvement, referee appeal, supreme court appeal, and $500 fine
for noncompliance. Enforcement for 3701.18, 3701.22, and 6111.13, .1^,
and .15 must be instituted by the Director of Health as specified by
Section 3701-57- Violations of 3701.18 are punishable by fines of not
less than $100 nor more than $500 and/or 90 days in prison. Violations
of 6111.13, 6111.1^ and 6111.15 are punishable by fines of not more than
$500.
The law in the Plan Review Section defines water supplies for which
plans are required as being all water supplies serving buildings or
places except those serving a private residence and those intended for
industrial use not including human consumption. The General Supervision
Section defines public water supplies, for which general supervision of
67
-------
the operation and maintenance is required, as any system of public or
quasi-public nature installed for an area or for buildings or places
used for the assemblage or employment of people.
Water Supply Regulations are prepared by the Department of Health
under Section 3701.03 of the State Law for consideration by the Public
Health Council. Section 3701.33 of the State Law establishes a seven
member, governor-appointed, Public Health Council which makes and amends
sanitary regulations to be of general application throughout the State.
The development of Rules and Regulations pertinent to water supply is
assigned to the Water Supply Unit, the General Engineering Unit and the
Division of Sanitation. Two regulations, HE-33, Plans Review and HE-37?
Operator Certification relate to public water supply.
HE-33 refers to the submission of plans for water supply. Inter-
connections of public water supplies and other supplies are prohibited
unless specifically approved by the Department. Plans must be in
duplicate; accompanied by specifications, an engineering report and a
request for approval; and approved by appropriate local officials.
Additional data or plans may be required as well as revisions or alter-
ations if the plans are considered to be unclear or inadequate. Design
standards are not specified.
HE-37 provides for the mandatory certification of operators of
water supply works serving a population of over 250 people. Where a
full time certified operator cannot by obtained, a certified operator
in responsible charge may be approved for a designated period of time
by the Director. Water supply works are divided into four classes.
-------
I
I
Examination for certification and prerequisites for examination are
specified. "Grandfather" certificates were allowed only for those
individuals operating a treatment plant prior to the regulation and
are only good for the treatment plant operated. An advisory board of
examiners is established to administer the certification regulation.
Eeciprocity with equivalent certifications in other States is established.
In addition to the State Law and Water Supply Regulations, an
in-house Water Supply Committee appointed by the Chief Engineer of the
Department prepares policy and guidelines for consideration by the
Chief Engineer. The Water Supply Committee consists of one representative
from each District Engineering Office, the Plan Review Section, the
Operations Section, and the General Engineering Unit. Policies proposed
by this committee cover both community and semi-public water supplies.
Present established policies are with regard to:
1. Mandatory disinfection of public water supplies.
2. Ground Water Policy
3. Surface Water Policy
k. Waste Sludge and Filter Washwater Disposal
Policy has also been established by practice and application.
Examples of these policies are the use of the Ten State Standard for
plans review and reference to the Public Health Service Drinking Water
Standards in monitoring of water quality. Such policies, however, have
no official standing.
69
-------
Department of Health Public Water Supply Program Organization
The Ohio Department of Health administers the State public water
supply surveillance program with the authorizations of the General
Supervision (Section 6111.13), Plan Review (Section 3701.18), Laboratory
Service (Section 3701.22), and Analyses Required (Section 6111.1*0 Laws.
In administering these laws, the Department of Health divides public
water supplies into two classes, community water supplies and semi-public
water supplies (see definitions in the "Water Supply Definitions"
section in the Introduction of this report).
Community Water Supply Program
The community water supply program is conducted by the Water Supply
Unit and the District Offices of the Division of Engineering (Figure 16).
The Water Supply Unit organization is shown in Figure 17» Policy and
program direction are established by the Chief, Division of Engineering,
using information provided by the Water Supply Unit. The Water Supply
Unit maintains records on all community water supplies, publishes
inventories and other data summaries, provides direction to the District
Offices on the conduct of inspections, provides technical assistance as
available and upon request, provides staff work for the Water and Wastewater
Operators Certification Committee, takes part in the Operators Training
Committee of Ohio activities, conducts plans review, directs chemical
and bacterial quality surveillance with the cooperation and assistance
of the Bureau of Public Health Laboratories, and directs the fluoridation
program. The District Offices are responsible for maintaining direct
surveillance over the community water supplies within their areas of
jurisdiction.
70
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o>
So
CO
„ .52
a
taut
CM
fr
ctf
-------
CD
oa
00
03
03
._ •»
ea ea
i_
c: o>
oacj
uu evi
in
at
CO
CQ
CJ
Q,
O> I
o> o>
BO
LU
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Semi-Public Water Supply Program
The semi-public water supply program is administered by three
Divisions of the Department of Health, with much of the inspection work
done by boards of health for general and city health districts. In
the Division of Engineering, plans review for semi-public water supplies
is done by the General Engineering Unit and preconstruction site in-
spections are done by District Office personnel. The Division of
Nursing provides for the inspection of nursing homes and rest homes.
Such inspections include review of the water supplies provided. The
Division of Sanitation is responsible for surveillance of the operation
and maintenance of semi-public water supplies covered by State regulation
in cooperation with boards of health for general and city health districts.
In addition to the three Divisions involved, the Bureau of Public Health
Laboratories provides laboratory support principally for bacterial
analyses of samples from the semi-public water supplies. The organizational
relationships of these Divisions and Bureau are shown by Figure 18.
Community Water Supply Activities
Water Supply Unit Resources
Figure 17 shows the Water Supply Unit has a staff of three engineers,
two engineer technicians, and two clerical personnel. Table 7 presents
a summary of the qualifications of the professional staff.
Table 7 shows that the staff is well qualified with regard to formal
training (four bachelors degrees and two masters degrees) and is par-
ticularly strong in experience (average of 17 years per man).
The staff's qualifications are reflected by their category ratings.
73
-------
Figure 18
State of Ohio
Department of Health Organizational Chart
Governor
Boards
Public Health Council
Water Pollution Control Board
Air Pollution Control Board
Radiation Board
Others
Director
of Health
±
Assistant
Director
Offices
Comprehensive Health Planning
Health Insurance Benefits Program
Nursing Home Program
Bureau of
General Services
L
Division of
Administration
Division of
Legal Services
Division of
Medical Facilities
Division of
Vital Statistics
Northwest
District Office
Northeast
District Office
Southeast
District Office
Southwest
District Office
Bureau of
Preventive
Medicine
Division of
Chronic Diseases
Division of
Communicable
Diseases
Division of
Maternal and
Child Health
Division of
Dental Health
Division of
Tuberculosis
Southeast Ohio
Tuberculosis
Hospital
Bureau of
Environmental
Health
_L
Bureau of
Local Health
Services
Division of
Engineering
Division of
Occupational
Health
Division of
Sanitation
Division of
Nursing
Division of
Public Health
Education
Division of
Local Services
Division of
Nutrition
Bureau of
Public Health
Laboratories
Division of
Public Health
Laboratories
Northeast
Laboratory
Southeast
Laboratory
Northwest
Laboratory
1968
-------
Table 7
Ohio Department of Health
Water Supply Unit
Professional Staff Qualifications
Category
Public Health
Engineer 7
Public Health
Engineer 6
Public Health
Engineer 6
Engineer Technician
7
Bachelors
Degree
Ch.E.
C.E.
C.E.
No
Masters
Degree
MPH
MSE
No
No
Professional
Registration
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Experience in
Water Supply
35 years
20 years
25 years
6 years
20 years city
government
12 years state
chemist
Engineer Technician
3
Biological No
No
2 years
1/1/72
75
-------
Engineer Technicians are rated from one to seven and Public Health
Engineers are rated from one to nine, with step one being the entry
level. It is noted that only one staff member has less than 20 years
of experience. This lack of personnel with intermediate experience
may indicate future problems in maintaining program continuity.
Estimates of expenditures for the community water supply program
for 1971 are Water Supply Unit - $85,000 and District Offices $^0,000
(salary, benefits, travel). This $125,000 amounts to about $15^ ex-
pended on community water supply activities for each of the 812 community
water supplies. Expenditures for water supply activities are difficult
to determine because such activities have no line item in budget planning,
allocation, or accounting.
Water Supply Unit Activities
The activities of the Water Supply Unit are determined by the
authorities previously enumerated, the rules and regulations established
by the Public Health Council, and the policies determined by the Chief
Engineer.
The Engineer-in-Charge of the Unit directs operations of the three
sections; maintains liaison with other agencies such as HUD, FHA, EDA,
the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, the Ohio Water Development
Authority, the Planning Section of the Department of Natural Resources;
provides input to water resources planning groups such as the Great
Lakes Basin Commission and the State Water Plan; and participates in
and directs special studies.
76
-------
Operations Section
The Operations Section is responsible for monitoring District
surveillance activities, maintaining surveillance records on all community
water supplies, supervising fluoridation, supervising cross connection
control, administering wastewater discharge permits for water treatment
plants and conducting special investigations.
District Surveillance
District personnel engaged in community water supply inspection
are periodically called into Columbus to review problems and
activities, but no systematic check of surveillance is kept. A
primary problem is a mutual feeling of lack of support from each
other between the Water Supply Unit and the District Offices.
Records
The Operations Section develops forms for the reporting of
data and distributes the forms to appropriate individuals.
Operator's reports, inspection reports, water quality analyses,
and plans approval provide the basic data on most public water
supplies. The operator's reports include a monthly report of
operation required from all community water supplies (see Appendix
A-1), a monthly bacteriological report for those supplies using
laboratories other than those of the Department of Health (see
Appendix A-3), a monthly operational report for lime soda
softening, iron removal or ion exchange plants (see Appendix A-2),
and a monthly operational report for purification plants (see
Appendix A-2). These reports are received by the District Offices,
77
-------
reviewed, logged in, and referred to the Operations Section. Data is
stored on computer tapes as well as files, but no computer programs
have been developed for selective retrieval of these data. All data
is filed and retrieved by hand. A memorandum providing directions on
how to complete the monthly report forms is available (see Appendix
A-1). Inspection reports are completed for the record by the District
inspection engineers and are followed by letters to responsible
officials outlining the results of the inspections. The latest com-
munity water supply inventory included 1968-69 data and was published
in 1971- The inventory is organized by river basin and by county.
Fluoridation
In 1969 the State legislature passed a mandatory fluoridation
law which required all water supplies (^7) serving over 20,000
people to fluoridate by January 1, 1971, and required all water
supplies (116) serving 55000 to 20,000 people to fluoridate by
January 1, 1972. Communities could reject fluoridation by referendum
within six months of the passage of the fluoridation law. Thirty-seven
communities held such referenda, with 3^ voting rejection (including
Milford, population ^,800). It is interesting to note that two
supplies having natural fluoridation rejected fluoridation.
As of January 1970, ^5 water supplies serving more than 5?000
people were fluoridating, and six were supplying naturally fluori-
dated water. As of March 1972, 70 such supplies were fluoridating.
Fifty-six supplies required by law to fluoridate are not doing
so. Included in this number are five of the largest
78
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
supplies in the State; the Canton, Cincinnati, Columbus, Dayton,
and Montgomery County, Great Moraine water systems. These 56
supplies serve over 2,700,000 people. The water supplies required
to fluoridate which are not doing so are located in the Districts
as follows: eight in the Northwest District, 22 in the Southwest
District, eight in the Southeast District and 18 in the Northeast
District.
No special effort to obtain fluoridation as required by law
has been made by the District Offices. No specific instructions
on action which should be taken to encourage fluoridation has been
received by the Districts from the central office. Several months
prior to the dates of fluoridation required by law the subject
water supplies were notified by letter of the need for submission
of plans and steps necessary to obtain fluoridation. Shortly after
the law's passage, brochures were made available to the public and
water supplies concerned through the central and District Offices.
This material described very well the status of fluoridation in
the State and gave an excellent review of the technical requirements
_ for fluoridation. Such information was meant to assist the water
supply operators and supervisors in evaluating the methods and
• means of fluoridation which would be appropriate for their systems.
No strong effort to support fluoridation in the various referenda
• which were held was made by the Department of Health. No effort to
_ educate the water supply operators on the benefits and advisability
* of fluoridation was made by the Division of Engineering.
79
-------
The fluoridation law is weak in that it established no strong
penalties for noncompliance, except as provided under Section 6111
of the State Code. There would, however, seem to be little
reason for noncompliance by municipalities in view of the fact that
the law provides for State reimbursement to municipalities for
the capital expense in initiating fluoridation. Certification of
installation of fluoride equipment is done by the Operations Section.
The primary reason for noncompliance would appear to be a lack of
conviction in the minds of local people and officials regarding
the benefits of fluoridation. Thus, the failure to fluoridate
may, in some cases, be an educative failure on the part of the
Department of Health.
Despite the lack of full compliance with the law, the law
must be judged a partial success since 25 supplies serving
6o6,000 people are now fluoridating due to the law. As of March
1972, a total of 78 supplies provided fluoridated water to over
4,711,000 people in Ohio. (Eight supplies serving <5,000 people fluoridate.)
The Division of Engineering learns of a water utility's intent
to fluoridate through the receipt of plans for review and approval.
Control of the fluoridation operation is obtained by requiring a
monthly State laboratory fluoride analysis which is compared to an
analysis on the same sample by the water utility, daily analyses run
and recorded by the water utility, and daily recording of the fluoride
added in ppm by the water utility. The daily analyses and the daily
concentrations by calculation should be recorded on the monthly
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
mm
•
•
I
I
I
I
operator's chemical use report form. No place is, however,
provided on this form for either statistic (see Appendix A-1).
Cross Connection Control
Cross connection control has long been discussed and neglected.
Although District engineers are aware of the subject, little emphasis
or action is taken to encourage and sustain cross connection control
programs. The Operations Section has prepared a cross connection
control regulation which was adopted by the Public Health Council
in May of 1972 and became effective in July 1972. This regulation
will provide guidance for cross connection control by containment
(prevention of backflow from service connections to water supply
mains). Following adoption of the regulation, the Operations
Section plans to work with the District Offices and the Operators
Training Committee of Ohio, Inc., to obtain implementation of
cross connection control and train personnel on a State^wide basis.
Wastewater Discharge Permits
Of the 730 water source supplies, ^16 practice iron, turbidity,
or hardness removal which create waste sludge or brines. Those
supplies which discharge to sewerage systems need not obtain dis-
mm
charge permits. All others, however, must provide wastewater
treatment and must obtain discharge permits. This program has
been recently assigned (although policy was established in 19&7)
to the District Offices for inspection and compliance.
Permit procedures will be:
1. Operations Section establishes procedures and maintains
records for activity.
81
-------
2. District Offices make inspections and report findings to
Operations Section with recommendations for action.
3« Operations Section reviews and recommends action.
*f. A work group of the Water Pollution Control Board decides
action for compliance. The permits handled in groups with
Operations personnel present.
The water supply treatment discharges are classified as follows:
Turbidity removal 93 - 21$
Lime-soda softening 1*4-1 - 37$
Ion exchange only 32 - 7%
Iron removal only 85 - 22$
Ion exchange + Iron removal 65 - 13$
Total *fl6
This permit program constitutes a major activity added to the
community water supply program for which no additional staff was
initially provided.
Special Studies and Activities
Special activities which are vested in Operations include
review of interstate carrier water supply certifications and assistance
to the Water and Wastewater Certification Board, Assistance to the
Operator Training Committee of Ohio, Inc. is also provided. Special
studies on community water supply initiated by the Water Supply
Unit, the U.S. EPA or other agencies are coordinated by the Operations
Section of the Water Supply Unit.
82
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The interstate carrier program is a U.S. EPA program in which
the State cooperates. Water supplies in the program are inspected
annually with inspection reports including water quality records
forwarded to EPA for interstate carrier classification. EPA
accompanies District Office personnel on triannual inspections.
Assistance provided to the Water and Wastewater Operators
Certification Board consists of aid in the development and conduct
of operator certification examinations. The Operator Training
Committee of Ohio is aided by participation in planning meetings
and the development of specialized curricula in subjects such as
cross connection control.
