United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
Washington DC 20460
October 1980
Water
xvEPA
Decision-Makers' Guide
in Water Supply Management
-------
60OR8O112
Region HI Library
Cauirftl
FINAL REPORT
DECISION-MAKERS' GUIDE
IN
WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT
PREPARED BY
GULP/WESNER/GULP - CLEAN WATER CONSULTANTS
BOX 40, EL DORADO HILLS, CA 95630
PROJECT OFRCER
HUGH HANSON
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
November, 1979
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT & DISCLAIMER
This guide was prepared by Culp/Wesner/Culp, Clean Water Consultants (CWC),
of El Dorado Hills, California, with Dr. William F. Owen and Justine A. Faisst as
authors and Russell L. Gulp as editor. All work was done under contract to the
U.S. EPA. CWC is solely responsible for the contents of the guide.
A Validation Panel of nine water works people, public officials, and
citizens assisted in preparation of the guide by reviewing and commenting on the
original outline for the report and on the original draft of the final report.
However, the Panel had no control over the content of the final report, and CWC
alone is responsible for it. Participation by Panel members does not constitute
their approval or endorsement of the manual or its contents. Validation Panel
members are listed below:
Reese Riddiough
Public Works Director
City of Santa Maria,
California
John 0. Nelson
General Manager
North Marin County
Water District
P.O. Box 146
Novato, CA 94947
Marshall Haney
Utilities Director
P.O. Box 309
Richardson, TX 75080
David W. Callahan
Assistant Manager
South Tahoe Public
Utility District
P.O. Box AU
South Lake Tahoe, CA 95705
Mrs. Arlis Ungar
League of Women Voters of Calif.
517 Silverado Drive
Lafayette, CA 94540
Robert Lee
General Manager
Medford Water Commission
City Hall
Medford, Oregon 97501
Richard Pelton
Water Superintendent
P.O. Box 1038
Topeka, Kansas 66601
Sat Tamarabuchi
Manager of Planning
Irvine Ranch Water District
P.O. Box D-l
Irvine, CA 92716
The ninth member of the Panel and Project Officer for EPA was Hugh Hanson,
Office of Drinking Water.
-------
DECISION-MAKERS' GUIDE IN
WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Subject Pages
INTRODUCTION 1
Decision Making Process li
Water System Management Concerns l±
Organization and Use of the Decision-Makers' Guide 5
PART I - INSTITUTIONAL 1-1
SECTION I - OWNERSHIP & MANAGEMENT
QUESTION ABOUT ORGANIZATION OF WATER SYSTEMS !_!
Existing Systems 1_1
New Systems 1_1
OWNERSHIP i_2
Alternatives 1_2
Considerations 1_3
COOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT !_3
Single Conmunity 1_3
Regional!zation • 1_5
Multi-Ccamunity Cooperative Administration 1_6
HOW TO SELECT AN ENGINEERING CONSULTANT 1_7
REFERENCES 1_9
SECTION 2 - RISK PROTECTION
RISKS AND INSURANCE 2-1
Types of Risk 2-1
Coverage 2-1
Property Loss or Damage 2-1
Workman's Compensation 2-1
Public Liability 2-2
Product Insurance 2-2
Crime Coverage 2-2
Self Insurance 2-2
REFERENCE 2-2
SECTION 3 - STAFFING
OUTSIDE SERVICES 3_1
SUPERVISION 3_2
PERSONNEL 3_2
Emergency Staffing 3_lt
SKILLS . 3_H
TRAINING 3_lt
HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS 3.5
REFERENCES 3_f
v
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Subject . Page
SECTION 4 - RECORDS AND REPORTS
RECORDS k.!
Records of Operation & Maintenance li_2
Preservation of Records 1^_2
REPORTS lj_3
REFERENCES 1^
..."
SECTION 5 - EXTERNAL INFLUENCES AND OBLIGATIONS
REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS 5-1
Rationale for NIPDWR 5_3
Secondary Standards • 5.1^
Options for Meeting Primary & Secondary Standards ^
LEGAL RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES 5.5
PUBLIC RELATIONS AND PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS 5.5
ECONOMIC AND ENERGY TRENDS 5_6
REFERENCES 5.7
PART II - PRODUCTION II-l
SECTION 6 - PLANNING 6-1
PROJECTING FUTURE SYSTEM NEEDS g_l^
Appropriate Projection Techniques for Static Conditions 5.5
Appropriate Projection Techniques for Dynamic Conditions 5.5
EMERGENCY AND STANDBY SYSTEMS 6_y
SUPPLY OPTIONS IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS 6_9
ENERGY CONSIDERATIONS . , 6_9
Sources 6_10
Conservation ••. £_IQ
. Redundancy and Reliability 6_12
REFERENCES g_13
SECTION 7 - SUPPLY 7_!
QUANTITY 7_2
RAW WATER QUALITY AND TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS . j_2
STORAGE Y_ll
CWSERVATION T_lt
REFERENCES . j_^
SECTION 8 - TREATMENT
OBJECTIVES 8-1
PROCESS SELECTION 8-2
Simple Disinfection 8-2
Turbidity Removal . 8-5
WATER TREATMENT FOR CORROSION CONTROL 8-9
CHEMICAL HANDLING . 8-9
VI
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Subject Page
OPERATION AND CONTROL ' 8-10
RELIABILITY 8-10
REFERENCES 8-11
SECTION 9 - WATER TREATMENT WASTES
SOURCES 9_i
SLUDGE DISPOSAL METHODS 9_2
RECLAMATION AND REUSE 9_2
Alum Recovery 9_2
Alternative .Reuses o,_2
SLUDGE DEWATERING 9.3
LANDFILL DISPOSAL ,9.3
DISCHARGE TO SANITARY SEWERS 9.5
REFERENCES 9.5 '
SECTION 10- DISTRIBUTION
SERVICE 10-1
FIRE PROTECTION !0_1
DISTRIBUTION MAINS 10_3
STORAGE 10_1*
CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL 10-1*
REFERENCES 10-5
SECTION 11 - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
ORGANIZATION AND PERSONNEL . n_i
PROCEDURES AND EQUIPMENT H_2
O&M Manual 11-2
Routine Operations 11-3
Maintenance 11-3
Tools, Equipment, and Supplies 11-U
RECORDS 11_U
REFERENCES 11_5
SECTION 12 - SURVEILLANCE
OBJECTIVES AND REGULATIONS 12-1
SAMPLING 12-2
LABORATORY FACILITIES 12-3
INTERPRETATION AND EVALUATION 12-1*
REFERENCES 12-li
PART III FINANCE III-l
SECTION 13 - COSTS
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES . 13_1
Supply 13_2
Water Treatment 13-U
vii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Subject Page
Waste Handling and Disposal 13-5
Distribution and Storage 13-6
Metering , 13-7
Fire Protection 13-8
Administrative and O&M Facilities 13-8
ANNUAL COSTS 13_8
Water Treatment 13-10
Waste Handling and Disposal 13-10
Supply, Distribution, Storage and Metering 13-10
Monitoring and Surveillance 13-15
REFERENCES 13-16
SECTION 14 - INCOME
REVENUE REQUIREMENTS il»_i
SOURCES OF REVENUE lk-2
Water Sales lk-2
Taxes , ..lU-5
REFERENCES ll»_5
SECTION 15 - FINANCING CAPITAL COSTS
BONDS 15_2
GRANTS AND LOANS 15-2
REVENUE RESERVES 15-1*
STOCK SALES 15_1|
BANK LOANS 15_li
REFERENCES 15_1»
REFERENCES l6-l
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - NATIONAL INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS (NIPDWR) A-l
APPENDIX B - PROPOSAL REVISIONS TO NIPDWR z~l
APPENDIX C - SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS C-l
APPENDIX D - BASIS FOR CAPITAL COSTS COMPUTATIONS D-l,
APPENDIX E - BASIS FOR ANNUAL O&M COST COMPUTATIONS E-l'
APPENDIX F - RATIONALE FOR NATIONAL INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS F-l
viii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Following
Page
1 Decision Matrix
I Part I Institutional
II Part II Production
6-1 Water Production Activity
8-1 Schematic Diagram of Disinfection by Chlorine
8-2 Schematic Diagram of Direct Filtration for Turbidity
Removal and Disinfection
III Part III Finance
3
1-2
II-2
6-2
8-6
8-6
III-2
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1-1 Advantages and Disadvantages of Public and Private Ownership 1-U
1-2 Summary of the Advantages and Disadvantages of Water Utility
Management Alternatives 1-8
3-1 Alternative Methods of Personnel Training 2-6
4-1 Minimum Recommended Duration for Record Keeping by SDWA h-3
5-1 Public Notification Requirements for Community Public
Water Supplies 5-3
6—2 Recommendations for Contingency Plan Personnel
Requirements 6-8
7-1 General Characteristics of Water Sources 7-3
8-1 Most Effective Treatment Methods for Contaminant Removal 8-3
9-1 Alternative Sludge Dewatering Methods > 9_U
10-1 Guidelines for Location Distribution System Valves 10-U
12-1 Required Surveillance Sampling Locations and Frequency 12-2
12-2 Recommended Minimum Water Plant Laboratory Requirements 12-1*
13-1 Summary of Rough Capital Costs for Various Si?e Water System 13-3
13-2 Summary of Approximate Total Annual Cost for Potable
Water Treatment 13-9
13-3 O&M Costs for Individual Potable Water Treatment Processess
as a percent of Total O&M Expenses 13-11
13-4 Summary of Annual Cost for Water Treatment Plant
Wastes Disposal . 13-12
13-5 O&M Costs for Water Treatment Plant Waste Disposal as a
Percent pf Total O&M Costs 13-13
13-6 Summary of Annual Costs for Supply, Distribution, & Storage 13-lU
13-7 Estimated Minimum Annual Monitoring Costs per Person Served
Versus Population Served and Type of Community Water System 13-15
14-1 Summary of Revenue Sources and Application lU-3
14-2 Rate Structures for Water Sales lU-U
1>-1 Capital Financing Options 15_3
ix
-------
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued)
Table . i Page
A-l IPDWR Maximum Contaminant Levels for Public Water Supplies A-2
A-2 Coliform Samples Required Per Population Served A-3
C-l Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels for Public Water
Systems C-2
D-l Cost Indices as of October 1978 D-3
E-l Water Treatment Chemical Cost for Small Treatment Systems E-3
F-l Rationale for National Interim Primary Drinking Water
Regulations F-2
-------
Errata Sheet
Table of Contents
APPENDIX B: Delete
APPENDIX F: Delete
Section 1
1. Page 1-1, question 6: Change to: "See pages 1-3 to
1-7."
2. Page 1-5, Paragraph 1: Add the underlined words:
"... an additional two year period for exemptions
for systems entering "
Section 4
1.. Page 4-1, paragraph 1: Change item 3 to read "...
maintained?" (See pg. 4-3, Table 4-1)
Section 5
1. Tab: Change "Rational" to "Rationale".
2. Page 5-1, paragraph 3: In item 2 delete the phrase
in parenthesis.
3. Page 5-1, paragraph 3: In item 4 replace the phrase
in parenthesis with : "(See the National Academy of
Sciences Report; Drinking Water and Health)".
4. Page 5-2, paragraph 2: Change sentence four to read:
"The NIPDWR were published in the Federal Register
(See Appendix A)".
;
5. Page 5-2, paragraph 3: Delete: "The revisions ....
sometime in 1980".
6. Page 5-3, last paragraph: In the fourth and fifth
sentences change "January 1, 1981" and "January 1,
1983" to "January 1, 1984" and "January 1, 1986"
respectively.
-------
7. Page 5-4, fourth paragraph: Change to read as
follows: "Details on health effects and the basis
for the standards are published in EPA publication
570/9-76-003 entitled: National Interim Primary
Drinking Water Regulations (NTIS #PB 267-630) and
also in the 1973 Report of the EPA Advisory
Committee on the Revision and Application of the
Drinking Water Standards".
8. Page 5-4, fifth paragraph, fourth sentence: Delete
"(as indicated in Appendix F)".
9. Page 5-7, References. Add: "Drinking Water and
Health, Volumes I, II, & III, National Academy of
Sciences, 2101 Constitution Ave. Washington, D.C.
20418.
Section 8
1. Page 8-2: first sentence: Delete: "Detailed
discussions....of this guide".
2. Page 8-5, Sentence 1: Change as follows:
"...regulatory activity (44 FR 63624, November 29,
1979) of EPA "
3. Page 8-5, paragraph 4: Change "larium" to "barium".
/
Section 12
1. Page 12-1, paragraph 2: In item 3 replace the
contents of the parenthesis with: "(See Appendix
A)"
2. Page 12-1, paragraph 3 delete: "As noted i Table
12-1, ....distribution system".
-------
3. Page 12-2, eliminate Table 12-1.
Section 15
1. Page 15-1, last sentence: Replace the last sentence
with the statement: "Many of these programs are no
longer funded or are not funded to the degree they
were. Individuals should check with these agencies
to find out more about the financial assistance
programs."
-------
PAGES
INTRODUCTION 1
Decision Making Process 4
Water System Management Concerns 4
Organization and Use of the
Decision Makers' Guide c
-------
DECISION-MAKERS' GUIDE
IN WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT
INTRODUCTION
Today's decision makers in the drinking water field have a unique opportu-
nity to improve the quality and safety of public water supplies. The findings of
the U.S. Public Health Service Community Water Supply Study in 1970 as to the
deficiencies in water systems were surprising to laymen and professionals alike,
and marked the start of an increased public concern over drinking water quality.
The Public Health Service report showed that approximately 17 percent of all
existing public water supplies failed to meet one or more of the mandatory qual-
ity standards; 25 percent did not meet one or more of the recommended ' quality
standards; more than 50 percent had major deficiencies in supply, storage, or
distribution facilities; 12 percent failed to meet the bacteriological quality
standards; and 90 percent had no programs for control of cross connection
hazards. There are also serious deficiencies in training programs and compensa-
tion schedules for water works employees.
The General Accounting Office (GAO) reached similar conclusions after
reviewing six State water supply programs. The GAO report stated that "poten-
tially dangerous water was being delivered to some customers, particularly by
small water supply systems serving populations of 5,000 or less."
Sufficient questions have arisen regarding water safety to concern the pub-
lic and to give impetus to adoption of the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (SDWA:
PL 93-523). For details of the SDWA, please refer to Appendix A of this report.
Under the SDWA, water utilities have several responsibilities beyond direct
operation and maintenance including the following: monitoring, public notifica-
tion for violations of the SDWA, and record keeping. Water utilities must provide
the necessary facilities, personnel, and operating vigilance to assure continuous
delivery of safe water which consistently meets the requirements of the National
Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations, established under the SDWA.
Water supply management is noticeably more complex for today's public offi-
cials, especially in small communities. Accordingly, the purpose of this guide is
to provide information that will help define the scope of problems facing water
utility management and assist in their solution. The manual presents an overview
of the key issues concerning water supply and suggests the means for addressing
detailed, specific questions related to these issues through recommended refer-
ence lists and use of consultants.