Plans Review Section
Ohio law requires Department of Health approval of plans for the
installation or alteration of any public water supply. The Department of
Health has required that plans be submitted on intake, reservoir, trans-
mission main, treatment plant, and distribution main (generally limited
to greater than eight inches in diameter) construction or alteration.
From 200 to 300 plans are reviewed each year (see Tables 8 arid 9)«
Complete processing of these plans usually takes from two to four weeks.
^ With only one man year applied to this activity, detailed review for
all plans is not possible. Approval of plans is based on the criteria
of reasonableness. If the implementation of the plans can be expected
to provide a reasonable solution to the problem, the plans are approved.
No attempt is made to assure that a "best" plan is approved, since such
a plan would vary depending on engineering opinion and funds available
83
-------
Table 8
Summary Plan Approvals 1971
Date
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Plans
30
7
22
8
20
12
27
32
32
29
33
26
Estimated Cost of Projects
$2,706,200
2,160,000
6,115,550
98,500
3,^95,300
7,if88,500
^, 936, ooo
2,389,300
1,220,770
l*, CM .325
2,850,280
1,718,703
Totals
2?8
$39,220,^28
-------
Table 9
Number of Plans Approved
I
I
I
• Date Plans Estimated Cost of Projects
1961 191 $25,^+22,000
• 1962 177 26,210,000
1963 19^ 17,722,000
I 196^ 2^0 32,189,000
— 1965 216 27,122,000
™ 1966 227 31,7^3,800
• 1967 258 66,065,500
1968 236 37,781,507
I 1969 257 5^,958,750
_ 1970 235 50,787,390
• 1971 278 39,220,^28
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
for the project. Although satisfactory performance is expected where
approved plans are followed, such performance cannot be guaranteed due
to lack of manpower to check detail and follow up on plan implementation.
No action is taken to check new installations or improvements for con-
formance to approved plans.
The "Recommended Standards for Water Works - Great Lakes-Upper
Mississippi River Board of State Sanitary Engineers" is used as a guide
in plans approval with a few revisions. A "Report on Waste Sludge and
Filter Washwater Disposal from Water Softening Plants" is used in the
review of plans for lime softening waste disposal from water treatment
plants.
The Water Supply Unit does not presently have the manpower to
influence water supply planning at the local or State level. Although
some input on the existing situation with regard to water supply is
provided to State planning, river basin planning, and comprehensive
health planning, very little feedback on regional or local plans or
trends is received. Little effort is being expended to tie plans
review and approval to future needs and river basin and comprehensive
health planning.
Water Quality Section
The Water Quality Section is responsible for obtaining water
quality data on all public water supplies, investigating analysis re-
sults exceeding the PHS Drinking Water Standards, and developing programs
for the efficient storage and retrieval of water quality data.
-------
I
I A series of reports and procedural memoranda on water quality data
needs and collection have established the direction for Department policy
I on this phase of public water supply surveillance. These reports and
• procedures have been prepared in close collaboration with the Department
of Health, Bureau of Public Health Laboratories which provides physical,
• radiological, bacterial, and chemical water quality analysis support
to the Division of Engineering. As of October 1970, analysis for heavy
| metals began for public water supplies, due to reports of mercury and
other heavy metals in certain source waters.
A paper written by the Section, "Hazardous Substances in Drinking
Water" (Appendix B-2), briefly brings out the need for drinking water
quality surveillance.
In December of 1970 the Water Supply Unit "Report on the Need for
Expanded Laboratory Services in the Chemical Analyses of Drinking
Water" (Appendix B-3) spelled out in detail the sampling and analysis
programs required for drinking water quality surveillance. Three
sampling programs were described; samples taken during inspections,
samples submitted by purveyors for routine monitoring and special
samples for fluoride monitoring, new source analysis, sand analyses
and special studies. The December 1970 report noted that routine
analysis was being run for 15 of the PHS 19&2 Drinking Water Standards.
Of the eight standards not being run routinely; four, odor, cyanide,
MBAS , and phenols, were listed as obtainable upon special request.
The four remaining, arsenic, barium, carbon chloroform extract, and
selenium were apparently not within the laboratory capability for
87
-------
analysis at that time. The report itemized immediate needs, which in-
cluded routine analysis of arsenic, barium, phenols, selenium, cyanides,
and organics (carbon chloroform extract). Also defined as immediate
needs were pesticides and mercury analyses. Barium was added to the
routine analysis list in July of 1971- Arsenic and selenium are expected
to be added by July 1972. The report and its implementation in the past
year demonstrate a strong grasp of the chemical analysis needs for
community water supply on the part of the Division of Engineering and
good responsiveness on the part of the Bureau of Public Health Lab-
oratories in meeting these needs.
Laboratory Support
The Bureau of Public Health Laboratories of the Department of Health
provides water quality analysis support to the Division of Engineering.
This support includes physical, radiological, bacteriological, and chemical
analyses of drinking water samples.
Sanitary Chemistry Laboratory
The Sanitary Chemistry Laboratory was visited on February 1^
and 15, 1972, for the purpose of evaluation by U.S. EPA personnel.
The evaluation report (Appendix B-7) found that the laboratory space
is adequate and personnel are well qualified. The chemical analyses
performed by the Division of Laboratories is quite comprehensive
and includes many parameters not listed in the PHS Drinking Water
Standards, The Industrial Chemistry Laboratory (not a part of the
Sanitary Chemistry Laboratory) is responsible for radiochemistry
analysis and pesticide analysis (no pesticide analysis on drinking
-------
I
I water was done in 1971, however).
The Sanitary Chemistry Laboratory in 1971 routinely determined
• color, turbidity, chlorides, fluorides, nitrates, sulfates, total
• dissolved solids, barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead,
manganese, silver, and zinc as required by the PHS Drinking Water
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Standards. In addition, calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium,
aluminum, beryllium, hardness, pH, and alkalinity (total phenolphthalein
and CaCO ) were routinely determined, even though these are not re-
quired by the Standards. Odor, cyanide, carbon chloroform extract,
surfactants, arsenic, selenium, phenols, gross beta, radium 226, or
strontium 90 were not done. In summary, of 29 determinations rou-
tinely run, standards for 16 are specified by the Drinking Water
Standards. Ten standards specified by the DWS were seldom done in
1971. Turbidity is the only substance being determined at present by
a non-standard method. The analysis of 21 additional parameters,
including most of the DWS omitted in 1971? has been requested by the
Water Supply Unit.
The Sanitary Chemistry Laboratory has the equipment for mercury
analysis and is purchasing equipment for the analysis of arsenic and
selenium by atomic absorption. An auto-analyzer which will enable
the determination of cyanide and surfactants is also on order.
Equipment for the determination of the carbon chloroform extract is
not available, but it was recommended by the U.S. EPA survey officer
that procurement of this equipment be delayed until the new mini-
sampler being developed by the U.S. EPA becomes available. It
was recommended a Hach Model 2100 turbidimeter be obtained.
89
-------
The Industrial Chemistry Laboratory has the equipment to do gross
beta, radium 226, strontium 90, and pesticides, but has no present
plans for its use in the analysis of potable waters.
According to laboratory records, 2,61^ samples were analysed
during 1971 (each for about 29 substances) for the Water Supply
Unit. No printout of the data by sample location or water supply
was available, although data had been keypunched. There were 911
samples analysed for fluorides in 1971. This represents the monthly
fluoride analysis check on the 78 fluoridating public water supplies.
The water chemistry staff consists of a chief chemist who
devotes about one half of his time to problems concerned with potable
water analysis, two assistant chemists with degrees, and one technician.
The equipment is available, or will be shortly, so that all of the
chemistries specified by the Drinking Water Standards, except carbon
chloroform extraction, could be carried out. Additional personnel
are needed to carry out the required chemistries necessary to define
water quality as specified by the December 1970 Water Supply Unit
report. These chemistries include pesticides and should also in-
clude radiochemical analysis.
Water Bacteriology Laboratory
The Water Bacteriology Laboratory provides bacterial analysis
services to local health departments (private water supply), the
Water Supply Unit (community water supply), and, in the summer, the
Department of Natural Resources (recreational waters at State
Parks).
90
-------
I
• Work is done in the central (Columbus) laboratory and three
branch laboratories. The central staff consists of a Bacteriologist III,
• a Bacteriologist II, a Bacteriologist I, and supporting personnel
• for media and glassware preparation. The branch laboratories are
staffed by one or two bacteriologists and supporting personnel.
I Two bacteriologists from the central laboratory have been
certified by the U.S. EPA as laboratory survey officers. These
• bacteriologists inspect 165 water plant bacteriological laboratories
• every three years. Reports on water plant bacteriological lab-
oratories serving interstate carrier water supplies are provided
• to the U.S. EPA.
The average monthly work load for 1971 was 5^150 samples.
•
I
I
I
Thirty percent, or about 1,5^5 samples per month, were from community
• water supplies. Under Water Supply Unit policy all ground water
supplies serving fewer than 10,000 people may have the necessary
I distribution samples done by the Water Bacteriology Laboratory.
All surface water supplies and ground water supplies serving more
I than 10,000 people are expected to provide approved laboratory
• facilities or to contract with an approved laboratory for bacter-
iological laboratories were approved. Sixty-two water supplies
• need to provide approved facilities or contract to have bacterial
examinations done. Twenty-eight of these are surface supplies
I serving fewer than 1,000 people.
• The policy for laboratory service does not define service to
be provided to master-metered water supplies. Presumably such
91
-------
supplies should be treated as ground water supplies. Of 92 master-
metered water supplies, 72 serve populations of fewerthan 10,000,
and 70 of the 72 do not have laboratory facilities. Of the 20
serving more than 10,000 people, only two provide approved laboratory
facilities.
Until the water supplies not having laboratory facilities or
contracting services obtain such facilities or services, the State
laboratory should continue to provide the service.
The total monthly work load, if State requirements are met,
would be:
Ground Water Serving 10,000 (514 supplies)
Distribution Samples 1370
Source Samples (100 subject to contamination,
klk not subject)
Plant Samples
Supplies not having lab facilities (62 supplies)
Distribution Samples 325
Source Samples (4/month per supply) 2^8
Plant Samples (k/month per supply) 2^8
Secondary Supplies (92)
Distribution Samples (estimated) 250
The total monthly work load is about 3,600 samples per month,
over double that presently done. Attainment of this work load, of
course, depends upon motivation of the operators to collect and
mail the required samples. A portion of this work load can be
expected to be dropped as more surface water supplies and ground
92
-------
water and secondary supplies serving over 10,000 people contract
for, or provide, laboratory services. The laboratory work load,
with maximum expected compliance with State requirements, is about
3,000 samples per month, almost double the present work load.
Laboratory certification or approval needs will exceed 200
water supply laboratories if State requirements are met for those
supplies serving more than 1,000 people.
District Operations
The District Offices of the Division of Engineering are responsible
for the inspection and surveillance of public water supplies in Ohio.
Semi-public water supply surveillance and inspection is primarily done
by the Division of Sanitation District Offices, with assistance from
the Division of Engineering District personnel and local health departments.
During the weeks of January 10 and January 175 1972, the District
Offices were visited by U.S. EPA personnel for the purpose of obtaining
information on the status of water supply surveillance and on surveillance
operations and procedures. These visits consisted of two days spent in
discussion and review of records and one day in the field observing
typical inspection procedures. The following comments on District Office
operation are limited to the Division of Engineering.
The District Office staff is directly under the supervision of
the Principal District Engineer, who reports directly to the Chief
Engineer, Division of Engineering, in the central office. The Water
Supply Unit staff reports directly to the Chief Engineer. Official
liaison between the Water Supply Unit and the District staffs is
indirect, through the Chief Engineer.
93
-------
Northwest District - Bowling Green
There were 2?2 community water supplies in this District as of January
1972. The Northwest District has 13 engineers assigned to the Division of
Engineering's operational responsibilities. The organization chart in
Figure 19 shows the major elements to which these personnel are assigned.
The Principal District Engineer, the engineer assigned to large municipal
treatment plants, and the five engineers assigned to general engineering
all work part time on community water supply. The engineer assigned large
municipal treatment plants is responsible for activities dealing with all
water and sewage plants in the District which treat greater than one million
gallons per day. He spent six percent of his time, or 13 man days, on
community water supply in 1971. The engineers assigned to general engineering
are responsible for from three to seven counties in the District. For
these areas they must provide surveillance over community water supply and
sewage treatment systems (under one million gallons per day), develop in-
formation for enforcement hearings, review plans for semi-public water
supply and sewage treatment systems, inspect semi-public sewage treatment
systems, review swimming pool and solid waste disposal plans, assist
stream water quality surveillance, and provide trailer park plans review
and site inspections. In 1971 the time spent on community water supply by
these men varied from three to ten percent, or an average of 11 man days
each. The Principal District Engineer provides program direction and
assists the engineers in general engineering. In 1971 the Principal Dis-
trict Engineer spent 12 percent of his time, or 26 man days, on community
water supply. Table 10 shows the time spent by month on community water
-------
Table 10
Northwest District Office
Percent of Time Spent on Water Supply
1971
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Principal 6
Engineer
1 MGD or 5
more Supplies
General 5
Engineering
Under 1 MGD
k 5 8 k 6 6 1^f 30 9 10 if1
500331 3327 31
5^7 ^3 10 ^936 12
Assume 222 working days per year per man
Over-all: Principal Engineer 12$, Supplies of 1 MGD or
more 6$, General Engineering 5$-
-------
— LLJ UJ
co
£: in CM
o>
cfl
cti
•-3
CO
oo
09
OJ)
toO
._ «o
.sf s: »ii
= *- « -
v = J* o>
^ 0> ^ 0>
« E ,01 •-
08 *± °* 00
^- ? . =
96
-------
supply. In 1971 total time spent on community water supply surveillance
was less than 0.5 man years.
Southwest District - Dayton
There were 182 community water supplies in this District as of Jan-
uary 1972. The Southwest District has ten engineers assigned to the
Division of Engineering's operational responsibilities. The organization
chart in Figure 20 shows the major elements to which these personnel are
assigned.
The engineers in general engineering do semi-public plans review in-
cluding water supply and sewerage plans, sewage treatment plant surveillance,
solid waste plan review, inspection of semi-public sewage treatment plants
treating over 25,000 gallons per day, trailer park plans review and site
inspection, and assist with stream surveillance. A limited amount of
community water supply plans review is done. One engineer is assigned to
community water supply work and also does swimming pool plan review.
Community water supply work done in 1971 included Principal Engineer - 0.1
man year, General Engineering - 0.1 man year, and Water Supply - 0.7 man
year. Water supplies having distribution systems arid treatment plants
which serve State parks are also inspected by the water supply engineer.
In 1971 total time expended on community water supply surveillance was
0.9 man year.
Northeast District - Cuyahoga Falls
The Northeast District of the Ohio Department of Health had 253
community water supplies as of January 1972, of which 1^8 are municipal
supplies. The total number of man days spent on water supplies in 1971
97
-------
«o J_
2
CM
p~
01
Q. °»
~ O>
-------
was about 125) or about 0.5 man year. This was divided between a con-
sultant (589 roan hours) and regular staff (^-15 man hours divided among
six men). The average total man hours for a municipal inspection in
1971 was 7.85 hours, including the visit, reports, correspondence, and
follow-up visits.
In 1972 the projected work load will be 600 hours assigned to the
consultant and 2800 hours assigned to the staff, based on 1.5 full
time personnel assigned only to community water supply.
Southeast District - Nelsonville
There were 216 community water supplies in the Southeast District as
of January 1972. During 1971 > 236 visits were made. This represents
at least one visit per water supply. Field visits last a minimum of
one hour for the smallest supplies to a maximum of one day for the
larger supplies. The average time spent at any one supply was reported
to be two hours.
In visiting water supplies, writing reports, and reviewing bacter-
iological and chemical data, approximately one man year (2080 man hours)
was expended. This represents one engineer technician assigned 90 percent
of the. time to community water supply and ten percent of the Principal
District Engineer's time spent to support and direct the community water
supply program. In 1972 the engineer technician will be assigned full
time to community water supply work.
Procedures and Practices
Inspections
Pre-inspection work normally consists of reviewing information
available in the District files on the water supply to be inspected.
-------
Such information includes the monthly report record, the bacteriological
report record, past inspection reports, chemical analyses data, and
any other correspondence on the supply.