Protection of the quality and safety of public water supplies is now under-
going rapid development and change. Water works operators are faced with many new
and complex problems, but they have the advantage of new technology to solve
these problems*
-------
In the past water treatment has developed partially as an art as well as. a
science. The water industry has frequently failed to utilize fully known, proven
methods for solving many water problems, and has been slow to adapt new scien-
tific ideas and principles to water works practice. There now exists a great
backlog of scientific and engineering data which might be used to the benefit of
the public by application of innovative solutions to today's water problems.
As examples, over the past fifteen years safe rates for filter operation
have been increased from 2 gpm/sf (gallons per minute per square foot) to 5
gpm/sf by replacement of single media (sand or coal) filters with dual media
(sand and coal) or mixed media (sand, coal, and garnet) filters. This has cut the
cost of filtration, and greatly increased the efficiency and reliability of the
filtration process.
Shallow depth sedimentation theory has been applied to water works practice
to bring high rate settling into use through development of tube settlers. These
devices are now marketed by several manufacturers. They save space and cut set-
tling costs. The space saving makes possible the production of factory fabricated
treatment plants of greater capacity.
Granular activated carbon has been introduced as a new and very effective
means of taste and odor control for many public drinking water supplies. On-site
and off-site reactivation of granular activated carbon for reuse is now making
possible the application of carbon to remove a broad range of potentially harmful
trace organic -substances from water supplies.
Discovery of ,the production of undesirable by-products during chlorination
in water treatment has led to development of means for minimizing such by-product
formation through proper selection of points for proper chlorine application.
This has also led to consideration of pre-oxidation or disinfection with ozone,
chlorine dioxide, or other substances.
There have also been recent improvements in methods for disposing of water
treatment sludges and for reclamation and reuse of water treatment chemicals.
Some of the most dramatic improvements in water supply methods are new
laboratory and monitoring techniques. The sensitivity and detection limits of
many tests have been greatly increased, and the use of instruments and computers
for process control and monitoring has been greatly extended.
These new concepts in water purification can be applied to remedy a wide
variety of conditions which are of current public concern. They can be used to
treat water supplies which are receiving greatly increased pollutional loads of
domestic wastes and new complex chemical wastes from industrial and agricultural
operations. They can ,be used to remove pesticides, herbicides, some heavy metals,
and other substances which are objectionable even when present only in trace
amounts. They can remove taste and odor from water and eliminate the hazards
involved when unpalatable tap water drives consumers to the purchase of bottled
water at much higher cost. These methods can be used to treat runoff from water-
sheds which were once considered to be "protected," but which are now subject to
development or to the pollutional threats posed by the widespread use of trail
-------
IWATER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT CONCERNS!
I PART i -
INSTITUTIONAL
SECTION I
OWNERSHIP &
MANAGEMENT
SECTION )
STAFFING
pU
— T
TSIDE SERVICE
SECTION «t
RECORDS
SECTION S
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES &
•[RECORDS P. 1 I
IREPORTS P. 3 |
PART || - I
| PRODUCTION |
1 PERSONNEL P. ^~l
-i SKILLS pra~i
——-[TRAINING P .41
-I HEALTH & SAFFTY I
I P. 5 I
[REGULATIONS & STANDARDS P,
ILEGAL RIGHTS & LIABILITIES t J5\-
RELATIONS & PUBLIC |_
NOTIFICATIONS P. 5 I
ECONOMIC* ENERGY
TRENDS P. 6.
SECTION fe
PI ANMINfi F "I
PROJECTING FUTURE!
SYSTEMS P. 4 |
EMERGENCY &
STANDBY SYSTEMS
P. 7
SUPPLY OPTIONS I
IN EMERGENCY
SITUATIONS P. 9
-[QUANTITY f. 21
^ASSESSING CHANG"*- .
REGULATIONS P. J» i
SECTION t ~1
PROCESS
SELECTION P. 21
—SOURCES P. i;
WASTE
TREATMENT
FOR CORROSION
CONTROL P q
1 CHEMICAL
HANDLING P 9|
1 OPERATION & I
CONTROL P
SECTION 9
TER TRFA •
U/ACTCC P 1
SLUDGE
DISPOSAL
METHODS P.,2!
{RECLAMATION!
8. REUSE P. 21
I . SLUDGE
PEWATERING p. 3
LANDFIL1 I
DISPOSAL - 3J
PROCEDURES & I
EQUIPMENT P. 2]
H DISTRIBUTION I
MAINS P. 3- |
—[STORAGE "
1—[RECORDS P.-4|
1 SECT ION 12
SURVEILLANCE
OBJECTIVES &
REQUIREMENTS P. 1
- (SAMPLING P. 2|
LABORATORY I
FACILITIES P. -j \
INTERPRETATION &|
EVALUATION P. 4 |
CROSS CONNECT
CONTROL P. 4
1—[ANNUAL COSTS P. 8 I
SECTION Hi 1
INCOME P. |
REVENUE
REQUIREMENTS
P. 1
SOURCES OF I
REVENUE P.
[REVENUE RESOURCES P . 4 I
Figure 1
DECISION MATRIX
1—IBANK LOANS P. - 4 i
-------
bikes, four-wheel drive vehicles, and snowmobiles which enable people, to reach
formerly inaccessible areas.
The means are now at hand to solve virtually any and all water quality prob-
lems. However, there is a great lag in the practical use and application of these
methods. A great deal more must be done. Many recently perfected water treatment
processes must be included in plans for new plants and must be added to existing
plants if the full potential benefits to the public from scientific and engineer-
ing progress in this'area are to be realized.
Decision Making Process
The decisions made by water utility management encompass a wide range of
economic, social, political, legal, and technological questions. Furthermore, the
specific concerns vary considerably among communities - thus each organization
encounters unique problems or decisions to be resolved.
Through continuous surveillance, a manager identifies specific problems and
needs of his organization and anticipates future areas of concern. These include
questions concerning personnel, administrative, and legal as well as technical
matters. Then, any system or organizational deficiencies are resolved by defining
the available alternatives and making the changes that most economically meet
community needs.
Water System Management Concerns
Water utility management addresses three major areas: institutional, pro-
duction, and finance. Some of the prominent concerns in these areas are illus-
trated diagrammatically in Figure 1, which corresponds to a table of contents for
this manual. There is a strong interaction among the various factors involved in
water system management that influences the ultimate decision-making process.
Some of the utility manager's most pressing concerns are:
• unfamiliarity with current EPA and State regulations and what EPA and
State expect from him under the present and impending Drinking Water
Regulations
• lack of knowledge of new technologies and what they can do to solve
water problems
• how to hire a qualified consultant and how to avoid hiring an unquali-
fied consultant
• inadequate compensation levels for water works personnel which prevent
him from attracting, hiring, or retaining qualified workers
• resistance to change, both by the public and the water works industry
• lack of information regarding the methods of financing major capital
improvements
-------
-------
• local political concerns
• how to replace lost ad valorem tax funds with new revenues
The fundamental force governing most management decisions is finance. A
successful administration, public or private, is based on sound economic policy.
The cost of operating, maintaining, and improving a facility must be balanced by
revenues. As with any business, this entails satisfactory service at an accept-
able price. However, economics of water supply are controlled by institutional
and production concerns. Institutional factors such as rate commissions and
surveillance by state agencies are often the most important. This is especially
true since passage of the SDWA. Legal responsibilities and regulations have
increased and, correspondingly, many communities have had to reassess their
organizational structure.
Obviously the key to meeting the new regulations and satisfying public
demand for better water lies in the production aspects of potable water supply.
Notable areas that require additional attention in many systems, as a result of
SDWA, include: treatment for meeting specific water quality goals, surveillance
to ensure these goals are met, and cross connection control to minimize potential
contamination during distribution, and a revenue base sufficient to insure
continued viability of the water utility.
Organization and Use of the Decision-Makers' Guide
This Decision-Makers' Guide is intended as a quick referencing system for
addressing the key issues of water utility management, particularly for water
systems serving 5,000 to 75,000 persons. Smaller systems may need assistance from
legal, financial, and engineering consultants in addition to that provided by
this Guide. Larger systems may already have at hand all of the information con-
tained herein. Some of the material in this manual is pertinent to all water sys-
tems. Site specific analyses by competent consultants will generally provide
expertise greater than this manual, and such assistance is often necessary if new
programs of investment are suggested.
Each Section of the Guide begins by asking a series of common questions con-
cerning the topic of the Section. Following each question there is a reference
to material in the Guide which will aid in answering the question. The text pro-
vides a general overview of many pertinent aspects of potable water supply.
Each major section is prefaced by a graph which outlines Section content
and gives respective page numbers. A list of outside references is provided at
the end of each section to assist in finding further details of each topic dis-
cussed. For problems not solved by the reference material, specialists in admin-
istrative, legal, or technical aspects of water supply should be consulted in
their areas of expertise.
-------
PART 1
INSTITUTIONAL
The primary decisions to be made by water utility officials are related to
the institutional concerns of a water supply system. These include such key
factors as utility organization and ownership and the legal aspects of operating
a potable water supply* system. The responsibilities of the water purveyor have
become particularly demanding since the passage of the Safe -Drinking Water Act
(SDHA) in 1974. Liabilities are increasing, as are the requirements for public
participation in the decision-making process.
The information presented in this part of the decision-maker's guide pro-
vides a brief overview of the various aspects of managing a water supply utility.
Topics including organization, personnel, external influences and obligations,
records and reports, and insurance are discussed.
A list of references is given at the end of each section. These sources con-
tain detailed information which may be necessary to answer specific, complex
questions facing water utility decision-makers.
1-1
-------
PART I
INSTITUTIONAL
11. OWNERSHIP & MANAGEMENT SECTION I |
OWNERSHIP - P, 2
COOPERATIVE
MANAGEMENT - P. 3
12. RISK PROTECTION SECTION 2 \
REFERENCES - P. 2
REFERENCES - P,
1
HOW TO SELECT AN
ENGINEERING CONSULTANT R 7
3. STAFFING SECTION 3 ]
| SUPERVISION - P. 2 I | PERSONNEL - P. 2 | SKILLS - P~4
OUTSIDE SERVICES P.1
HEALTHS,
SAFETY - P. 5
TRAINING - P. 4
REFERENCES - P. .7
RECORDS & REPORTS SECTION
| RECORDS-P. 1 | | REPORTS. P, 3 |
REFERENCES - P. 4
5. EXTERNAL INFLUENCES & OBLIGATIONS SECTION
REGULATIONS &
STANDARDS-P. 1
LEGAL RIGHTS &
LIABILITIES - P. 5
1
ECONOMIC & ENERGY
TRENDS-P. 6
PUBLIC RELATIONS &
PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS - P. 5
REFERENCES - P. 7
1-2
-------
PART I - INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES ,§
ii
m "
PAGES IS
3 ••
SECTION 1 - OWNERSHIP & MANAGEMENT *-
Questions About Organization of Water System 1
Existing Systems 1
New Systems 1
Ownership 2
Alternatives 2
Consideration 3
Cooperative Management 3
Single Community 3
Regionalization 5
Multi-Community Cooperative
Administration 6
How to Select an Engineering Consultant 7
References o
-------
SECTION 1
OWNERSHIP & MANAGEMENT
QUESTIONS ABOUT ORGANIZATION OF WATER SYSTEMS
There are several questions which those responsible for public water systems
should ask with regard to the organization of their enterprises. These questions
relate to the ownership, administration, and management aspects of the opera-
tions. The questions may be different depending on whether a new water system is
being contemplated, or whether changes are being considered in the operation of
an existing system. Included in these two categories of questions concerning
organization are the following:
Existing Systems
1. Should the ownership as it now exists be continued, or should a sale or
transfer to new ownership be considered? (See pages 1- and 1-3)
2. Should the water utilities in the vicinity be combined to operate under
a water authority or a regional government? (See page 1-5)
3. What area should the utility attempt to serve? (See page 1-6)
4. Is it better for the water system to operate as one of the departments
of a government entity or as an independent agency with its own board
of directors? (See page 1-2)
5. Can the water system manager discharge his duties to the State under
the Safe Drinking Water Act on his own, or should he seek legal,
engineering, or financial advice from consultants? (See page 1-7)
6. Is some reorganization needed? (See pages 3 to 7 and 5)
7. How should an engineering consultant be selected? (See page 1-7)
8. What contacts are needed with other agencies? (See Section 5 , page 5-2)
9. Should cooperative arrangements or joint-power agreements be sought
with other agencies? Can cooperation with others be advantageous in
billing customers, operation of laboratories, providing technical
assistance in water plant operations, or other areas of common need?
(.See page 1-3)
New Systems
Some questions posed under Existing Systems also may apply to new systems.
10. What enabling legislation is there and what are the legal constraints?
(See Sections )
1-1
-------
11. Should the water system be organized under public or private ownership?
(See page 1-2 and 1-3)
12. Will fire protection be provided under private ownership? (See pages
1-2 to l-ll)
13. Should annexation to an existing nearby water system be sought? (See
page 1-5)
14. If water system is owned by a city, should there be a separate water
board, or should a water department be formed under the existing city
administration? What are the interdepartmental relationships? (See
pages 1-2 and 1-3)
Information concerning some of these questions will be given in this section
of this report. Other questions will be answered, in subsequent sections.
OWNERSHIP
Water systems may be either publicly or privately owned. Rural water systems
which are cooperatively owned by the individuals served are considered publicly
owned in this report. Privately owned water systems are operated as a business,
including methods of day-to-day operation and in relationships with employees.
Except for entirely new systems, the decision on private versus public
ownership was made long ago. Any decision made now to change ownership is likely
to stem from financial or political considerations. One common reason for consid-
ering a possible change in ownership is that the owner cannot afford the neces-
sary improvements to the water system. The motivation for a change may originate
with the owner who wants to be free of a financial burden, or from water users
who are dissatisfied with water quality or water service and want to improve the
system.
The majority of water supply systems in the United States are publicly owned
entities; however, for each community the decision regarding public versus pri-
vate ownership should be based on the ability to supply the best service at least
consumer cost under local conditions. Service should be provided in an environ-
mentally sensitive manner consistent with land use and water conservation and
development plans.
Alternatives
Ownership and control of a public water utility can be as a private or gov-
ernmental enterprise.
• Private Ownership - A privately owned water utility may be organized as
a corporation, partnership, or a single owner. Ownership is generally
vested in a group of stockholders who control operation through a board
of directors and; ultimately, a chief executive or president. Day-to-
day operation can be managed by a full time or a part time operator or
under a lease-service arrangement. The manager would report to the
Owner or Board of Directors.
1-2
-------
• Public Ownership - The community property owners or taxpaying public
usually represent the controlling body for a publicly owned utility.
In this case, control is directed through elected officials, who may in
turn, appoint the manager of the facility. Organization of a publicly
owned facility varies considerably among agencies, depending on
specific needs and enabling legislation. The water department may be
incorporated into other city or municipal departments, or be organized
as a separate institutional unit, such as a district, board, or author-
ity, which is relatively autonomous with respect to other municipal
management functions. In addition, it may be part of a regional
authority.