U.S. EPA personnel accompanied four State inspectors on ten
inspections to observe inspection practices. The operators are
not normally contacted prior to the inspection visit. The
thoroughness of inspection from District to District and inspector
to inspector varied considerably. In two Districts no written pro-
cedures are provided. Two Districts provided the engineers with
different inspection procedures, The inspector neither used the
procedure nor was familiar with the procedure. During each inspection
the inspector discussed the operator's problems with him, advice
was often offered but not assistance, the facility was toured with
visits to at least one source and the treatment plant, and chemical
samples were taken. Some inspectors completed the inspection
report form in the presence of the operator and took a bacterial
sample and chlorine residual analysis on the distribution system.
Others did neither.
Time spent on individual inspections ranged from one to four
hours, with an average of two hours in three Districts, and
ranged from two to eight hours, with an average of four hours in
one District. Office time per inspection averages about three hours.
Although comprehensive detailed surveys every five years of
each supply are requested by the Water Supply Unit, none are done
by the District Offices.
100
-------
Inspection Training
Training of new personnel in inspection procedures and practices
is quite limited. Training normally consists of having the new man
accompany an experienced man for two or three days of inspections
(four to ten water supplies inspected). In two Districts written
procedures (both different) are given to each new engineer on how
to conduct an inspection. The new man is then allowed to do small
supplies and gradually does larger ones as his experience increases.
The written procedures, although good, are not emphasized and
engineers with several years' experience are not familiar with the
procedures and do not use them. Some individuals have taken courses
in Cincinnati related to water supply, but not specific to water
supply evaluation. Orientation courses or seminars given in
Columbus are also not specific to water supply evaluation.
Water Supply Surveillance Records
Each District maintains monthly operational report records,
bacterial test result records, and a correspondence file on each
water supply. Record keeping methods varied from District to
District. The methods are summarized below.
Before the fifteenth of each month, the operator is required
to forward the previous month's Monthly Report of Operation to
the appropriate District Office. If the treatment plant is classified
as a purification or water softening plant, the operator must attach
appropriate Chemical Use Reports. If bacteriological analyses are
done by laboratories other than those operated by the State, a
101
-------
Report on the Bacteriological Examiniation of Water for the
previous month must also be attached. These records are given a
cursory review by the responsible District engineer, are recorded
as having been reviewed, and are forwarded to the Water Supply
Unit. No monthly summaries are kept. One of the Districts did
not record the receipt of Chemical Use or Bacteriological Exam-
ination Reports. One District used the symbols M, C, B to
designate the receipt of monthly, chemical, or bacteriological
reports. One District recorded the date of receipt of the reports.
At least one year's monthly operational and chemical use reports
should be given a detailed review with a "key" record established
for each supply. After the "key" record is established, discrepancies
or operational changes should be easily detected by a quick com-
parison of the "key" record to the monthly report being reviewed.
At the end of each year the Water Supply Unit should provide to
the District Offices an annual summary of the monthly operational
and chemical use reports on each supply submitting such reports.
A copy of this summary should be provided to the water supply
operator by the District Office.
Bacterial records are maintained primarily for those samples
collected by the water system operator and analysed by the State
laboratories. Incomplete monthly summaries of sample results
from other laboratories are maintained by two Districts. The
other two Districts keep no records of sample results from
other laboratories. In a number of cases a complete year's record
102
-------
I
• of bacterial analyses could not be found because records had been
destroyed after the last inspection was made. At least one year's
bacterial record should be maintained on every supply. Sufficient
. data from the monthly Report on the Bacteriological Examination
of Water and the State laboratory results should be recorded to
• determine compliance or non-compliance with the Drinking Water
Standards. Review of the records indicated that many of the
I samples counted as total distribution samples are taken at the
_ treatment plant or well. Extra samples following bad samples
™ were not designated as repeat samples on the bacterial records.
Ij Repeat sample procedures for those supplies not using State lab-
oratories for bacterial sample analysis are not checked by the
I Districts. Sample procedures and sampling sites are not checked
by the Districts unless repeated bad samples are reported by the
• State laboratory. Bacterial data reported by the State laboratories
• to the Districts are handled by notifying water supply operators
of bad samples by telephone arid requesting repeat samples. If
• repeat samples are bad, the District engineer initiates an in-
vestigation to determine the cause of the bad samples and assure
• elimination of any hazardous conditions. This is usually done
• by recommending increased chlorination. The recording of chlorine
residuals at bacterial sampling points is recommended but is
• practiced by few supplies. No record of this practice is maintained
by the District Offices.
I
I
I
I
103
-------
Master-Metered Water Supplies
Master-metered supplies are those distribution systems which
purchase water wholesale from another community water supply.
Department of Health policy requires that these supplies submit
monthly reports and be inspected. Records of distribution system
chlorine residuals for such supplies are strongly recommended by
the Department of Health. These policies are largely ignored by
the District Offices. Few master-metered supplies submit monthly
reports and few are visited by District Office personnel in three
of the four Districts.
Plans Review
Some Districts take part in community water supply plans review,
while others consider such plans review to be entirely a Water
Supply Unit reponsibility. Copies of the summary of plan
specifications and the Water Supply Unit action on plans approval
are provided to the District Offices for inclusion in the water
supply's correspondence file. No specific checks on the progress
of approved plan implementation by the water supply is made by
the District Offices. Notes of changes in facilities are made,
however, in the annual inspection reports.
Certification of Operators
Prior to each inspection, the District engineer determines
whether the operator is certified. If he is not, the owner of the
supply is urged by letter to send the operator to operator training
school or to obtain a certified operator or a technical supervisor.
-------
I
I The District engineers do not carry pertinent, up-to-date in-
formation on operator training courses for distribution to the
| operators. The operator is, however, urged to obtain certification
M and is provided with general information on the Operator Training
Committee of Ohio, Inc. training courses.
• Cross Connection Control
Very little is done during District inspections with regard to
| cross connection control. The subject is sometimes discussed with
_ treatment plant operators, but plumbing and building inspectors are
* seldom contacted. District engineers need orientation on the
I subject of cross connection control program needs and implementation
methods.
I Chemical Results
_ Chemical sample analyses from the State laboratory are not
™ received, in most cases, until four to six weeks after the inspection
I (samples are collected during the inspections). These results are
included in the water supply inspection report with attention
I called to any constituents exceeding the PHS Drinking Water Standards.
The inspection report is, therefore, seldom timely and does not
* demonstrate a concerned reaction to the inspection's findings. One
• District sent inspection reports shortly after the inspections and
followed up when the chemical analyses were received from the laboratory.
I Water Supply Inventory
Water supply inventories are provided from Water Supply Unit
I
I
file data and are not checked during inspections by the District
105
-------
engineers. District engineers were not familiar with the inventory
completed within the last year and did not use it or refer to it.
The inventory cannot, therefore, be kept current by the Water
Supply Unit.
Fluoridation
The Districts have spent little effort on obtaining compliance
with the mandatory fluoridation law and are not familiar with the
status of water supply fluoridation in their jursidiction. Lacking
direction from the Water Supply Unit or the Chief Engineer's
Office, it has been assumed that no specific effort should be
taken and that compliance efforts will come from the Water Supply Unit,
106
-------
I
• Division of Sanitation
Responsibilities for semi-public water supply surveillance within
|
•
•
•
I
•
I
•
_
*
I
I
I
the Division of Sanitation are administered through the organizational
structure shown by Figure 21. Direct supervision of operation and
maintenance of semi-public water supplies is administered by the
boards of health for general and city health districts. Exceptions
are migrant labor camps, State parks and recreation areas, and highway
rest areas. Figure 22 summarizes the status of regulations for the
various areas included in Division of Sanitation activities. Except
for the case of public buildings, the State regulations refer to all
aspects of good sanitation.
As interpreted by the Water Supply Section, U.S. EPA, semi-public
water supply does not include those waters used for food processing or
milk processing. Included in the U.S. EPA interpretation are restaurant,
travel trailer port, State park and recreation area, camp, resort area,
highway rest area, trailer park, school, migrant labor camp, temporary
mass gathering, and institutional independent water supplies. Semi-
public water supplies not specifically included in Division of Sanitation
activities are those serving motels, service stations, industries, and
_
non-State hospitals. Where such public places have food service facilities,
the water supplies would be inspected under the food service program.
There are about 630 migrant labor camps in Ohio. Most are located
in the Northwest District and have semi-public water supplies. The
Division of Sanitation conducts sanitation inspections of these camps
on an annual basis. Eeinspections are made where appreciable improvements
107
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
o
•H
4J
to
CD
a
•H
H
cO S
0 to
ffi h S
M O
S3
•H
O 0
O CO
CD
O
•H
Ti >
O PH
O CD
PH co
X Nl
X CNl
SH N
X N
!=H CNl
X X
X X
p
i — 1
cO
tD
^ cO
Q o
Z;
0
H
EH
1
S
p
1
O
,_q
0
CO
CO
IS CO
43 -P tO
hO CO 0
•H 0 PH
M K <«;
O • 4J
0 S3 to
ft CO -H
W W Q
-p
PH CO
O CO
CO CD
tD PH
W <
K
p
E
CO
o
bfl
S3
•H to
43 CO
-P CD
CO PH
CQ <
bO
•H
n ^
•H 0
3 0
CO P<
(Q 1
J*! cO to
SH CD CO
CO SH 0
P4 O t.
0 <;
0 PH
-P S3
CO 13 O
-P S3 -H
W CO -P
rH 0
0 H CQ
> -H -p
cO tO M
P-i ^ O
EH EH OH
S3
0
•H
-P
O
0
H
rH
0
O
f — 1
cO
to
o
p
CQ
•H
Q
tNl
CNl 1
X CN]
r"< X
r*4 X
rH X
>H X
tNl tNl
tNl
>H tNl
!>H tNl
X X
-p
1 — (
tO
M
W rH
• cO
Q o
EH
S
rj
«
W
o
^
S
l_^
^j
ryi
!=H
plj
^
tD
O
W
S3
•H
CO
O
K
a
o
•H
0 -P
CQ CO
•H -P
G -H
0 S3
fn CO
PH CO
08
-P -P O
O S3 SH
tD 0 -P
CO ^ S3
S3 O O
H K 0
1
rH -H tQ
cO -p 0
•H CO T3
-P 0 -H
S3 PH 0
0
•H
CO S3
0 O
P^ SH 'H
0 P
-P CO
to -p
tO -H
CO S3
•H tO
Q co
1 •
3 S3
-P r-H O
•H CO SH
-P S3 -H
CQ 0 >
53 -H a
H -P W
CQ
CO hi
(0 S3
CO -H
O 0
E fi -P
tD CD CO
EH !H C3
-p
CO (H tQ
SH C P
EiO 43 g
•H tC CD
S l-H1 0
to
O
0
CQ 43
0 O
O CO
cO
rH
^j
^
O 0
r) H CQ
43 Ct '!H
3 S- CO
PJ fc-i PH
!>H CN)
>-i tS3
!>< CS1
J>H [S3
>H tNl
>H tSl
>H tNl
^
O
S3
0
M
CO
0
K*H X -P
a to
O -P
•H CO
-P
tO S3 !H
rH O0
3 -H 43
bfl -P -P
CD tO O
>H X is H S3
\ 3 10
# M
tO 0 43
H 0 !H -P
0 -H
0 -H rH IS
-P > CO
CO PH CJ -P
-P 0 O S3
>H X CO 10 rH 0
E
f»j 0 f-i 0
43 > O 0
•H PH
r^J "P ^3 bO
PH CO SH CO
43 O -P CO
-P -P rH -P H
H CO 3 S3 tO
CO T3 10 S 3
0 S3 S3 H P
K CO o O 2
S 0 > S
• CO II II M II
CH o
• O X ^ IN! CNl
O I-3 tN]
109
-------
have been required. Inspection procedures require checks of the water
supply source location and development and one bacterial sample annually.
Records of bacterial results and descriptions of the water supplies
are kept on standard forms maintained in local board of health files.
There are over 5100 public and private high and grade schools in
Ohio. A small proportion of these schools have semi-public water supplies.
Local boards of health are required by State law to make semiannual
sanitation inspections of all such schools. Water supply guidelines as
defined by "Sanitation in the School Environment" and "Guideline for the
Evaluation of School Programs" are satisfactory where administered by
well trained, conscientious personnel. The guidelines do not define
satisfactory water quality. Only annual bacterial samples are required.
The Division of Sanitation has a policy of evaluating local school
sanitation programs triannually. In the past three years fewer than 70
of the 161 programs have been evaluated. The evaluations are quite
detailed and include State inspection of a large number of the schools
under the local board's jurisdiction.
There are about 1,^00 trailer parks in Ohio. A large proportion
of these, trailer parks have semi-public water supplies. Local boards
of health are required by State law to make inspections of trailer parks.
Water supply guidelines as defined by "Trailer Park Program Sanitation
Review Guideline" are satisfactory where administered by well trained,
conscientious personnel. The guidelines do not define satisfactory
water quality. Only annual bacterial samples are required. The Division
of Sanitation has a policy of evaluating local trailer park sanitation
110
-------
programs triannually. In the past three years, less than one-half
of the 161 programs have been evaluated. The evaluations are quite
detailed and include State inspections of a large number of the trailer
parks under the local boards' jurisdiction.
There are over 5^ resident and family camps and 41 State parks
in Ohio. In addition, there are over 100 recreation areas administered
by Federal agencies, conservancy districts, the State Division of
Wildlife and the Ohio Historical Society. Over 300 highway rest areas
are maintained by the State Highway Department. A large proportion of
these facilities have semi-public water supplies. State law requires
inspection of resident and family camps and resorts by local boards
of health. State parks and conservancy district recreation areas are
inspected by the Division of Sanitation annually. Federal recreation
areas are not inspected by State or local agencies. The State Highway
Department is provided with a special training program conducted by
the Division of Sanitation for the rest area operators. Water supply
guidelines as defined by "Camp Program Sanitation Review Guideline,"
"Camp Regulations Guide for Resident Camps" and "Camp Regulations
Guide for Family Camps" are satisfactory where administered by well
trained, conscientious personnel. Camp guidelines require at least
annual inspections and two bacterial samples per year. A more frequent
sampling schedule is required of State parks and conservancy districts.
The guidelines do not define satisfactory quality. The Division of
Sanitation has a policy of evaluating the local camp sanitation programs
triannually. Many of these programs have not been evaluated in the
past three years.
111
-------
The food service sanitation program includes inspection of the small
proportion of the State's restaurants served by serai-public water supplies.
Guidelines as defined by "Food Service Operation - Law, Regulations,
and Interpretive Guide" for the evaluation of water supply are inadequate.
Location, construction, and quality standards of the Ohio Department of
Health are referenced but no such standards have been established. Under
Plan Review, Section 3701.18 of the State law, however, plans for water
supplies serving food service operations must be approved by the Division
of Engineering. The guides do not define satisfactory water quality
or sampling requirements. Division of Sanitation policy, however,
requires at least annual bacterial sampling with more frequent sampling
where problems may be encountered. Under the State law local boards
of health must conduct annual inspections of food service operations.
These local inspection programs must be approved by the Division of
Sanitation. The law requires the Division of Sanitation (actually
the Director of Health) to survey periodically all local board of health
food service sanitation programs. Such surveys are conducted annually
with a statistically significant sample of the establishments under
local board of health jurisdiction subjected to State inspection. Approval
of the local inspection programs in partially dependent upon adherence
to the Division's policy on bacterial sampling and adherence to the
Plan Review law.
The Division of Sanitation places emphasis on training for local
board of health personnel. This training includes special seminars
and workshops of up to a week's duration, a 16 week "Basic Sanitarian
112
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Training" program, and a four week "Principles of Environmental Health"
course offered three times a. year. The training provided applicable to
serai-public water supply inspection was not evaluated for this study.
Recent increases in funding and staffing for the Division of
Sanitation may provide the program activity necessary to improve the
frequency of local camp, trailer park, and school sanitation program
evaluations. Methods for evaluation of State and local programs are
being considered utilizing statistical techniques which are well
conceived and innovative.