Considerations
The prime considerations concerning utility ownership are institutional,
management efficiency, the ability to provide needed services, and profit. Over-
all, privately owned systems have an excellent track record, and, in certain
cases, a privately owned organization represents a more efficient alternative to
public ownership.
Public ownership is not always feasible but is generally preferred when a
private investor cannot operate effectively under the associated constraints of
low profit margins and large capital investments. Furthermore, many operations
are often best organized as a subdivision of, or jointly with, other municipal
services and governments. In small cities many operating responsibilities, such
as accounting, billing, reporting, etc., can be combined with other municipal
services. Public responsiveness of publicly-owned water utilities may be better
than that of private water companies. Also public water systems may be eligible
for some state and federal assistance which is not available to private
companies.
The trade-offs between private and public ownership are summarized in Table
1-1.
COOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT
There are several forms of cooperative management which may be applied to
water works administration. There can be internal cooperation within a single
community or formal or informal cooperation among several communities.
1. Single Community - In instances where the water system is operated as
one department of several within a single city or community, there are
several opportunities for potential efficiency and savings through
interdepartmental cooperation and sharing of personnel and facilities.
There may be combined administration of water and wastewater facilities
or of all public works facilities in the city. Or there may be a shar-
ing of computer facilities, communications equipment, automobiles, con-
struction and maintenance equipment, or billing and accounting staff.
Certain insurance policies may cover several city departments. These
internal arrangements may be advantageous or not, depending upon local
circumstances. In many communities, a single-purpose, separate and
1-3
-------
TABLE 1-1. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE OWNERSHIP
Alternative
Advantages
Disadvantages
Private
Ownership
Profit motive
Autonomous from municipal
government
Not affected by debt limitations
of municipal government
Taxable
Cannot raise revenue
through taxation
Low profit margin
complicates investment
and management
Failure by utility regulatory
agencies to allow recovery
of fire protection costs in
rate structures may limit
ability to provide fire
protection
Public
Ownership
Generally lower rates due to
exemptions
Higher exposure to public
Can sell tax exempt bonds
at low interest rates
and obtain government .
grants
Can obtain income
through taxation
Can better utilize income
from customer contributions
Politicial .constraints
-------
independent water board, commission, or department may be the best form
for management and administration, particularly where there is not suf-
ficient attention or emphasis on water programs, or where there has
been harmful political interference with water system operations or
finance.
2. Regionalization - In some situations where several cities or community
systems are located in proximity and are providing similar services,
there have been efforts to' create a single new political or institu-
tional entity to replace the several separately managed ones. In the
implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) both Congress and
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recognized the potential
utility of regionalization in solving some of the practical problems
facing small systems. For instance, Section 1416- of the SDWA provides
an additional two-year period for systems entering into a regionaliza-
tion program. The extra time period allows .for the negotiation of
institutional and administrative details.
EPA encourages the consideration of regional systems as a means of
resolving some very difficult problems. Economies pf scale, capital
resource pooling, and improvement in operation are some of the advan-
tages of regionalization.
The pooling of skills, resources, and knowledge has long been recog-
nized as an appropriate method for enhancing a program. Regionaliza-
tion, as applied to public water systems, can be defined as an inter-
connection of existing systems or the centralization of one or more
management functions for several water systems that are not physically
interconnected.
The benefits of regionalization go beyond that of providing a means by
which a public water system can meet the requirements of the SDWA. Four
major areas that may benefit through regionalization are operation and
maintenance, financing, planning and design, and relations with regu-
latory agencies.
The pooling of financial resources can allow for the hiring of a few
qualified personnel to properly manage, maintain, and operate a group
of consolidated public water systems instead of the part-time operators
who are all too frequently underqualifled and undertrained. The unified
management of a regional system may improve service and water quality
through comprehensive and knowledgeable supervision and direction of
operations. Also, a water system with a sound personnel base is better
able to attract, retain, and train qualified personnel. Other operation
and maintenance benefits include better reaction to emergency situa-
tions, sharing of physical facilities, and standardization of construc-
tion materials.
For small public water utilities which are fiscally handicapped by
their size, the difficulty in raising money to update their systems
to improve service and water quality and to meet the SDWA requirements
1-5
-------
may result in a financial burden for the users. Through regionaliza-
tion, capital costs can be distributed over a larger user base. The
larger base also nay make it easier to raise funds for public water
system improvements. The opportunities to finance necessary projects
solely on a service charge basis may be enhanced by providing a larger
base for revenue, which will encourage better bond ratings. In addi-
tion, a more uniform rate structure is possible.
A central public water system or regional management of a group of
small, scattered systems may provide better water resource management
to meet the water supply needs within a given area by increasing plan-
ning options. Because of the larger geographical area of operation, the
regional system may more easily take advantage of multiple sources of
water supply, thus utilizing the best available raw water supply within
a given area. This in turn provides greater latitude in the choice of
treatment and thus greater control over capital costs. Many drought-
related problems of individual systems might be relieved if systems
become a part of a regional system.
The continued proliferation of small water systems creates problems.
Additional water systems mean a dilution of existing monitoring and
technical assistance capabilities. Moreover, small systems are more
likely to require outside assistance in solving operation and mainte-
nance problems.
A significant proportion of small) water systems in the US might benefit
through regionalization. Unified purchasing, operation, maintenance,
monitoring, planning, and financial and administrative management func-
tions could be carried out by a single staff. This consolidation might
lend a stability and economic base to these systems which they do not
currently possess. Further, the administration of all of the functions
by a regional entity may allow the consolidated system to enjoy the
economics of scale and the resultant savings.
Despite its advantages, regionalization is not considered a panacea. In
some places, the replacement of several governmental units by a new
regional agency has been accomplished successfully. However, in many
instances this approach has met with great resistance and opposition.
The objections to regionalization of governments, where it exists, stem
from several sources. There is community pride and inter-community
rivalry. There is resistance to change in established political insti-
tutions, and there may be legal and financial difficulties in regional-
ization. Communities considering this approach should study the experi-
ence gained in previous attempts by others in this direction before
initiating a local program, in order to anticipate problems and develop
local support.
3. Multi-Community Cooperative Administration - For groups of neighboring
communities desiring to obtain some of the advantages of consolidation
without the political and administrative difficulties of regionaliza-
tion, multi-community cooperative administration may offer an
1-6
-------
alternative. It might be advantageous for several communities to share
a manager, an accountant, an engineer, or a chief water works operator.
They may share the use of laboratories, of facilities for sample col-
lection, or of construction or maintenance equipment, or they may stock
a common supply of repair parts or emergency equipment. To date, this
type of cooperative management has not been widely used, but offers
definite advantages. Under the SDWA, the new water quality considera-
tions .make the operation and management of water systems somewhat more
technical than in the past, which poses problems for many communities,
particularly small ones. The required, managerial, engineering, and
technical skills for water systems may be more readily obtained in some
cases through multi-community cooperation.
Clearly, the alternatives for water supply operation and organization are
many. Each community or utility must evaluate the alternatives relative to its
own specific needs and situation. Some of the main considerations of utility
organization are summarized in Table 1-2.
HOW TO SELECT AN ENGINEERING CONSULTANT
Except for very large cities, most water managers or directors find it nec-
essary to employ consulting engineers to design water works improvements or new
water facilities, because of the specialized nature of the work to be done. It
may be particularly important to hire a consultant to design improvements needed
to bring a system into compliance with the National Interim Primary Drinking
Water Regulations (NIPDWR). Some questions to be asked in this regard include:
1. Is the engineer licensed or registered to practice Civil or Sanitary
Engineering in the State?
2. Is the engineer qualified and experienced in the type of work to be
done?
3. Have the results of his work for other clients on similar projects been
satisfactory? Have his references been checked, particularly with per-
sons who have been responsible for operation of facilities designed by
the engineer?
4. Will the engineers who actually do the work within the firm be persons
with the necessary experience?
5. Is the engineer familiar with the State regulations?
Further information on selecting a professional engineer is contained in two
publications, as follows:
1. American Society of Civil Engineers, Manual 45, "Consulting Engineer-
ing, A Guide For The Engagement of Engineering Services," available
from the ASCE, 345 East 47th Street, New York, NY 10017.
1-7
-------
TABLE 1-2. SUMMARY OF THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES
Alternative
Advantages
Disadvantages
Favorable conditions
Single Community
Directly under
general community
administration
Under separate
water board
Opportunities for inter-
departmental cooperation
Direct accountability
Autonomy & simplicity of
administration
Cost may be high in
small communities
Less time to spend on
water problems
Cost may be high in
small communities
Large and small communities
Large communities. .
More attention of top officials
to water problems
Direct accountability to public
Less opportunity for inter-
departmental cooperation
i
00
Regionalized Govern- In some cases overall economies
ment & Water of scale can maintain more corn-
Authorities petent technical & maintenance
staff
Low interest financing may be
more available
More complex administra-
tion
Requires cooperation
between political units
Less accessability to
public
When optimum water'service area
boundaries do not coincide with
existing political* boundaries
Existence of several closely-
grouped communities
Multi-community
cooperative
administration
Overall economies of scale
Can maintain more competent
staff; technical, operational,
and maintenance
Flexibility
Adaptability to emergency
conditions
Less accessibility
to public
When joint" cooperative effort
by neighboring communities can
improve operation of water sys-
tems that they cannot accomplish
individually
Small communities
-------
2. National Society of Professional Engineers, Guide For "Selecting,
Retaining, and Compensating Professional Engineers In Private
Practice," available from the NSPE, 2029 "K" Street N.W., Washington,
DC 20006.
Water works engineering is a highly specialized profession. It is important
for water system managers and officials to obtain the services of a firm which
has thoroughly trained personnel who are well experienced in water system plan-
ning, design, construction and operation. The selection of the right consulting
engineer is highly important to the successful completion of water system
improvement programs.
REFERENCES
• "Water Utility Management," American Water Works Association (AWWA) Manual
M5. Chapter 1 deals with questions of ownership and regulation of water
supply utilities.
• Urban Public Works Administration, W.E. Korbitz, ed., International City
Management Association, 1976. Chapter 2 deals with the organization and
interrelationship of various public works organizations.
1-9
-------
PART I - INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES
PAGES
SECTION 2 - RISK PROTECTION
Risks and Insurances 1
-a
Types of Risk 1 ||
Coverage 1 fj
Property Loss or Damage 1 (
Workman's Compensation 1
Public Liability 2
Product Insurance 2
Crime Coverage 2
Self-Insurance 2
References 2
-------
SECTION 2
RISK PROTECTION
RISKS & INSURANCE
Water system managers have several decisions to make regarding the risks
involved in water system ownership and operation, and how to protect the owner
against excessive losses.
1. The basic questions are how many risks can be assumed presently by the
utility (self insurance), and how many risks should be covered by
insurance? (See pages 2-1 and 2-2)
2. What types of insurance are available? (See this page below)
3. What public liability risks are incurred by water utilities? (See page
2-2)
4. How often should insurance programs be reviewed? (.See page 2-2)
Types of Risk
Water systems may be exposed to losses from: windstorm, fire, flood, theft,
libel, slander, violation of privacy, damage to boilers and machinery, lightning,
water damage, collapse, loss of records and drawings, injury to employees, auto
collision, public liability, crimes by employees, burglary, robbery, forgery,
earthquake, and product quality.
Coverage
Comprehensive coverage is not a type of insurance carried by a water system.
Most comprehensive contracts require the disclosure to the insurance company of
all hazards. Many of these may not be known to the owner. Thus, there are likely
to be gaps in the coverage provided.
Property Loss or Damage
A property loss or damage policy for water systems should cover the replace-
ment of facilities or equipment at the market value at the time of loss. Indi-
vidual components of the water system should be assessed for vulnerability to
specific types of damage. Vandalism of water systems is common and consideration
should be given to insurance to cover such losses.
Workmen's Compensation s
This insurance is generally required by law. Such policies must comply with
individual state laws as to the amount, type, conditions, and extent of cover-
age. The coverage may be a substantial budget item and should not be overlooked
as an employee benefit. Often, the policy cost is based on the claim history;
enforcement of safety rules can be a decisive factor in reducing this cost.
2-1
-------
Public Liability
Liability insurance covers both personal and property damage. Hazards such
as false arrest, libel, slander, etc., as well as death and disability, are
included. The increased responsibility for meeting SDWA requirements may necessi-
tate consideration of product insurance coverage. One difficulty in writing
liability policies is defining the conditions to be covered and determining the
extent of coverage.
Product Insurance
Protection against possible claims of polluted or unsafe water may be pro-
vided by carrying product insurance. Under the SDWAj class action suits are pro-
hibited. .A citizen may sue if a water system is out of compliance. However, if
the water utility has an exemption or variance, it is protected against citizen
suits.
Crime Coverage
Crime coverage can be broken down into two general categories - employee and
outside. The most effective way of providing crime insurance is to have the
employee "honesty bond" included with the ."money and securities" policy which
would cover burglary, robbery, vandalism, etc.
Self Insurance
Because of the high cost of coverage or lack of availability, water utili-
ties often do not carry flood or earthquake insurance. Also, as previously
mentioned, deductible limits may be set with regard to prudent self insurance
capacity so as to reduce insurance costs.
Securing insurance coverage should be approached cautiously. The fact that
insurance policies are contracts should not be overlooked. They must be reviewed
critically and revised to the satisfaction of the water utility.
The number of policies to be carried by a water utility varies according to
load conditions. Grouping of coverages under fewer contracts may be advantageous
under many conditions. The selection of the insurance carrier may be by negotia-
tion or by competitive bidding. Again local circumstances may dictate this
choice. The whole insurance program should be reviewed annually to take into
account acquisitions and dispositions, value changes, and other changes.
REFERENCE
• "Water Utility Management," AWWA Manu'al 45, Chapter 17. Discussion of the
various types of insurance that should be carried by a water utility,
including comprehensive coverage, property loss or damage, workman's compen-
sation, public liability, crime coverage, etc.
2-2
-------
PART I - INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES
PAGES
SECTION 3-STAFFING
Outside Services 1
Supervision 2
Personnel 2
Emergency Staffing 4
Skills 4
Training 4 ^
Health and Safety Programs 5 |
3
References 7
-------
SECTION 3
STAFFING
Proper selection, organization, and management of the people who are
employed to operate the water department greatly influence the success of the
water system in providing proper service to its customers. With small and medium
sized systems one of the basic decisions to be made is how much of the work is to
be done in-house by permanent or temporary staff, and how much can be done better
or more efficiently by outside contract.