In summary, data to determine the adequacy of semi-public water
supply activities administered by the Division of Sanitation is not
available in the Division's records. Certain types of facilities
using semi-public water supplies are not included under State regulations
or the Division's activities. The Division's program of evaluation of
local camp, school and trailer park sanitation programs appears to be
well conceived but poorly implemented in the recent past. Recent
increases in program staff may change this record. Training efforts
are emphasized by the Division. Water supply evaluation guidelines
are satisfactory with the exception of those specified for food service
inspections. Water quality sampling requirements, except those pro-
posed for State parks, are very weak and the definition of satisfactory
quality is wholly inadequate.
113
-------
Department of Natural Resources Water Supply Activities
The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (DNE) is responsible for
the conservation, development, and use of Ohio's natural resources.
With regard to water resources and drinking water use, DNR develops
data on the quantity and quality of ground and surface waters, develops
plans for the protection and future use of these waters, and aids and
guides other agencies in the implementation of these plans.
Figure 23 shows the organization of DNR and those offices which
are concerned with water resources and drinking water use. The Ground
Water Section and the Surface Water Section are responsible for developing
adequate data describing the State's water resources. The Water Planning
Division is responsible for the development of plans describing the
best alternatives for future use and conservation of water resources.
The Water Management Section is responsible for the implementation of
the future use plans.
The Ground Water Section maintains an inventory of over 350,000
well logs with over 15)000 new wells produced each year. These logs
in most cases provide information on the types and depths of material
under the ground surface and can be used to evaluate ground water con-
ditions for most areas of the State. Data is lacking, however, on
ground water quality and production capacity. To obtain such data on
the primary aquifers of the State, the Section either contracts for
ground water evaluations or conducts its own test well and production
well program. About 200 water quality samples are taken each year by
the Section. Analysis is provided on a cost basis by the U.S. Geo-
-------
CO
o>
0> ™ t>0
6f " ™
-~ CJ ^
••— Q3 J2
O>
CJ
o>
-------
logical Survey. Some sample analysis is provided by the Ohio Department
of Health, Division of Laboratories. Problems include lack of complete
reporting on newly drilled wells (it is estimated well logs are received
on 65 percent of the wells drilled), no uniform State-wide regulations
to control drilling practices, no uniform State-wide enforcement of
good well drilling practices, lack of complete water quality data, and
lack of well production capacity data. This Section is presently
staffed by "]k professionals (including eight geologists) and one
secretary. Complete State-wide enforcement of drilling regulations
would require and estimated increase of 16-18 personnel (about $250,000).
The Surface Water Section develops data on surface water hydrology
and quality in cooperation with the Ohio Department of Health and the
U.S. Geological Survey. The Section is also responsible for the location,
evaluation, and inventory of those locations having good potential for
water storage.
The Water Planning Division utilizes data from the Ground Water
Section and the Surface Water Section to define raw water availability.
Other data is used to obtain estimates of demands for present and
future use. From these data raw water needs are defined and solutions
to meet these needs are derived and evaluated. The best solutions are
incorporated into regional plans (the State is divided into five regions)
for implementation. The development of regional plans is contracted to
private consultants. A staff of five personnel is responsible for
monitoring these contracts and obtaining public support for the solutions
incorporated in the regional plan. Contact with the public is
116
-------
established prior to plan development so that public input to the
various solutions derived is obtained.
The Water Planning Division also provides State input to inter-
state agency planning (such as the Great Lakes Basin Framework Study)
and Federal water resources development projects (Soil Conservation
Service, Corps of Engineers, Farmers Home Administration and Housing
and Urban Development sponsored or aided projects).
The Water Management Section aids local agencies in developing
projects to implement the best solutions defined by Regional Plans and
to meet pressing needs in water management. In the area of drinking
water supply sources, the Water Management Section is responsible for
the management of State owned reservoirs and is the State's contracting
agent for Corps of Engineers water resources development. Local
agencies are directly assisted in finding solutions to pressing water
supply needs. At the present time, assistance is being provided to
communities using untreated surface waters to develop complete treatment
facilities.
117
-------
I
• Appendix A
Operations Records
I
1. Monthly Report of Operation 119
126
2. Monthly Chemical Use Reports
• 3- Monthly Bacteriological Examination Reports
k. Water Supply Works Data Sheet
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 118
I
-------
MONTHLY REPORT OF OPERATION
TO THE OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Appendix A
NAME OF WATER SUPPLY WORKS.
Moiling Address
During this month hes the source ef supply, pumping
treatment, storage and distribution facilities been
adequate to meet the demand without curtailment of weter
use or abnormally lew system pressure.
(if no, explein under comments) fYes er Ne)
During this month have there been justifiable complaints
on the physical, chemical or biological quality of water
in the distribution system
(If yes, explein under comments) (Yes er Ne)
Are wells, water mains, storage facilities and other
equipment disinfected efter each installment, rapair or
other medificetien which may heve introduced contamination, ff,, >r N,)
(If ne, explein under comments)
Type of Treatment Chemicals Used
Bacteriological Approval
(Name)
Average Collform Density of Distribution
If unsafe samples are reported, have repeat samples
been collected from the seme location until ot least
tw« consecutive samples shew the water to be of
satisfactory quality. (Yes or No)
Comments:
Identification Cede ° _^_
6-> I I I I ' V
Report of Operations for the Month 1 1 1 \t | 1
••TW^ vTLf
10-16 I ^^
17-22 J
Total Number ef Weter Services __ ___ .
23-29
Total Output for Month (MG) « _ m
30-35
Av^reg* Deily Output (MGD) A
Maximum Deily Output (MGD) , s)
42 -*7
Estimated Works Cepecity (MGD) -. - - •
W-50
Percent ef Weter from Surface Sources
51-53
Percent of Weter from Ground Sources
Percent ef Water from Other Water Works
57-59
Average Chlorine Dosage (mg/j_) Pro _
60-61
Average Chlorine Dosage (mg/|_) Intermediete
1
.
.
62-63 I I
Average Chlorine Dosaga (mf/|_) Post I ' •
6^-65
Minimum Residual Chlorine at Free
Entrance to Distribution System
68-69
Minimum Residual Chlorine ot Froe
Extremities of Distribution System
72 -7*
Number of Distribution System Samples
Collected During Month for Bacterial Test
.1
.c
I \ 9 \
a.d
75-76
No. of Samples Reported Unsafe
I
Persons in Responsible Charge
Name Certificate No.
T.tU
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
495S.10 12/tS (10M 1/61)
119
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
•JAMES A. RHODES, Governor
EMMETT W. ARNOLO. M.D.
Director of Health
. 450 Easl Town Street
P.O. Box 118
Columbus. Ohio 43216
S, , f ^>'- *
-j-fit^. c~\\ i- ^''*;
i.C'lwv^ Oi -<_x z.j-f.
l-Y>'.:>~--\ L-."
V^"4"^'y
Appendix A I
1
PUBLIC HEALTH COUNCTL
David K. Ross, M.D.. M.P.H
Chairman
Mr. Von Ft. KlerunRer
Vice Chairman
Richard V. Erunner, D.D.S.
J. Howard Holrr.es. M.n.
Ralph K. Ramsaycr. M.D.
J. F. Mear. Ph.G.
Phillip T. Knies. M.D.
To: Personnel Responsible for Submitting Monthly Reports of Operation or Public
Water Supplies in the State of Ohio
From: Division of Engineering, Water Supply Unit
Subject: Monthly Reports on Foriu No. A955«10
Because of the value of and i/iany uses for the data in this Monthly Report
of Operation, the form should be filled cut and sent to the appropriate District
Office of the Department within two weeks after the end of the nonth. For example,
the report for, January, based on the water delivered to the distribution system
from January 1 through January 31, should be in the District Office by February 15.
l
Promptness of reporting is emphasized because there is daily reference to these
reports to answer questions from and furnish information to state and federal
agencies, consulting engineering fix\as, suppliers of equipment and chemicals used
in water supply, and to keep us better prepared to vork with you toward the solution
of problems of supply and operation of your o;m public water facilities.
Enclosed is a supply of Report. Form No. 4955.10. Tncre has been a slight
revision so please discard all old forms left on hand. When your supply runs
low a note with your next month's report will bring additional copies. Use ac
many as you like for your own records.
Included is a sample copy with data from a recent report on your supply, or
estimated from data in our files. Due to the nature of Data Processing, we ask your
cooperation in enterir>3 detail or. your reports in a manner similar to that on the
sample copy to avoid error in our Data Processing.
Identific,atipn.Code
The identification code number is necessary on each report.
Report of Qir-ergtiong for^tj^e^orith
The appropriate number for the month is ]"0j lj (Jan.) through J"l}~2'{ (Dec.) for
the month during which the -..-ater v:as pumped to the distribution system, not the
follovring month when the report is bein? written.
Population S
The population is the cost reasonable estir^te of the number of people served
by that distribution systcu.
- 1 -
120
-------
J.
Total Number _ o__,
The number of service connections on that distribution system.
Total Output for npnth _
The number or rrd.13.ion gallons (MG) entering the distribution system during
the month designated in line 2, rounded off to the nearest thousand gallons in
the third decimal of I-i.G.
Average _ Daily, Output. .(MOD)
Total KG for the month divided by the number of days in the month.
Kax3 mum Pa ilv_ Output^ (l-IGD^
The KG served during the day of highest demand.
Estimated Vforks ^Cagac ity Q-'GD )
The most water, in KG, that c&n. be served to that distribution system by
the pumps or treatment plant, if this can be reasonably estimated.
Percent _cvf j/?ter__f ron Surface Sourcss
The percent of all water entering tne distribution system during the month
which came from1 surface sources under your control.
Qt.^f ^Watcr^frpn _Grouno' ._S_ou;rc.q.s
The percent of all water entering the distribution system during the month
which came from ground sources under your control.
Percent of Water from -j
To be used by those supplies which purchase water from another suctjlier.
Those supplies whose entire source is from another supply would enter [ 3] 0| 6]
in this field and zeros .in the previous two lines regardless of whether the prime
supplier uses surface or ground water. Those whose sources are under their
own control should enter zeros in this field,
4
Ayera.g,e_Chlo_rine Dosage, (r.y/l).
From, the percentage of available chlorine in the chemical used, calculate
the amount of chlorine fed during the month, and calculate the average milligrams
per liter dosage by comparing the cnlorir.e used to the gallons of water treated
during the month. Calculate the dosage for each point of application and make
entries in the appropriate lines; Pre, Intermediate, and Post.
Minimum Residual. Chlp.rJ ne^at Entrance ,_to Pi.strib\:tJpr)jjSv^tCT
Fr_e_c
The lovrest chlorine residual, by the "flash" test, in water entering the
distribution system during the. month.
Total
"" The lowest, chlorine residual, by the 5 minute test, in water entering the
distribution system during the month.
- 2 -
121
-------
i.-
i)
Kinjjniim_Residiial .Chlorine._at- F^reir.itie^n^of Distribvtj.on
Free v
The lowest chlorine residual, by the "flash" test, in watsr at the
extremities of the distribution system during the month.
Total
The lowest chlorine residual, by the 5 minute test, in water at the
extremities of the distribution system during the montht
(Record all chlorine data to the nearest tenth of a milligram per liter.
Any chlorine residual of 0.01 to 0.04 millicrarr.s per liter should be recorded as
£o].[Y] which indicates a "Trace" of residual chlorine.
Nuraber^ofDistr ibiit3 on_.System _£rynrj.e_5_. C.o.lle^t_qd _ifr;rj n-r .i'lonth...fog Ba cter.5 al. Test
Record the total number of bacterial samples from the distribution system
collected during tho month desi£A3.tcd in line 2, excluding repeat samples. Every
effort should be made to include samples collected by count;/ or state personnel.
These results should be available to the person submitting the report.
Dumber of JSarmgles..Rero£tecl^Unsa.f e
Enter here the number of the samples reported in above itera which were found
to be unsafe, regardless of who or what agency collected them.
j
Percent, of_.SsTiTglgs_,yngafe_
This item is now calculated by our computers. It is left on the form for
those who wish to calculate the percentage for comparison with requirements outlined
in the United States Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards.
To prevent figures getting recorded in the wron5 field, we do ask that aeros
be entered in spaces ahead of or after significant figures. In any field where
the "information is not known" or "does not apply", please enter a dash ( P- i ) in
each space.
Reports can be signed and submitted by anyon? to whom the o'.mer of the supply
delegates the responsibi3.ity. However, th basic responsibility of the awareness
that these reports are submitted correctly and promptly (by the 15th of the month
following the end of the reporting period) to the Dijst:rj_ct.. 0f_fieg of this Department
rests with the owner of the water systen. The statutory authority for this requirement
is contained in Sections 6111.13 and 611]..14 of the Revised Code of Ohio.
If there are any questions regarding these reports please feel froe to contact
this department at any time, or discuss them with someone from a nearby water supply.
Since it is necessary for this data to be compiled by the State Department
of Health, we thank you for your cooperation in submitting these monthly reports
on the operation of your water supply.
«• 3 •-
122
-------
Appendix A
1
Ohio Department of Health Policy on the Use of Form ^955.10 by
Water Supplies Serving Municipalities, Sewer Districts, or Other
Communities Through Master Meters, and Those Areas Being Served
by Master Meters
So that we can properly interpret where there is duplication of totals
on population served, number of services, gallonages, and distribution
systen s mn.l L.jp; data, it will be necessary for these supplies to furnish
each othjr th-; r.oceso- ry information in those catagories.
We would like ail rtpr. rrs to reach the District Office of the State
Deptirtment of ifealt^ hy the 15th of the following month.
Works ci ppl;yinpj Other Communities Through Master Meters
The main supply uil'L report totals for all areas served by their works
on population served, Timber of services, gallonages (as MG), and sampling
data. They will incl.id d-.itu on all bacterial samples collected in
satellite distribution .sy.' >ITIR which are examined by laboratories other
than their own.
They will supply each m;.et
-------
control, it is strongly recommended that each community maintain their
own program of checking chlorine residuals throughout the area served
by them. Where residuals are being adequately maintained throughout
the distribution system by the dosage applied by the supplier, dosages
by the satellites would be reported as zero. Wherever the satellite
has to use supplemental chlorination, these dosages will be reported
as "post" chlorination.
They will keep the main supplier informed of significant changes in
population served and number of services.
NOTE: To be recorded accurately by the data processing equipment, every
square must have the appropriate number, zero (0), or dash (-). The
dashes in any catagory report that "at present this information is not
available."
-------
U-~
,- -. >v ^T, •' - i
-------
a: ILU
•< , -i'
UJ !,,„
o V'
FE e
t" to 1
°!n! 5 ,<; «
o
o
-s
o
I
O
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
• Appendix A
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
• WATER SUPPLY WORKS DATA SHEET
fAur nr WATFR SUPPLY '
•
Persons Contacted
|
(1
dditiona! Notes on Supply
1
County
, 123456789
, 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20
24 25 26 27 28 29
- — • • ; " " " " " .-- ..
1
1
•
1
•
"
l
•
•
L
4964.10 12/65
1
32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
41 42 43 44 45 46
'47 48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56
57 58 59 60
61 62
P 63 64
65
66
67
68
6 9
Status of Monthly Operating Reports (
lmt.r-uC'me"tsNp'pded '
o „,,.'_ r1
72
73 74 75
Ins -rt.on L
F 76 77 78
-------
Appendix A
4
PHYSICAL WATER SUPPLY DATA SHEET
In filling in the data sheet, the name of the water supply, proper
^
mailing address, and county are to be written on the first three lines. The name
of the person contacted and his title should also be given. Any additional notes,
information or comments should be included to give full evaluation of the works
and supply.
An "0" should be used to indicate "none" or "zero." Spaces not used for
data should be filled in using "0." For example, a water plant having an average
works output of 1,600,000 gallons per day should be recorded as 001.600 m.g.d.,
system storage of 270,000 gallons would be recorded as 00.27 m.g. If data is not
available the spaces should be filled in with a dash.
The first 9 spaces on «-"n data cards are filled in as follows:
Spaces 1 to 5 Are the federal (and state) place identification code.
Spaces 6 and 7 Are the type of case identification which, in this in-
stance, is water supply coded as "01."
f "\
V . Spaces 8 and 9 Are the number of case at this particular location such
as, 01, 02, 03, 04 which would, for example represent the four Cleveland
purification plants.