Some pertinent questions are:
1. How much help is available? (See this page, below)
2. What number and mix of personnel is needed m staff the water depart-
ment? (.See pages 3-2 to 3-5)
3. What services can be contracted to advantage? (See pages 3-2 and 3-3)
4. How can the technical and managerial expertise of the water department
be increased at low cost? (See pages 3-k and 3-5 and Table 3-1)
5. What factors influence staffing requirements? (See pages 3-2 and 3-5)
6. What kind of health and safety program is required? (See page 3-5)
OUTSIDE SERVICES
Because water utilities are subject to regulation by local health depart-
ments, state agencies, and the federal government, some technical assistance is
available at no extra cost from these regulatory agencies. City or County health
departments can furnish information regarding regulations which must be met by
public water systems. They also can provide instruction in the collection and
submission of water samples for bacteriological, chemical, or radiological
analysis. Some or all water system samples may be analyzed in local health
department laboratories. They can assist in the interpretation of the reports of
test results. State water agencies can also provide these services. In addition,
states can provide technical assistance with treatment plant operations, operator
training, the selection of a consulting engineer, and with application for grants
and loans. In states which have not assumed primacy (primary enforcement
responsibility) under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) can provide these services.
Because the design of water purification plants is such a highly specialized
undertaking, most water systems, even large ones, usually engage a consulting
firm experienced in water treatment plan design to prepare plans and specifica-
tions for new or expanded plant work. Consulting engineers also can assist in
operator training, plant startup, or in plant operation. They may prepare plant
operations manuals to aid plant operators.
3-1
-------
Regulatory agency representatives and consulting engineers also are avail-
able to assist water systems in times of emergency.
Some equipment manufacturers or suppliers provide maintenance services under
water department contract, particularly for control systems and monitoring
equipment.
Legal and financial advice can be obtained from local attorneys, lawyers
specializing in water rights, or from financial institutions such as bond houses
or banks.
Help also may be obtained from other water system operators in the area or
the local section of ANNA.
SUPERVISION
The key to the manner in which a water system is operated is the manager. He
must be given and he must assume the primary responsibility for the proper opera-
tion of all facilities. The first responsibility of the manager is to provide
safe water. His other direct responsibilities may vary quite widely depending on
the size and complexity of the particular water system he is managing. In some
cases, the water system may be operated by one person, who must do everything
necessary. For all other systems, a clearly defined organization should be
established.
A basic chart showing the various positions and supervisory levels should be
available to «1I personnel. The relationships among groups with different func-
tions should be well defined. A chart with names should be given to each individ-
ual within a work group.
As in any business, it is important that the established organizational
structure is followed. Communication must be through the proper channels, with
directions coming through each employee's immediate supervisor.
As a general rule, the number of people supervised by anyone should be
limited to six. This ensures adequate opportunity to establish good communication
while. reducing the chance of having a "top-heavy" organization with too many
managers.
An individual should have only one supervisor.
PERSONNEL
Staffing requirements depend on numerous factors, including:
• The extent to which outside services are utilized
• The size, complexity, and age of the water system
• The source of supply and water treatment requirements
• The degree of instrumentation and automatic controls
3-2
-------
• The relationship to other utility services
• The degree of individual staff utilization and overall organizational
efficiency
• The extent of operational attendance required
In assessing staffing requirements, the best sources of information are the
historical records for the facilities. If the records are poor or staffing is
being estimated for completely new facilities, operational information from sim-
ilar facilities may prove useful. The water system should be divided into
functional groups, such as supply, treatment, distribution, and administration,
which may be further subdivided. Treatment, for example, could be broken down
into process operation, maintenance, buildings and grounds, and laboratory. The
sum of the estimated annual manpower needs for each task and level of respon-
sibility will give the overall staffing requirement.
Unionization is an important consideration which can have both advantages
and disadvantages.
In any event, formal arrangements should be made for good communications
between the manager and all employees. There should be freedom to discuss wages,
working conditions, and fringe benefits. A procedure should be set for filing
grievances.
Job opportunities should be made known to all employees and all employees
should be given full consideration in employment.
Recommendations for optimum surface water treatment plant and distribution
system staffing are as follows:
SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT STAFFING
Plant Capacity, mgd
Position 1 10 50
Plant superintendent 111
Assistant plant superintendent 001
Chemists and bacteriologists 013
Chemical building operators 014
High and low service pump station operators 028
Filter plant operators 444
Maintenance mechanics 015
Utility helpers 1 4 12
Storekeeper Oil
Stenographer 0 1 _!_
TOTALS 6 16 40
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
Operation and Maintenance, Total 3 5 15
3-3
-------
For small systems, individuals will be responsible for many different tasks,
while for larger systems, more than one individual may have the same general
duties for multiple shift operation. In all cases, the level of responsibility
should be defined in a written job description including:
Work group
Position of immediate supervisor
Job description - duties, responsibilities, limitations
Job title
Qualifications - skills, education, and experience requirements
Appendix B of the EPA "Technical Guidelines for Public Water Supplies" con-
tains typical job descriptions for twenty-one positions (see reference at the end
of this section).
All new employees should be carefully interviewed and fully informed of the
conditions of their employment. These include such matters as:
Economic incentives including employer-paid benefits
Organizational structure
Duties and responsibilities
Possible risks associated with the job
Expected performance standards
On-the-job training
Scheduled performance and salary reviews
Emergency Staffing
Contingency plans should be made to operate the water system in the absence
of regular personnel due to illness, strike, or other emergency.
SKILLS
Employee skills should match operational requirements as determined from the
detailed job descriptions. Operator certification is another method of matching
skills and job assignments. In some states it is mandatory, while in others it is
optional. In either case, it provides a standardized classification system by
which individuals may be placed in positions.
TRAINING
Training is perhaps the lowest cost method available for increasing the
technical and managerial expertise of the water department. All employees should
be encouraged to participate in training programs and refresher courses. They can
perform best if they are informed of current practices related to their jobs.
They should be encouraged to maintain or improve their current skills as well as
acquire new skills to prepare for possible advancement.
There are various training aids, including:
• Formal orientation of new employees
• Consultant's presentation of O&M manuals
3-1*
-------
Manufacturers' operation and maintenance instructions on new equipment
Individual on-the-job training by supervisor
Instruction by state agency, local health dept., EPA, or consultant
Group or classroom on-the-job training
Short schools sponsored by professional organizations, state agencies,
or vocational schools
Correspondence courses
Extension, part-time, and full-time courses taught by instructors from
local vocational schools, colleges, and universities
Advantages and disadvantages of three general approaches to personnel train-
ing are summarized in Table 3-1.
HEALTH AND SAFETY PROGRAMS
A comprehensive safety program is an essential tool in preventing accidents
and protecting employees. The safety program should be established and fully sup-
ported by top management. Supervisors must inform all staff members of the safety
program and see that it is carried out.
Basic considerations to promote plant safety include:
• Comprehensive "hands-on" training and classroom instruction regarding
safety equipment operation, maintenance, and repair
• Basic protection against potential dangers at facilities (i.e.,
machinery guards, handrails, hazard warning signs, adequate lighting,
suitable tools, etc.)
• Regularly scheduled safety meetings
• Good housekeeping (i.e., removal of debris and flammable materials)
• First-aid training
• Regular inspections, both scheduled and unscheduled, by the safety
committee
State and Federal Occupational Health and Safety Act (OSHA) standards must
be followed.
Safety records and accident reports are the best means of assessing the
effectiveness of a safety program. As well as comparing the current safety record
with previous year's records for the system, it should be compared to published
safety reports or records for other utilities. An example of this is the annual
water utility disabling injury rates published by the Accident Preventation Com-
mittee of American Water Works Association (AWWA). Additional statistics on
safety and accidents may be obtained from the National Safety Council.