Spaces 10 to 14 - Population Served. This number represents the total
number of users of this particular water supply. This will probably be
greater than the recoraea population of the runicipality. The figure is re-
corded to the nearest hundred, emitting the unit and tens digits.
Spaces 15 ..to 20-Service Connections. The number of service connections.
Space gl - Source of Snpply. From the following sources select the one
which most nearly describes the supply.
1. Ground (wells, etc.) 6. Combination ground and
2. Surface strc;ai.L-3 reservoir
3- Lake, reservoir or impoundment 7. Combination ground and
4. Up-ground storage ' up-ground storage
5. Combination ground and stream 8.
0. Other
-------
Sraees.22 andv_23 - fAwbe? of Wells , .
In theso spaces record the timber of veil, and if any, v.'ach we
9?. lipped for uss ii prcducirg v-t'jr ."or this Tupp^y-
Sr>?.cog ?-'• to 2? - SaCe Y'.eld
Dstsrziino in million of ga^-lews por da7 the considered de
yield for- •';!.? 373 1:: urjder Adverse condit5.occ. TA;I includes vsll p. r'-Z
le Gtrc?d flr/r or ea-r.t:'-V - -ithdiv: 71 f\-o7\ aierc^e i'i y£Z.f
^ fijiTcs i:1 "aillio-s ..' •cJ'-lonc p - dc." (w,g,d.' '^o thrco
, 3JO,CTO ,p.d. shov—' ":' rccorclc- ao CCCc3^0.
£2£C.',-_30_^i_?l - "^T- of p:^nt (iT .—7)
Tha Conf'.rsnco ol Ctato T "dtarj r-'TLr.feri
-------
X
Spaces 41 to 46 - Works Capacity
\ ) Indicate in million gallons per day the capacity of works as determined
by a limiting factor such as pumping capacity, settling capacity, filter capacity
or other limiting unit. The capacity is recorded in m.g.d. to three decimals.
Spaces 47 to 52 — Avorugd Worka Output
From plant operating records the average daily output for the proceed-
ing year is determined and recorded in m.g.d. to three decimal places. For example,
an average daily output of 2,210,000 would be recorded 002.120.
Spaces 53 to 56 - Clear Well Storage
Record the total clear well storage of finished water available to the
high service pumpa. Use million gallons to two decimals.
Spaces 57 to 60 - System Storage >
Record sum of all storage on the distribution system in m.g. to two decimals.
Spaces 61 and 62 - Year Placed in Service
Record last two digits of year plant or system was placed in service.
VN—•' Spaces 63 and_64 - Year of Last Major Improvement
Record last two digits of year of last major improvements such as plant
enlargements, new filters, etc.
Space 65 - Works Classification
In this space indicate the type of clfissification as determined by the
rating system set up by the Advisory Comaittee to the Board of TZxaniners*^
Space 66 - Laboratory Control Taking
Indicate whether satisfactory laboratory arrangements have been made.
If the plant operates in own laboratory it should bo approved by the Ohio Depart-
ment of Health laboratory staff.
1. Satisfactory and approved
2. Unapproved and unsatisfactory
3- Ir.T'.roYt.G.cnta uriden-ray
' A.
0. No laboratory control.
-------
Spacer67L - Bacterial Quality Rating • •<•
1. Satisfactory
(a) Bacteriological analyses all performed by a laboratory approved
by the Ohio Department of Health.
(b) The number of samples collected for bacteriological analyses is
in accordance with recommendations of the Ohio Department of Health*
(c) The standard sample for the bacteriological test consists of at
least five 10 ml portions in the fermentation tube test or not less
than 50 ml in the membrane filter teat.
(d) The average coliform density of all samples examined per month does •
not exceed one per 100 ml.
(e) When the coliform density in a single sample exceeds a recommended
limiting value, repeat sampling is performed in accordance with re-,
commendations of the Ohio Department of Health.
2. Provisional
(a) Bacteriological analyses are performed by a laboratory not approved
i
by the Ohio Department of Health.
(b) The number of samples collected each month for bacteriological
analysis is less than the recommended number but is not less than
50$ of the recommended number.
(c) Repeat sampling is not performed in accordance with recommendations
of the Ohio Department of Health. i
. 3« Unsatisfactory
I . (a) There is no bacteriological sampling performed.
• (b) The number of samples examined per month ia less than 50 % of the
* recommended number.
t(c) The average coliform density of all samples examined per month
'—"N ' '
V,' exceeds one per 100 ml. •
-8-
-------
. Chemical Quality Rating
f —— ^ . . * -»—v«^*^
^} . ^ ^<*ttng appraisal of chemical quality use hardness
or othw
ar, relate f ^ „ .• ^ of the chraioal
.1. Satisfactory chemical quality
2. Unsatisfactory chemical quality
J» Some improvement needed
gpace ^ - Stat*» <>f Technical Superviaion
its, indicates compliance or non-compliance vith the Department re-
-------
72 - Overall Rating (continued)
'O
mpn".».
! ' • .1. Excellent ' .
.'
. ' 2. Very Good ' • -~. .
r •> • i •
v •'.' 3. Gopd •
4. Fair- ' ) • . ' ,.
' . '• ' , ' i • . ' i .
5. Poor . ...
: Spaces 73 to 75 - Date of Inspection
List month and year of this, complete inspection vhich has included the
collection of chemical samples. Please note, however, that the months are given >
in Space 73 beginning with January as month number "lrt,
October is month "0" '
November is month "X"
December is month "R"
This saves one space on the data card. For example, a visit made February 10, 1962,
is coded 262. A visit made in December 1965 is coded R65*
Spaces 76 to 78 - Engineer Identification ' . ' *
,o
-10-
itcno')
•*OP Y;
ixenoi
con*
-------
PROPOSED RATING VALUES' FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF WATER SUPPLY WORKS
Source -
Quality -
"
"
"
"
Treatment -
Unit
Ground Water
Surface Supply
Surface Supply with Reservoirs
Less than 1.0 coliform per 100 ml.
1.0 to 100 " " " "
100 to 1000 " " " "
1000 to 5000 " " " "
5000 to 20000 "
More than 20000 "
(maximum monthly average)
A- Aeration
d - Coagulation (Surface water only)
S- Sedimentation
f" Filtration
P~ Disinfection
Z-- Ion Exchange
"'. Adsorption
2. Chemical Oxidation
I- Chemical Precipitation (Softening)
K Stabilization
V Fluoridation
Distribution -
Purapage -
Raw Water Pumping '
Receiving Basins or Reaction Tanks
Finished Water Pumping
Finished Water Storage at Plant •
Storage on the System
One unit per 0.1 M.G.D. (average)
CLASSIFICATION
Rating Value
3
6
2
h
6
"8
10
12
2
10
5
10
5-
5
2
2
6
2
2
5
1
$<
1
2
i -50
Class I 1- 50
Class H -- 51-75
Class III 76-100
Class IV 101 or more
6/5/63.
-------
Appendix B
Water Quality
1. Collection of Water Samples for Chemical Analysis
2. Hazardous Substances in Drinking Water
3« Need for Expanded Laboratory Services in Chemical Analyses of
Drinking Water
4. Water Quality Data
5- Bacteriological Examination of Water -jfo
6. Laboratory Approval Program for Control of Water Quality -](}k
7. U.S. EPA Survey of Water Chemistry Laboratory igg
138
-------
JAMES A RHODES, Governor
EMMETT W ARNOLD. \1 D
Director of Health
450 Ea.si Town Street
P O Box 118
Columbus, Ohio 432 10
f>
f Health
PUBLIC HEALTH COUNCIL
Richard V. Brunner, D.D.S.
Chairman
J. Howard Holmes, M.D.
Vice Chairman
Ralph K. Ramsayer, M.D.
J. P. Mear, Ph.G.
Phillip T. Knies. M.D.
Lloyd E. Larrick, M.D.
J. Bruce Wenger, D.V.M.
Appendix B
1
TO: Waterworks Super-u'U^ndenr,*-. vp.,u"^.tors and Chemists
FROM: A. L. Fishback, £hginear--i->-'J';arge, Water Supply Unit
SUBJECT: Collection cc ^ater i^:;>\L;;,- :ror Chemical Analyses
The potential hsswds c.f
this state indicates a need fo
of drinking water supplies.
s *sXeinents to the public water supplies of
, • y;igt,h®ning the program on chemical analyses
We are proposing to meet this need by increasing the frequency of sampling
for chemical analysis and expand! ;K the routine chemical analysis to include
additional tests for trace eleftisr , s 0 The following program is proposed:
1. The responsibility fo* collection of samples will be placed on
the owner of the water supply system,
2. All public water supplies taken from surface sources will be
sampled every threa (3) months.
3. All public water supplies taken from ground water sources will
be sampled once each year,
4. The sample will consist of & grab sample representative of the
water entering the water distribution system.
5. Public water supplies suspected of containing substances hazard-
ous to health will be aa spied at more frequent intervals.
We seek your assistance and cooperation in the collection of the samples
and the sending of the samples to the laboratory of this department for chemical
analysis. Each water works will be notified when a sample is to be collected
and will receive the necessary sampling bottles and shipping containers. It
is expected that the water works will pay the cost of shipping the samples to
the state laboratory in Columbus »
The sample should be collected from a tap at the entrance to the distrib-
ution system. If the water is treated the sample should be the finished water
at the plant. If no treatment is provided the sample would be collected from
the well or the first tap after the water enters the distribution system. We
are seeking a sample of water that is representative of the water that the
consumer will be drinking.
A copy of the report of water analysis will be sent to the water works as
soon as the analyses are complete!:. If there are questions on the above pro-
cedures, please contact the Water .Supply Unit, Ohio Department of Health, tele-
phone number is 614 469 - 4994*
-------
Appendix B
2
Hazardous Substances in Drinking Water
The importance of providing safe drinking water is essential because
of the direct health effects it has on large numbers of people who consume
it daily. Concern for the quality of drinking water has until recently
centered principally on the danger of waterborne disease outbreaks caused
by bacteriological contamination.
However, a growing roster of trace metals, organic and inorganic
chemicals, and an almost countless number of other toxic substances
greatly emphasizes the potential of such substances being present in
drinking water and the need for constant surveillance by qualified
public health personnel. In addition, the acute and chronic low level
effects of all chemical substances are not known.
These potential health hazards added to a lack of historical data
as to their occurrence, plus difficulties in identifying such substances,
and little knowledge of the effects of treatment processes, has created
a need for constant vigilance and application of the best techniques
of water treatment and distribution by responsible public health officials.
In discussing these potential health hazards it is necessary to
consider the following types of substances.
I. BIOLOGICAL
Bacteriological and Virological
There is a recognized need for new rapid techniques for
identification of bacterial health hazards in water. There is
also an urgent need for direct and efficient methods for
140
-------
quantitation of Salmonella, Shigella, Vibrio Leptospira and
other pathogenic type organisms. There is no satisfactory
method now available for the detection of viral organisms.
This is necessary in order to make available standard viro-
logic methods for water quality examination, re-evaluate the
efficiency of conventional water treatment processes and to
ascertain the validity of bacterial indicator systems used
today in relation to viral pollution under different conditions.
Solutions to these problems are best handled by people
thoroughly familiar with such potential health hazards and
their potential effect.
II. PHYSICAL
Substances causing turbidity color, odor and taste problems
frequently are the source of complaints and are aesthetically
displeasing, as well as having potential health effects.
III. CHEMICAL
During the past decade, science and industry have developed
and manufactured a great variety of new products. Many of
these substances carry along with them certain threats to
health and wellbeing and consequently their hazard to public
health when encountered in drinking water must be evaluated.
The presence of such substances is indicative of the need for
qualified public health personnel.
-------
Organics
The toxicity of a few of these has been studied substantially;
however, the available information on the toxicity of most of
these chemicals is quite meager. There is an obvious need for
pertinent toxicity data relating this group to detrimental
effects on human health and derivation of drinking water
standards for organics other than pesticides.
Inorganics and Heavy Metals
Heavy metal salts in solution constitute a very serious
form of pollution since they are stable compounds, not readily
removed by oxidation, precipitation or other natural process.
A characteristic feature of heavy metal pollution is its
persistence in time as well as in space. The fact that such
materials are concentrated to varying degrees adds to the concern.
Some of the metal-organic complexes may be even more toxic
than the metal ion itself as in the case of methyl mercury.
The lack of understanding of the total overall long term
effects of such inorganics on human health has made it most
difficult to attach the proper significance to such materials
when consumed for long periods of time at low levels, as may
be found in public drinking water supplies. Again the need
for qualified public health personnel to evaluate the effects
of such substances is obvious.
-------
IV. RADIOACTIVITY
The effects of human radiation exposure are viewed as
harmful and any unnecessary exposure to ionizing radiation
should be avoided. Radiological health personnel are aware of
the hazards involved.
SOURCES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
The sources of substances which may be hazardous to health are many
because public water supplies commonly involve processing of water to
improve its quality. The initial source of contamination is logically
the raw water. This however, is not the only source of contamination.
Water treatment chemicals are another source. All treatment chem-
icals must be studied and approved before use. Open finished water
storage reservoirs, distribution systems, water main breaks, and cross
connections are still other potential sources of contamination, pointing
out the need for personnel thoroughly trained in public health engineering.
OCCURRENCES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Causes of suspected waterborne disease outbreaks in Ohio since
19^6 at public water supplies have been attributed to interruption of
disinfection and cross connections.
M< > M i I c i r i i i.r; I c i r 11 i I iviI < 11 i I r< )|'Vi i ( c :i 11; .1 • n I mi • t 11< 'iTI< >/'; I (>
infant,:;) a I. drinkinc; walrr ;;upp 1 Lcr, in Ohio wa;; bogun in July,
Consistently high nitrate nitrogen concentrations have not been found
in public water supplies, although it is suspected that some inadequately
protected rural water supplies do have high concentrations of nitrate
nitrogen. Advice and warnings in these cases are given by health
department officials.
-------
Routine analyses for fluoride do not indicate any fluoride levels
above the standard at drinking water supplies with controlled fluori-
dation. Many supplies without controlled fluoridation, however, have
a natural fluoride content which exceeds the standards causing potential
health problems.
Analysis for heavy metals began routinely in October, 1970, fol-
lowing reports of mercury in Lake Erie the previous spring. Of the
twelve metals analyzed for regularly, barium has been found to persist
in concentrations exceeding the 1962 United States Public Health Service
mandatory limit at, at least, one public water supply. The discovery
of chromium in another water supply led to abandonment of one of its
wells. In addition, investigations have been made for suspected
concentrations of lead, copper, nickel and zinc. Requests have been
made to begin testing routinely for eighteen additional trace chemicals
as well as inclusion of pesticides and radioactivity.
CONCLUSIONS
Even though wastewater control efforts will be expanded in the
future and are sorely needed to minimuze future pollution of our
drinking water sources, it is clear that water pollution control efforts
alone cannot assure a safe drinking water quality. It is highly un-
likely that even the best conventional waste treatment will produce
an effluent of drinking water quality. As such, waste treatment does
not remove all of today's known potential toxicants or biologic agents
prior to discharge. In addition, there are known pollutants from
runoff and spills which have an effect on source drinking water which
-------
are not subject to waste treatment. Unlike wastewater treatment,
accidental spills and by-passing at water treatment plants could be
catastrophic.
For these reasons, and because of the direct health effects, such
hazardous substances may have on large numbers of people, it is imper-
ative that the control of drinking water supplies be in the hands of
public health officials. The investigation of waterborne disease out-
breaks and chemical contamination are best conducted by public health
personnel, so that we may benefit from past mistakes and change proce-
dures, so that such instances will not re-occur for the same reasons.
Delivery of adequate supplies of safe water at the consumer's tap will
be dependent upon constant surveillance of the finished water by
qualified public health personnel and properly designed, constructed
and operated water treatment plants and distribution systems.
-------
Appendix B
3
REPORT ON THE NEED FOR EXPANDED LABORATORY SERVICES
IN THE CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF DRINKING WATER
December 18, 1970
The increasing pollution of the rivers, lakes and streams of Ohio
by a wide variety of contaminants requires that the laboratory services
available to the Water Supply Unit, Division of Engineering be expanded
to provide the necessary capability for detection of contaminants that
may be present in concentrations hazardous to health. This report
describes the present status of the laboratory program and lists im-
mediate and future requirements for laboratory service to meet these
challenges.
PRESENT STATUS
There are three general types of sampling programs followed by the
Water Supply Unit: (1) Samples collected by engineers during inspection of
public water supply systems (2) Samples submitted by water purveyor for
routine monitoring of drinking water quality and (3) Special samples for
fluoride monitoring, new sourcec- of supply, sand analyses, and special
investigations. A routine set of chemical analyses are performed on
engineer's inspection samples and monitoring samples.
Engineer's Inspection Samples.
These are samples collected by the engineer during his annual in-
spection of public water supply systems. The number of samples collected
from each of the 700 public water supply systems will vary depending on
-------
the number of raw water sources and the treatment provided. This will
average about 11/2 to 2 samples per inspection for a total of about 1200
samples per year or about 25 samples per week.
The sample containers are supplied by the Division of Engineering
from central storage at Chesapeake Avenue offices.
Routine Monitoring Samples.
On October 1, 1970 the Water Supply Unit initiated a program for
regular sampling of drinking water at all public water supply systems.
This provided for sampling of drinking water from approximately 150
surface water supplies every three months and approximately 550 ground
water supplies once each year. The water purveyor was assigned the
responsibility for collection of the samples and sending to the Bureau
of Laboratories in Columbus. Sampling of surface water supplies began
on October 1, 1970 at the rate of 15 samples per week. Sampling of
ground water supplies is scheduled to begin on January 1, 1971 at the
rate of 15 samples per week. The total number of monitoring samples
will be about 30 samples per week.
The sampling containers are prepared and shipped to the water
purveyor by the Bureau of Laboratories on a schedule set by the Water
Supply Unit. The sampling containers are taken from central storage
at the Chesapeake Avenue offices. Instructional material for in-
clusion with the sample kit is supplied by the Water Supply Unit.
Special Samples.
Fluoride Monitoring. Public water supply systems with controlled
fluoridation are required to submit a monthly sample of treated water
-------
for fluoride analysis by the Bureau of Laboratories. At the present
time kk samples are submitted each month. This will average about 10
samples per week.
Sample containers are supplied by the Bureau of Laboratories.
New Wells. The District Engineer collects samples from each new
well intended as a source of supply for public water supply systems.
This will total about 100 samples a year or about tv/o samples per week.
A routine chemical analysis is performed on each sample.
Sieve Analyses. Samples of sand intended for use in rapid sand
filters at water treatment plants are submitted to the Bureau of Lab-
oratories for sieve analysis. The number of samples averages about 50
per year or one sample per week.
Special Investigations. Samples are collected during special in-
vestigations. The recent mercury problem thrust an unusually heavy load
on the laboratory staff. Similar incidents concerning chromium arid
chloride contamination have occurred in the past few weeks. Samples
of this type are characterized by the need for fast accurate analyses.
Routine Analyses.
The following routine analyses are performed on all engineer's
inspection samples, routine monitoring samples, and samples from new wells.
Turbidity Hardness Calcium
Color Total Solids Magnesium
pH Sulfate Sodium
CaCO Stability Chloride Potassium
Alkalinity Fluoride Iron
Manganese
-------
In addition, all samples of water entering the distribution system
(finished water) are analyzed for:
Nitrate Copper Silver
Cadmium Lead Zinc
Chromium Nickel
Special Analyses.
The engineer may request special analyses on water samples. These
may include any of the following:
Odor Total Carbon Tannin
Conductivity MBAS Aluminum
Ammonia Phenol Mercury
Nitrites Cyanide
Sulfide Oil
Microscopic examinations, determinations of the chemical composition
of substances, pesticide analyses, jar tests may be requested.
IMMEDIATE NEEDS
(1) As of January 1, 1971 the routine monitoring program for public
water supplies should be expanded to cover ground water supplies at the
rate of 15 samples per week.
(2) As of January 1, 1971 all samples submitted for routine water
analysis should be analyzed for trace metals and nitrates.
(3) As soon as possible, the routine water analyses should be
expanded to include the following analyses:
Conductivity Boron Selerdum
Arsenic Aluminum Phosphate
Barium Phenol Cyanides
Mercury
(4) There is a need for routine analyses of the organics in water.
Steps should be taken to determine procedures and equipment needs for
organic analyses.
-------
(5) There is a need for routine pesticide analyses. Steps should
be taken to determine procedures and equipment needs.
(6) There is a need for automation of routine chemical analyses.
The use of an "Autoanalyzer" should be investigated.
(7) The laboratory should make preparation for receiving an
additional 80 fluoride monitoring samples each month as a result of the
new fluoridation law.
(8) Procedures and equipment should be studied for inclusion of
radioactivity analyses as a routine water analysis.
FUTURE NEEDS
(1) During 1971 the laboratory should develop the capability for
performance of the following trace metal analyses and gradually in-
corporate these analyses in the routine examination of water.
Beryllium Vanadium Cobalt
Strontium Antimony Lithium
Titanium Tin Tungsten
Uranium Molydenum Zirconium
(2) During the summer of 1971 all surface water supplies (150)
should be examined for pesticides. During 1972 all ground water supplies
(550) should be examined for pesticides.
(3) ky January 1, 19/2 the laboratory should have the capability
for scanning for organics on a routine basis. During 1972 all surface
water supplies should be scanned for organicc. This should be extended
to ground waters in 1973-
(k) There is a need for inspection of water works laboratories to
determine if the chemical analyses performed by these laboratories are
in compliance with Standard Methods. This would be a program similar
150
-------
to the bacteriological laboratory survey that has been carried out for
the past ten years.
(5) By January 1, 1972 routine analyses for radioactivity should
be made on surface water monitoring samples. By 1973 this should be
expanded to ground water monitoring samples.
151
-------
SCHEDULE OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES
TO BE PERFORMED ON A WEEKLY BASIS
Turbidity
Color
pH
CaCO Stability
Alkalinity
Hardness
Total Solids
Sulfate
Chloride
Fluoride
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Iron
Manganese
Nitrate
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Present
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
53
42
42
42
42
42
42
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
As of
1-1-71
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
74
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
As of
1-7-71
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
75
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
As of
1-1-72
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
135
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
As of As of
1-1-73 1-1-74
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
140
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
152
-------
SCHEDULE Or CHEMICAL ANALYSES
TO BE PERFORMED ON A WEEKLY BASIS
As of
Present 1-1-71
Conductivity
Arsenic
Barium
Mercury
Boron
Aluminum
Phenol
Selenium — —
Phosphate
Cyanides
Organics (Scanning)
Radioactivity
Aldrin
DDD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin — —
Chlordane — —
Endrin
Heptachlor — —
Heptachlor Epoxide
Lindane
As of
7-1-71
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
—
—
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
As of
1-1-72
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
70
15
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
As of
1-1-73
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
As of
1-1 -7k
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
153
-------
SCHEDULE OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES
TO BE PERFORMED ON A WEEKLY BASIS
As of
Present 1-1-71
Methoxychlor — —
Malathion
Parathion — —
Methyl Parathion
Beryllium — —
Strontium — —
Titanium
Uranium — —
Vanadium
Antimony
Tin
Molybdenum
Cobalt
Lithium
Tungsten
Zirconium — —
As of
1-7-71
15
15
15
15
60
—
60
60
60
60
—
—
—
60
—
—
As of
1-1-72
30
30
30
30
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
6^
As of
1-1-73
35
35
35
35
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
As of
1-1-7^
70
70
70
70
-------
C - Metal Finishing Plant
D - Steel Mill
E - Chemical Plant; Inorganic
F - Chemical Plant; Organic
3 - Refinery; Oil Producer
H - Food Processer; Brewery
I - Acid Mine Drainage
J - Sand arid Gravel Producer
K - Tannery; Bendering Plant
L - Coal Washer
M - Industrial Sewage
N - Miscellaneous
12. Date of Grab Sample - (or last date of composite sample) - year
month, day, hour, minute.
13. Composite Type - Describes the nature of the composite as follows:
First Block
S - Space composite (volumetric proportions).
T - Time composite (time proportions).
B - Samples that are both space and time composites.
Second Block
Leave Blank - Composite samples for which a single set of
analyses are made after the compositing
nrcceco has been completed.
Code A - Computed average value of several individual
samples or average value of a continuous record.
Code H - Maximum value of several individual samples or the
maximum value of a continuous record.
Code L - Minimum value of several individual samples or
minimum value of a continuous record.
1^f. Sample Type - Indicate by checking the block.
15. Analysis to be Reported to: - Check the block indicating which
office the results are to be sent.
16. Beginning Date of Composite Sample - Year, month, day, hour, minute.
156
-------
17. Frequency - Describes the frequency of a composite sample as follows:
- For samples collected continuously, code the first block
with "C" and leave the second block blank.
- For a composite sample made up of individual grab samples,
the number of which is not to be reported, code the first
block with "G" and leave the second block blank.
- A two-digit number such as Ok or 12, is used to report the
number of grab samples comprising a composite sample.
- Both blocks can be left blank when none of the above information
is to be recorded.
18. Additional Information - Reason for Taking Sample - Remarks by
Analyst - Comments to be made as necessary.
19. Regular - Check this box for water supply samples which are to be
analyzed for the routine set of parameters.
Check the box next to each analysis requested.
The laboratory should always be contacted regarding special samples,
preservation, and "emergency" analyses.
-------
1. Received OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Loborafory Number
WATER QUALITY DATA
Dore R.ported Laboratory
ion
Analyst
Station Code County
Li
I 1 ]
1 1 1 r~n...«..4 >,„
tjfication of Sample Sample Code
pie Types: D Industrial D Sewage j~) ^a*er fj Stream
^ Supply
Analysis to be Reported to: D CO D SEDO DNEDO [j SWDO D NWDO
Date of grab sample v ., tL n i,
, , , K Year Month Day Hou
composite sample) | | ill
r Minute Composite Ty
i :
Beginning Date Year Month Day Hour Minute Frequency
of 1 1 1 g 1
i
i
SON FOR TAKING SAMPLE - ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - REMARKS BY ANALYSIS:
I
HF Regular <
PT. Flo*
1 ^ ' Water Temperature, Field
L, r
Hj.PH, Field
HI; Dissolved Oxygen, Field
f " Hydrogen Sullide, Field
^•".Chlorine Free AVI, Field ',
•~. Chlorine Tot Resd, Field!
ff| Color '
| T ] Odor
Hj 'Turbidity
• Conductivity at K C° •
1 |pH,Lab i
•| pH, CaCOs Stability
Hj Alkalinity Total, uiCUj j
P Alkalinity Phth, CaCOs 1
L A kal'nity, CaC03 Stabl |
HJj Carbon Dioxide, C02
H[ •; Acidity Total, CaCC>3
If"1 Acidity M 0., CaC03
H 1ness Total, CaC03
H n idue, Total [
V [._
IT"1 Residue, Total Volatile 1
Mi Residue, Total Nflt (Sus)
•j Residue, Vol Nflt
p j Residue, Total Fit (Diss)
[_[J Residue, Vol Fit j
H Residue, Settlatale
I! , Nitrogen Organic, N i
T Nitrogen Ammonia, N
• '.Nitrite, N
•fl Nitrate, N ;
rf~] Phosphorus Total, P ,
L,1 Phosphorus Soluble, P
|f 1 Phosphate Total, P04
(";, Phosphate Ortho, PO^
[ SiJfate, $04
Bl^j'fite, $03
|| Sulfide, S j
J ' hloride, Cl j
Dr indicate by checking boxesi
! CFS
i c°
i ' : ' s u.
1 . . —* -^ - -
1 ' I mg 1
-> -i T ' ' • • t -- |- - -
- - ;- -l- !- ; * -- !"8 -
i ! , mg 1
i ' J_ » i
] j Pt-Co Units
1 T N
J U
1 ' Miuomhos
-t — L- - -j — t- - - — * - - --
i ' 1 S U
-I i 4 . -* ;-
i . s u
-[ -1 -r--T -* -. -
ill11 -.--msl
I | ^ mg 1
i ' mg 1
T ' : ' mg'l
1 ' • -ig
! " ' i" ' '"' i.ff "
1 ! ! mg i
1 fflg I
X 1 i i ; * m8 '
mg
1 t mg'
|| j ''6/1
~f-l~^- -i- '- ' KB'-
-| — I — L_ i - « ..j_-4. Ki ' ---
1 ; 1 i ! • m8 '
1 '
. i , me'l
1 11
I ; | I ^ ms'l
I I ! ' | ng i
I T"4 f TT mgl
Fluoride Diss, F
Calcium Total, Ca
Magncs.um Total, Mg
Potassium To*al, K i
Sodium Total, N? '
Alufinnum Total, A! , ! ,
" Antin.ory Total, Sri , ;
Aisen L Total, As '
Bsnum Total, BJ ' |
j . ) _-.
Beryliur? Total, Be i ! •
Bismuth Total, Bi j ! !
Boron Total, B I ! '
Cadiminn Total, Ctf | '
C'tromium Total, Cr , !
Chromium Hex, Cr i I
Cobalt Total, Co i !
- _ - J U 4 —
t Copper Total, Cu '
Iron Total, Fe I
; _I_ _L _
iron Diss, Fe i , '
iron Ferrous, Fe i ]
--JBl^-Ll- "1-4 I"
, Manganese Total, Mn , |
"' Mercury Total, Hg i '
Molybdenum Total, Mo \ \
7~Nickel Total, Ni |
Selenium Total, Se '
_' Silver Total, Ag
~ Strontium Total, Sr i
" Thallium Total, Tl I
Tin Total, Sn , , ,
Titanium Total, Ti i
Tungsten Total, T '
-- - . - -,_+- 4--
" Vanadium Total, V
" _'Zinr Total, 7n
Zucon jm To*ai, Zr ,
_ HO!! ^-Day \ }
~'CCD , i
Ch'ori'ip Demand, lb mm
" ;Carbc,n Total Org, C ' ; !
^ "ig 1
mg 1
mg 1
Ug |
, ; i i ! uei
: ' | * ugl
J UB '1
, ! * -ugi
-- } f 4- * U8 -
j 4 "8 '
.-H - 1 . -Ug' -
1 , ug 1
i ug 1
"T:_LJ""
i ' ^ i
- - -[ s -
\ "g 1
- f t - ; •-
! ' ug/i
^ i- - -^- -•
1 ug
* "8 '
i * l
UB'I
, | * 6
' : i . "8'1
" " 1" ! J " *i"""
i ' ^ Ugl
i- • r- 4-
* ug'l
, ug/ 1
mg'l
ng'l
. , mg'l
' Cyanide, CN ' |
MBAS , j
Oil-Grease, Total
•r i
Phenols
t ;
^ Tannin Lignm ! 1
Aldrin, Whl Smpl ! 1
-t 1 l - t
"ODD, Whl Smpl I
: , DDE, Whl Smpl i J J i
DOT, Whl Smpl '
" " ~1 " t * "
; Dieldrm, Will Smpl I I |
Chloidane, Whl Smpl I
"' Endim, Whl Smpl I
t * ' *
Heptachlor, Whl Smpl j
_'Hchlr-Epoxrde, Whl Smpl i I
" ; Lmdane.Whl Smcl I
L" Melhoxyotiloi, Wil Smpl j i
;Malathicn, Whl S" pi
,Parathian, WhlSi.pl
' Methyl P.-rathn, Wnl Smpl 1
-- - , - ). . 1 . .- _ 1 1 .
Bed, Total
b.'j, ^i - |
B-ta Su' -d " " 1 ~ \~~~~
- - - _, . — j __
"'^ Alpha, Total i
" Alpha, Dibs i i
4 - -i- -4 — i - -1 - -
'' ' Alpha, Suspd | j
""Radium 226, Total 1
j Strontium 90, Total | :
f~ Cohform Total, MF ' L ' 1
n Conform Total WPN.Confj 1 I
' '
"j Fecal Coli Total, MF
'_} Fecal Stiep Total, MF 1
[7] Plate Count, Total I
" " Algae, Total |
,__! ~ ' " " f "
' i !
"J 4 i '
-"" "" ~TT r
D " "f 4 r it"
r^T" " F""" " " "1 1
_7 ^1
k
I
•
- -
-
~
- -\
~ 1
1
I
--
., 1
,
_.
mg'l
mg/l
mg'l
Ui'l
mg 1
ug 1
i*'l "
uR;r ~
••
ug'l
ug,'l
tlj.'l
" —
ug'l
ug/l
Ug'l
u»'l
ug 1
ug'l
- -- -- -
ug.'l
pr '1
;-;-;--
pc-l
pc/l
f'lOOml
#/100i ii
M'lOOml
MOOml
*/ml
L- *Lml ____
|e,o
COPY DISTfllBUTION White - Centra! Office
Yellow-District Oflice
Pink - Owner
Blue - Data Processing
Green - Laboratory
-------
State of Ohio
EMMETT W. ARNOLD, M.D.
Director of Health
450 East Town Street
P.O. Box 118
Columbus, Ohio 43216
Appendix B
i O'-JLMV. Ai£jAj-i * o cOut^vuLj
Richard V. Brunner, D.D.S.
Chairman
J. Howard Holmes, M.D.
Vice Chairman
Ralph K. Ramsayer, M.D.
J. F. Mear. Ph.G.
Phillip T. Knies, M.D.
Lloyd E. Larrick, M.D.
3. Bruce Wenger, D.V.M.
Department of Health
TO: Water Works Superintendenta, Chemists, Bacteriologists and Operators
FROM: A. L. Fishback, Enginoor-in-Charge, Water Supply Unit
SUBJECT: Bacteriological Earasilnation of Water
The following changes are made in tha requirements for the bacteriological
examination of water.
1. The membrane filter procedure will be the standard procedure
for tho examination of water for the presence of members of
the colifona group. Examination by the fermentation tube test
will continue to be accepted.
2. Raw (untreated) surface water shall bo examined for both total
coliform and fecal colifora.
3. Ground water and treated surface water will continue to be
examined for total coliform only.
4. The minimum frequency of sampling from the source and plant
for bacteriological examination shall be in accordance with
Table A.
5. The ainimum frequency of sampling from the distribution system
for bacteriological examination shall be in accordance with
Tablo 3C
6. All surface wator supplies will be expected to provide approved
laboratory facilities or to contract with an approved laboratory
for the bacteriological examination of water.
7. Ground water supplies serving 10,000 or more persons will be
expected to provide approved laboratory facilities or to contract
with an approved laboratory for the bacteriological examination
of water.
8. Ground water supplies serving less than 10,000 persons may continue
to have routine samples examined by tho laboratories of the Ohio
Department of Health.
Compliance with the abovfe requirements will be expected as soon as possible and
not later than Juno 1, 1972. If there are questions concerning this change of
requirements, please contact this office at telephone number 614 469-4994. We
shall appreciate your cooperation.
159
-------
T&BIE A
MINIMUM FREQUENCY 0? SAHPUNB FRCK SOURCE AND PIANT
FOR BACTERIOLOGICAL SEMINATION
Minimum Frequency
Soxirco of Supply of Semolina
Ground Viator Not Subject To
Contamination Monthly
Ground Viator Subject To
Contaaaination Weekly
Surface Water Frcu Upground
Reservoir Weekly
Surface Water Froa Lalco Or
Impounding Reservoir Daily
Surfaco Water Direct Frca
Stream Daily
Definition^
Source - Untreated water at the source of supply or entrance
to tho distribution oystoa.
Plant - Treated water at the entrance to the distribution
cystea.
Ohio Department of Health
Division of Engineering
Water Supply Unit
160
-------
TABLE B
MINIMUM NUMBER OF SAMPLES TO BE COLLECTED FROM WATER
DISTRIBUTION SXSTS4S FOR B6.CTSIIOLOGICAL ECAMINATION
Population
Served
2,000
(or Less)
2,900
3,800
4,500
5,300
6,100
7,000
7,800
8,500
9,200
10,000
11,700
12,500
13,300
14,000
14,800
15,600
16,400
17,200
18,000
18,800
19,600
Min. No.
of Samples
Per Month
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Population
Served
20,400
(or Loss)
21,200
21,900
22,700
23,500
24,300
25,000
28,000
32,200
36,100
40,000
44,000
48,000
52,000
58,000
61,000
67,000
72,000
80,000
87,000
95,000
100,000
Min. No.
of Samples
For Konth
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
no
Population
Sorved
115,000
(or Le»«)
130,000
150,000
170,000
200,000
230,000
270,000
310,000
360,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
550,000
600,000
700,000
750,000
800,000
850,000
900,000
1,000,000
Min. No.
of Samples
Per Month
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
320
Ohio Department of Health
Division of Engineering
Water Supply Unit
161
-------
PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING THE FREQUENCY OF WATER BACTERIAL SAMPLING
AT WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS SERVED THROUGH MASTER METERS
The following procedure is used in determining the frequency of water
bacterial sampling at water supply systems served through master meters.
Formula
D - A x G
B
Where: A - Population served in master metered water supply system
B - Total population served by water supply system supplying
the water
C - Number of system water bacterial samples required each
month based on total population served by supplier
D - Number of system water bacterial samples that should be
collected from the master metered water supply system
each month
Example Bexley water supply system
(A) 15,000 - Population served by Bexley
(B) 648,000 - Population served by Columbus water supply system
(C) 250 - Minimum number of samples to be examined from Columbus water
supply system
D = A x C
B
= 15.000 x 260
648,000
= 6.0
Therefore, 6_ samples should be collected from the Bexley water supply
system each month.
Ohio Department of Health
Division of Engineering
Water Supply Unit
5/67
162
f
-------
Appendix B
6
Laboratory Approval Program
for
Control of Water Quality
Due to fluctuations in supervisory and operating personnel, yearly
renewal of a simple certificate of approval, with a conspicuous expiration
date, will give us better control.
Prompt submitting of satisfactory reports should be one of the
conditions of approval.
Establish a policy of allowable deviations from the text of Standard
Methods.
Establish acceptable minimums of quality in material, equipment-
reagents, primary standards, etc., used in every phase of laboratory
procedure, i.e.; a reliable electric pH meter should be used wherever
any treatment is practiced.
Prepare the scope of an?lyt;es that should be expected on each
individual supply.
lyrist that ."11 r1" j^lcr"1,, ',sed, either i"1 l-^oivrLor/ r/:, n: : _ ">.'.
in treatment processes, be purchased from reliable suppliers, aad that
the assay of these chemicals be furnished.
An operator should be familiar with the use of primary chemical
standards for each test that is required on that supply.
163
-------
Bacteriological laboratory approval is based on the assumption that
samples are run each day, at some rather regular time, by the one person
whose name appears on the certificate of approval. The Engineering
Division has to follow through, in the cases where contamination persists
in the distribution system. The laboratory retains its approved status
as long as their results show this contamination. It is not rescinded for
lack of skill or initiative in tracing and removing or overcoming the source
of the contamination.
Chemical tests are run at intervals throughout the day's operation of
the plant, by operators working in shifts. So the approval certificate
would have to carry the names of these operators and list the tests each
one might be required to make on his shift. Otherwise, the chief operator
would be held responsible for the accuracy of the results from each operator,
along with his ability and initiative to take corrective steps in operation
control whenever analytical results suggest improved operation. If the
latter type of approval is adopted, the chief operator must be given full
control of acceptance or rejection of the operators under his supervision.
Further consideration suggests that it would take up to several weeks
to evaluate the preparation of known standards and check out all possible
interference" in ppch test in ^Mch supply, in aljition to chf^kinc out each
of the wide variety of non-standard "kits" in the various laboratories.
An alternative calls for carrying into the field reagents, supplies,
instruments, and glassware to run parallel tests for comparisons. The
list of necessary supplies for this type of survey appears to be too great
for even a trailer laboratory.
164
-------
This leaves a third alternative of reference samples being made
up at the central laboratory and sent out to the various water plants,
basing approval on their results, whether or not they use Standard
Methods.
165
-------
Laboratories Approved for Bacteriological Examination
of Drinking Water
Ohio Department of Health
January, 1971
; WILLIAMS" TFULTON
»
V
• I •_•_•
: I"Z~HE"NTY i.
•DEFIANCE I - r
i PAULDING"*-
PUTNAM
• i • • L i •
— .ZJ%URON ^ •
4SENEU i • • j'
HANCOCK I A J | m
w •: r '— •
_1
IVAN WERT i
_l --- - -- 1-
CRAWFORD iRICHLANQ
' '
_
-,
i
INLAND
MEDINA
WAYNE
•
SUMMIT
I*
-L, »A
PORTAGE
r
'
i
'
MERCER I L.__ 0
• i« 'Z ,-L_
! /LOGAN
•o
I Al
Jr J
Al SHELBY
UNION
DARKE
• t-; i. .
r^L_j
i DELAWARE
STARK
'; ^'l ' TUSCARAWA^
KNOX J ^
^ I COSHOCTON L. *
TMAHONINB ^"
_J i
'i-^-i1 —
ICOLUMBIANA
I .J CHAMPAIGN '1
_ *,LICI<'NG
"
1- GUERNSEy~~rTELMQNT
MUSKINGUM 1 BELMONT
| ,.J—
._
•A0 ! /PERRY i
'-
t nn i i
•'' 1'~—•
_j*0"HEMS
' i •>/
•— V--T,/ HIGHLAND
LEGEND
• Water Works
o Healtn Department
A Private or Industry
166
-------
Appendix B
7
Report of a Survey of the
Ohio State Health Department
Water Chemistry Laboratory
1571 Perry Street
Columbus, Ohio 43201
by
Earl F. McFarren, Chief
Analytical Quality Control
Water Supply Programs Division
The water chemistry laboratory of the Ohio State Department of
Health at 1571 Perry Street, and the Water Supply Unit at 450 East Towne
Street was visited on February 14th and 15th, 1972. The equipment and
procedures employed in the chemical analysis of water by this laboratory
conforms with the provisions of Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater (13th edition) and with the provisions of the Public
Health Drinking Water Standards, except for the items marked with a
cross "X" (deviation from standard), or an "O" (not being done at present).
Items marked with a "U" could not be determined at the time of the survey.
Substances Determined
The water laboratory routinely determines color, turbidity,
chlorides, fluorides, nitrates, sulfates, total dissolved solids, barium,
cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, silver and zinc as
required by the drinking water standards. In addition, they also routinely
determine calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, aluminum, beryllium,
hardness, pH, and alkalinity (total, phenolphthalein, and CaCO^) even though
these are not required. At present, they do not do odor, cyanide, carbon
chloroform extract, surfactants, arsenic, selenium, mercurv, 2'ros- beta,
radium 226, or strontium 90. Thus in summary, although they routinely
do twenty-nine determinations, only sixteen of these are required by the
drinking water standards, and ten substances specified in the standards are
seldom, if ever, done. Turbidity (item 1 c) is the only substance being
determined at present by a non-standard method.
» .
Laboratory Apparatus • v*
They have the equipment available in the Industrial Chemisty Section
under Mr. Weigelt, to do gross beta, radium 226, and strontium 90, but at
present, there are no plans for its use in the analysis of potable waters.
167
-------
The Sanitation Chemistry Section (water laboratory under Mr. Walker) also
has the equipment for mercury analysis and are purchasing equipment for
the analysis of arsenic and selenium by atomic absorption. They also have on
order an auto-analyzer which will enable them to do cyanide and surfactants.
They do not have the equipment for the determination of the carbon chloroform
extract and it was recommended that they wait until the new mini-sampler
becomes available. It was recommended that they purchase a Hach Model
2100 turbidimeter.
Samples
It is recommended that samples collected for metal analysis be pre-
served with nitric acid (item 32 a) and those collected for nitrate and surfactant
analysis be either refrigerated or preserved with mercuric chloride (item 32b).
Records
According to laboratory records 2614 samples were analyzed last
year (each for about 29 substances). Since there are about 800 municipal
water supplies in the state, this means that on the average each water supply
was analyzed three times last year. However, no print out of the data by
supplies was available at the moment, although all data has been key-punched
and presumably will be available eventually. In addition, there were 911
samples analyzed for fluorides. Since there are about 130 supplies which
fluoridate, presumably they should have analyzed about 1560 samples
(assuming all supplies are checked once a month).
Laboratory
The Sanitary Chemistry Laboratory is responsible for the analysis of
both potable and raw or polluted waters. The laboratories consist of two
laboratories about 20 by 40 feet each and one laboratory about 20 by 20 feet.
In addition, the chief his an oPVe about 10 by 19, r>
-------
If this laboratory desires to be certified for analysis of those
chemistries which they are now running routinely, it will be necessary
for them, to establish their proficiency by analyzing a reference sample
which we can supply.
Staff
The water chemistry staff consists of a chief chemist who devotes
about one half of his time to problems concerned with potable water analysis,
two assistant chemists with degrees, and one technician.
In general, the salaries of all appear to be low and the number is
inadequate to carry out all the desired chemistries. However, a change
in emphasis would permit some required chemistries to be done which are
not now done. If radiochemistries and pesticide analysis are to be done,
however, at least two more persons would be required.
Conclusions
The water chemistry laboratory routinely analyzes for 29 substances,
but only 16 of these are required by the drinking water standards, and 10
substances that are in the standards are seldom, if ever, run.
The laboratory analyzed 2614 samples last year, and since there are
only about 800 municipal supplies in the state it would appear that each was
analyzed on an average of about 3 times last year. Although last year's data
has been key-punched, no print out is yet available to check or verify these
conclusions. A summary was available of those supplies analyzed during
the period from 1968 to 1969.
About 130 water supplies in the state are fluoridated, and if each was
checked just once a month, presumably 1560 samples should have been
analyzed; whereas, only 911 sai ;ples were an?lyx^d for fluoride .
The equipment is available, or will be shortly, so that all of the
chemistries specified by the drinking water standards except carbon chloro-
form extraction could be carried out, however, more personnel would be
needed if the additional chemistries are to be undertaken. Another chemist
would be needed if the radiochemical analysis of potable waters were to be
undertaken, and likewise another chemist would be needed to carry out pesti-
cide analysis. The other water chemistries could be undertaken, however,
without an increase in staff, simply by making a change in emphasis; namely,
substituting some of the required chemistries for those now being done but
not required.
The salaries of all laboratory personnel appear to be low.
Metal samples and samples for nitrate and surfactant analysis are not
now properly preserved.
169
-------
The laboratory does not have any routine system for checking their
laboratory performance, although they have in the past participated in
Analytical Reference Service studies. In view of the emphasis now being
placed on quality control by all government agencies, it was suggested that
the Chief Chemist take a short course in "Analytical Quality Control. "
It was recommended that a Hach Model 2100 turbidimeter be purchased.
Earl F. McFarren
170
-------
SURVEY OF WATER CHEMISTRY LABORATORIES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Water Programs
Water Hygiene Division
Indicating conformity with the 13th
edition of Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Waste -
water (1971).
Survey by Earl F. McFarren
Date February 14-15, 1972
X = Deviation U = Undetermined
O = Not Used
Laboratory state Health Department
Street 1571 Perry Street
City Columbus
Director Charles C. Croft
Chief Chemist
Wilson Walker
State Ohio 43201 Water Supply Chief A.U. Y~.'Jvk> *.
1.
Substances Determined
Physical determinations
a. color platinum-cobalt standard method
b. odor
c. turbidity
Method
Jackson candle
2. Miscellaneous anions, organics and solids
3. Metals
a. arsenic
b. barium
c. cadmium
d. chromium
e. copper
f. iron
g. lead
Atomic absorption
X
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
chlorides arpentometric (silver nitrate)
cyanide
carbon chloroform extract
fluorides
nitrates
sulfates
surfactants
total dissolved solids
other
electrode
phenoldisulfonic acid
turbidimetric
103° gravimetric
" (verified by boat)
h. manganese
i. selenium
j. silver
K. mercury
1. zinc
m. other
Calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium.
aluminum and beryllium, hardness, alkalinity,
and pH.
O
O
O
O
O
O
-------
4. Radioactivity
a. gross beta
b. radium 226^
c. strontium 90
d. other
Pesticides
a. aldrin
b. chlordane
c. dieldrin
d. DDT ~
e. endrin
f. heptachlor
g. heptachlor epoxide
h. methoxychlor
i. lindane
toxaphene
k. total organic phosphates plus carbamates
1. chlorinated phenoxy alkyl pesticides _
m. other
Laboratory Apparatus
Make Model
6. Color comparators
a. visual
b. filter photometer
7. Spectrophotometer
a. visible Beckman (2) Model B
b. flame
c. other Ultraviolet Spectrophotometer Perkin-Elmer 402
8. Atomic absorption Spectrophotometer
a. air-acetylene burner Perkin-Elmer (2) 403
b. nitrous-oxide burner " '' "
c. cold vapor (flameless) " " "
9. Gas chromatographic equipment
a. electron capture
b. flame ionization
c. flame photometric
d. microcoulometric
e. other
172
-------
Laboratory
'Ohio State Department of Health
Location
1571 Perry Street
Date
2/14-15/72
10.
Make
Other chromatographic equipment
a. thin-layer
Model
b. Kuderna-Danish evaporator_
c. other
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Turbidimeter
Amperemeter
Titrimeter
pH meter Corning Model 10. Beckman SS-1 (3)
Fluoride electrode Beckman
Arsine generator have, but seldom use
Cyanide still 2 stills
Fluoride still
Carbon-chloroform extraction equipment
a. high or low flow columns
b. carbon drying oven
c. extraction apparatus
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
d. manifold for solvent evaporation
Drying oven Thelco and Fress
Steam bath
Yes
Hot water bath
Muffle furnace
Yes
Thermolyne
Distilled water still 2-5 gal/hr Consolidated stills_
Water deionizer laboratory cartridges
Conductivity meter Industrial Instruments
Balance, sensitive to 0. 1 mg Mettler H207, Satorius^
Automatic analyzer for
a. nitrates plus nitrites on order
b. nitrites on order
X
O
JLL
O
173
-------
28.
29.
30.
Make
Automatic analyzer for (Continued)
c. chloride
d. sulfate
cyanide
Model
e.
f.
g-
on order
fluoride
°"ier phosphates, ammonia, phenol. MBAS.
on order
Radiation Counting Equipment
a. internal proportional counter Beckman Widebeta TT
b. alpha-scintillation counter Beckman, Liquid Scintillation LS-233
c. other Lowbeta II, Gamma Ray Spectrometer
Other Instruments or Equipment
a.
b.
c.
d.
Samples
31. Containers
a. Non-reusable plastic containers preferred for the
collection of samples for general inorganic analysis. . .
b. Glass bottles with teflon lines caps preferred for
collection of pesticide samples
c. Other kind
32. Preservatives
a. Samples for metal analysis preserved by the addition
of nitric acid to a pH of about 2.0
b. Nitrates and methylenc blue active substances preserved
by addition of mercuric chloride
c. Cyanide preserved by the addition of sodium
hydroxide to a pH of 11
d. No known or required preservative for turbidity, color,
pH, chloride, sulfate, fluoride, specific conductance
and total dissolved solids
e. If no preservative is used, in general samples are
analyzed within 72 hrs
X
-------
Laboratory Location Date
Ohio State Department of Health 1571 Perry Street 2/14-15/72
33. Identification
a. Every bottle should be identified by attaching an
appropriately inscribed tag, a label or a number
corresponding to a sample identification sheet
b. The minimum information required on the tag or
correspondingly numbered sheet includes; name
of the water supply sampled, location of sampling
site, exact date and time of collection, type of
sample (raw, finished, grab or composite) by
whom collected, and kind of preservative if added
34. Collection
a. Samples from wells collected after pumping for
a sufficient time to assure that the sample is
representative of the ground water which feeds
the well
b. Finished (treated) water sampled at the plant by
use of a pipeline drip device or the collecting
and compositing of hourly (or other interval) samples
c. Distribution samples obtained at several different
points in the system; usually grab samples obtained
without first flushing the line, although both kinds of
samples may at times be desirable U
Records
35. Availability
a. Assay results assembled and available for inspection
b. Notation made of those water supplies which did not
comply with one or more standards, and some sort
of follow-up program instigated , , . ,
36. Number analyzed annually
a. private supplies * very few
b. semi-public \j
C. municipal 2fi14 samplpH in 1 971 (fi^ 4R4 analyses^
(1) sources
(2) finished
(3) distribution
175
-------
37. Frequency
a. Physical characteristics measured at least once a week
and preferably every day at the treatment plant . .
b. Chemical characteristics determined at least once every
three years on ground water supplies and semi-annually
on surface water supplies unless previous data has indicated
a potential problem which needs to be monitored more frequently
Laboratory
38. Physical facilities
a. Bench top area adequate
b. Sufficient cabinet space for chemicals and glassware
c. Adequate hood space.
d. Office space available for record keeping and
processing reports
e. Space for storage and handling of bottles
39. Glassware
a. Thoroughly washed with suitable detergent and warm water . . .
b. Rinsed immediately in clean tap water to remove detergent . . .
c. Final rinse with distilled water
d. Bichromate cleaning solution used for difficult to
clean glassware
e. Glassware used for pesticide analysis should receive a
final rinse with A. R. grade acetone or ethyl acetate Q
40. Organization
a. Total number of laboratories examining water 1 ....
b. Water laboratory is a separate unit, and not part of a
food, drug, or toxicological laboratory
c. Each of the other rerti^ial laboratorif ° have the same
capabilif,- £-....„
d. Radiation chemistry is a part of the water laboratory x
Quality Control
41. Laboratory water quality
a. Conductivity of water checked at regular intervals
b. Use of deionized water for metal analysis y
distilled water checked, and not found necessary.
176
-------
Laboratory
Ohio State Department of Health
Location
1571 Perry Street
Date
2/14-15/72
42. Control Samples
a. A control sample of known composition (in addition to
any necessary standards) is analyzed every time one or
more unknown samples are analyzed x
———
b. A control sample is available and used for each
substance specified in the drinking v/ater standards x
c. A control chart has been constructed for each substance,
and the precision of each determination has been
calculated x
43. Reference Samples
a. Accuracy and ability of laboratory to perform each
> analysis checked by requiring them to analyze an
unknown reference sample(s) supplied by the surveying
office or laboratory at least once a year x
Staff
44. Personnel
a. Total number of staff 31/2
b. Number with degrees in chemistry 3
c. Does state operate under a merit system
d. Are job descriptions written
e. Does state encourage attendance at professional
meetings, short courses, etc
45. Salaries
a. Chief chemist $11,602 ?-A-
b. Assistant chemist $g to 9.000 (2) . 3..A
c. Aids $5.096 (1)
-------
Appendix C
Manpower Needs for Community Water Supply Activities
Two estimates of manpower requirements are presented in this
appendix. The first was prepared by the Water Supply Unit using
criteria established by the Division of Water Supply of EPA. The
Region V office of EPA finds this estimate with its assumptions to be
accurate. The second estimate was prepared by the Water Supply Section,
EPA, Region V, using the task evaluation method. This method requires
the definition of tasks which must be done, the number of sources
generating the task, the number of times the task must be done for
each source, and the time required to accomplish each task.
Differences in the two estimates are: the first estimate assumes
greater emphasis on cross connection control than the second, the
first includes planning whi1 o the second does riot, and the first assumes
greater State particinatior ±n water supply operator training than
the second. Neither estimate provides for the surveillance of \vater
supply facility waste discharges.
-------
Requirements for Professional Personnel in
the Administration of a Community Water
Supply Program in Ohio by Experience
Estimate Method
(1)
A. Assumptions :
1. 858 community water supply systems (1971).
2. k man days/public water supply/year (includes plans review,
meeting with governing bodies, surveys, report writing, training,
etc. - does not include cross connection control activities).
3- Cross connection control requirements for water supply systems
based on the following:
Population Served Man days/System/Year
by System
Over 250,000 6
50,001 to 250,000 5
25,001 to 50,000 k
10,001 to 25,000 3
5,001 to 10,000 2
0 to 5,000 1
^. 225 man days equals one man year.
5. Man days required does not include personnel requirements for
auxiliary facilities or clerical help.
B. Professional Personnel Required
1. Community Water Supply
o ±. i an ciYE -7, „ ,
o systems x H - - — * — = 5^32 man day
systen
3^-32 man days = 15-3 man years
225 man days
man year
(1) Assumptions follow pattern used by Bureau of Water Hygiene, EPA, in
January, 1971, report on Evaluation of the Tennessee Water Supply
Program.
-------
2. Cross Connection Control
No. of Man Days Man Days
Population Systems System Group
Over 250,000 7 6 if2
50,001 to 250,000 11 5 55
25,001 to 50,000 20 if 80
10,001 to 25,000 61 3 183
5,001 to 10,000 57 2 11 if
0 to 5,000 602 1 602
758* 1076
1076 man days = if.8 man years
225 man days
man year
3. Total
Community Water Supply 15-3 roan years
Cross Connection Control if.8 man years
20.1 man years
C. Present Status
Present
Area Staff
Water Supply Unit 5
District Offices jf
9
To meet the required number of professional personnel it will be
necessary to increase the staff from the present nine to 20, or an
increase of 11 prefer,.: '".-••il personnel.
Does not include satellite systems.
180
-------
D. Plan for Reorganization
Present Proposed
Area Staff Staff
Water Supply Unit
Engineer-in-Charge 1 1
Plans Review 1 2
Operations 2 k
Water Quality 1 2
Planning 1
Training 1
Enforcement _1_
Total 5 12
District Offices
Northeast 1 3
Southeast 1 2
Southwest 1 2
Northwest _J_ __2
Total ^ 9
It is estimated that one district engineer can cover about
100 public water supply systems each year on the basis of
two man days per system for inspections and report writing only.
-------
Estimate of Professional Personnel Needed for
Public Water Supply Surveillance in Ohio by
Task Definition Method
This method first defines the organization to accomplish the basic
objective, divides tasks into three basic functions or classes, defines
the tasks necessary to accomplish the objective and assigns those tasks
to logical offices or sections within the organization and finally uses
estimates of the number of sources, number of task units generated by
each source per year, and man hours per task unit to determine the
manpower requirement to obtain the objective.
The manpower requirement, not including planning and well log
functions, presently done by the Department of Natural Resources, and
not including secretarial staff, is estimated at 15 professional
personnel as shown by the summary. Bureau of Laboratory manpower re-
quirements are not included.
182
-------
Summary of Manpower Needs
Water Supply Unit
Chief's Office 2000 hr. = 1.1 1
WQ Section 1188 hr. = 0.7 1
Operations Section 5^04 hr. - 3-1 3
Plans Review Section 4000 hr. = 2.3 2
7
All Districts 12648 hr. = 7-2 7
Divide District need based on number of water supplies
SE 155 X 12648 = 2610 = 1-5 2
750
SW 176 X 12648 = 2970 = 1.7 2
750
NE 214 X 12648 = 3610 = 2.1 2
750
NW 205 X 12648 =: 3460 = 2.0
750
183
-------
Steps for Professional Personnel Estimate by
Task Definition Method
A. Organizational Structure to Accomplish Tasks
Water Supply Unit
Chief's Office
Water Quality Section
Operations Section
Plans Review Section
District Offices
B. Task Classification
Administration
Surveillance
Compliance
C. Task Definition by Structural Section or Office
Chief's Off ice-
Admin is trat ion
1. Technical assistance (include review of other agency output)
2. Liaison with other agencies concerned with water supply
3- Training assistance
k. Direction of program activities
Compliance
1. Guide action against violators
Water Quality Section
Administration
184
-------
1. Maintain and develop liaison with other organizations
requiring or having water quality data.
Water Supply Section, EPA (Cincinnati and Chicago)
Water Pollution Laboratory, EPA, Cincinnati
District Office, EPA, Cleveland
U.S. Geological Survey
Water Pollution Unit, Department of Health
Department of Natural Resources
Others
2. Develop programs for the storage and retrieval of
water quality data to meet varied needs.
Statewide surveys
District surveys
Data on individual water supplies
Data on specific sources
3- Technical Assistance (includes training aid)
Surveillance
1. Develop sampling programs
2. Follow up Bureau of Laboratory re-suits to see that
program goals are met.
3. Maintain check and control over Bureau of Laboratory
bacterial and chemical laboratory certifications.
Compliance
1. Conduct field investigations to confirm and remedy fin-
ished water quality exceeding the Drinking Water Standards
185
-------
Operations .Section
Administration
1. Technical Assistance, provide consultation, assist
chiefs office in training function.
2. Check water supply classifications (information vital
to Certification Committee)
3« Develop programs for the storage and retrieval of
operations data to meet varied needs. Prepare reports
from such data.
Feedback to District offices
Feedback to water supplies
Preparation of District and Statewide reports
Special studies
k. Assist District Offices in developing inspection programs.
Surveillance
1. Receive arid manage monthly reports
2. Manage interstate carrier inspections and reports.
3> Maintain surveillance over fluoridation of public water
supplies
't. Assist development of cross connection control programs.
5- Manage bacteriological sampling and reporting program
(should be under WQ Section)
Compliance
1. Develop data for action against water supplies violating
State regulations.
-------
Plans Review Section
Administration
1. Technical assistance (including training aid)
Surveillance
1. Develop and maintain program on status of instsllation
Compliance
1. Review and evaluate plans for water supply
District Offices
Administration
1. Technical Assistance
Surveillance
1. Provide information to Water Supply Unit
2. Process operators reports, maintain records on such
reports
3. Maintain bacterial records
k. Conduct annual and detailed inpsections
Compliance
1. Develop data on violations of Department regulations
and law in cooperation with the Water Supply Uni„ for
enforcement action.
-------
D. Derivation of Manpower Requirements
Task Unit # of Work load
Sources per source
per year
Chief's Office
A-1 Request for assist
A-2 Meeting +• followup
A-3 Liaison with oper.
train, comm.+followup
A-4 Develop & check policy
C-1 Enforcement cases
1 + man year
Water Quality Section
A-1 Meetings
A-2 Programming
A-3 Requests for assist.
S-1 Schedule devel.
S-2 Check of schedule
progress , followup
S-3 Certification check
C-1 Field Investigation
1- man year
Operations Section
A-1 Requests for assist.
A-2 Check classifications
(make 5 yr. program)
A-3 Data Evaluation
A-4 1Aly meetings and
directives
S-1 Process monthly reports
S-2 Coord. ISC Irisp. &
Annual Report
S-3 Review Monthly Rep.
Pursue those not F
S-4 Develop programs as
Consultant
S-5 Receive mo. report
Process
C-1 Data Development
3 man years
100
15
2
7
10
8
1
50
1
1
1
50
200
160
5
1
800
25
120
200
800
20
1
4
8
12
4
2
8
nature 1
varies
2
12
4
1
nature 1
varies
1
12
4
12
1
12
2
12
4
Man hours
per work
load unit
4
8
8
8
8
Total
8
16
2
40
24
16,
8
Total
1
30 min.
16
16
5 min.
4
30 min.
4
5 min.
1
Total
Manhours
per year
4oo
48o
128
672
320
2020
128
128
100
80
288
64
4oo
1188
200
80
960
64
800
100
720
1600
800
80
54o4
188
-------
Task Unit
# of Work load
Sources per source
per year
Man hours
per work
load unit
Man Lours
per year
Plans Review Section
A-1 Requests for assist 50 nature 1
varies
S-1 Review Dist. reports
check & revise invent. 300 1
C-1 Review & Eval. plans
for W.S.Cincl. consult
of spec, plans) 300 1
2+ man years
District Offices
A-1 Requests for Assist. 1000nature 1
varies
S-1 Monthly Reports &
Quart. Staff Meeting h
S-2 Review Reports Check
against Standards 800
S-3 Review Report, Check
Stds., Follow up,
Record 800
S-k Inspection, Follow up 800
C-1 Data Development 20
8 man years
12
Total
100
300
3600
kOOO
1000
12
12
12
1
4
6
10 min.
20 min.
8
2
Total
288
1600
3200
6400
160
12648
Bnvironm-
Librar,, ,
1 North
Chicago,
'•Tction
,A.J G0606
------- |