3-5
-------
TABLE 3-1. ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF PERSONNEL TRAINING
Training
method
Advantages
Disadvantages
This training
can be obtained from
U)
i
On-the-job
training
Correspondence
course or other
educational
packages
Classroom
instruction
Learning is in a practical
situation, trainee can
see and hear the operation
Cost/man hour is usually
low, trainees are actively
involved, instruction is
self-paced and consistent.
Materials have been pre-
tested and their effective-
ness has been proven
Less time-consuming, much
material can be covered
quickly, fewer interrup-
tions allow instructor to
pursue objectives, and the
same lecture can be given
to more than one group
with little in-between
preparation
Generally one-way communication,
difficult to set up, may place
heavy demands on instructor,
limited number of trainees
can participate
Slow feedback, no instructor for
supplemental guidance, requires
high level of motivation, and
can be difficult to teach "hands
on" experience because specific
self-instructional materials are
not always readily available
Communication is one-way,
opportunities for misunderstand-
ing of information are great,
lectures cannot be tailored to
individual needs, and lack
personal trainee involvement.
Planning a lecture that will
hold the interest of the
trainees is difficult
Job Supervisor
Equipment suppliers
Consulting engineers
State personnel
Personnel from other utilities
Local Health Dept.
i
Private correspondence schools (ICS)
Universities and junior colleges
Vocational schools
Professional organizations
Some State agencies
Textbooks
In-house by supervisors
State and Federal agencies
Universities and junior colleges
Consulting engineers
Equipment suppliers
Local Health Dept.
Personnel from other utilities
-------
REFERENCES
"Technical Guidelines for Public Water Systems," U.S. EPA, June, 1975, NTIS
#PB 255 217. Chapter 10 given information on .staff requirements and organ-
ization, training and education programs, certification, etc.; it also dis-
cusses safety programs. Appendix B has descriptions for twenty-one typical
water utility jobs.
"Safety Practices for Water Utilities," AWWA Manual M3. Discusses need for
safety program, starting and maintaining such a program, and specific safe
work practices (operating tools, handling chemicals, etc.).
"Water Utility Management," AWWA Manual M5, 1959. Chapter 2 discusses organ-^-
izational and management practices; Chapter 18, personnel management;
Chapter 19, training programs; and Chapter 20, safety programs.
3-7
-------
PART I - INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES
PAGES
SECTION 4 - RECORDS AND REPORTS
Records 1
Records of Operation and Maintenance 2
Preservation of Records 2
Reports 3
References 4
!8
-------
SECTION 4
RECORDS AND REPORTS
Managerial decisions regarding the maintenance of records and preparation of
reports influence operating costs for water systems because they are time consum-
ing activities. Therefore, it is important to answer the following questions:
1. What purposes do records and reports serve? (See this page, below)
2. What records should be kept and what records should be discarded? (See
pages U-3 and h-k)
3. How long should records be maintained? (See page k-2, Table ^-l)
4. What are the best ways to preserve records? (See page h-3)
RECORDS
Record keeping and reports are essential elements of a well run water sys-
tem. Records serve as historical and legal documentation for the system, and
reports are the means by which this information is distributed. The two go hand-
in-hand with analysis and interpretation, which are important aids to successful
operations.
Records of data collected fall into several categories. These are:
» Service - customer connection files, billings, accounting, complaints,
etc.
• Construction and Maintenance - dates and details of plant improvements
and repairs, valve operation and distribution system flushing
schedules
• Operations - system O&M, equipment and supply inventories, surveil-
lance, etc.
• Quality Control - records of performance
• Personnel - employee records (evaluations, staffing, statistics, staff
planning, etc.)
« General Management - policies, planning, finance, organizational struc-
ture, etc.
The adequacy of record keeping can be judged' by the usefulness of the infor-
mation collected. Records should be clear and concise; they should contain all
essential information without having superfluous or incomplete data in them.
They may be used to project future conditions, plan system and service changes
and improvements, and increase overall operational efficiency.
U-l
-------
Methods of record keeping vary, depending on the size of the system, the
services offered, and the relationships with other utilities. For small systems,
manual record keeping may be adequate. For larger systems machine processing of
data may be advantageous. If water is provided along with other services, records
should reflect the interrelationships and the effectiveness of combined opera-
tions for some functions. Consistency of record keeping by different recorders,
especially those on different shifts is important.
Records of Operation & Maintenance
Record keeping is an essential function of plant operations and maintenance.
A brief review of the system records will show the effectiveness and efficiency
of operations. A detailed review of records may point to obvious areas where
improvements are needed. Well designed summary reports will best allow for good
week by week administration.
Records are important for several reasons:
• They demonstrate compliance with regulations and standards.
• They provide historical information on the system which will aid in
planning future expansions and modifications.
• They reflect the adequacy of current operations.
• They are necessary for the preparation of annual reports.
• Records of valve operation are needed to insure that seldom used
valves will function when required.
• They assist in routine administration such as chemical purchases and
budgeting.
Preservation of Records
The length of time records should be kept depends on the water system and
the type of records. Table 4 -1 summarizes the length of time some of the more
important operations records should be kept to satisfy the 'requirements of the
SDWA.
In addition to the records required by the State, it is a good idea to keep
records of power and chemical purchases, personnel, budget, water sales, and
other items.
Reports of engineering surveys and studies are often kept for more than 10
years, since they may contain data which will be useful in subsequent surveys.
Much valuable information is lost due to indiscriminant disposal of records.
-------
TABLE 4 -1. MINIMUM RECOMMENDED DURATION FOR RECORD KEEPING BY SDWA*
Records
Duration
Bacteriological analyses**
Chemical analyses**
Written reports such as surveys,
engineering reports, etc.
Variances or exemptions
Action taken to correct violation
5 years
10 years
10 years following completion
5 years following expiration
3 years after last action taken
* There also may be additional State requirements.
** Mandatory records.
In time the bulk of records accumulated may make it advisable to microfilm
some records. It may be desirable to store records in a safe or a vault for pro-
tection from fire and flood.
REPORTS
Good records are not useful unless they are properly analyzed, with the
findings clearly reported. Reports may be in a number of forms, depending on the
purpose of the report and the size of the system. Examples of the various types
of reports are:
• Monitoring Reports - monthly reporting to the state of routine sam-
pling, check sampling of violations, and violations (these must be
reported within 48 hours of a confirmed violation). Public notification
of violations is discussed in Section 3 ..
• Annual Reports - Annual reports serve to keep the customers and stock-
holders informed of the past activities and future plans. To be an
effective public relations instrument, such reports should be interest-
ing, concise, and attract the audience's attention. They should summa-
rize system statistics, preferably illustrated with simple graphics or
photographs; discuss any major events or changes which occurred in the
past year; and have a financial statement for the last three to five
years. Since the audience is a specific, non-technical group, profes-
sional help in preparing this report may be useful. Common ways to dis-
tribute annual reports are through the newspaper as an article or sup-
plement, or by mail as a bill enclosure or in a separate mailing. A
comprehensive annual report should be available to individuals who wish
more information regarding system operations.
• Special Reports - Special reports aimed at a specific audience or for
special communications such as water conservation programs or system
expansions may be needed. These should be non-technical in nature and
can take the form of newsletters or bill enclosures.
U-3
-------
• Management Reports - Management reports may take many forms and are
generally intended for internal use. They are tools by which the man-
agerial staff can assess the system and plan future improvements. They
may cover such topics as finance and budget, staffing, production,
efficiency, maintenance, quality control, and expansions. Depending on
complexity, extent, and type of report, they may be prepared in-house
or by an outside consultant.
• Construction Reports - Progress, etc.
Evaluating the adequacy of reports is important to insure that they are
serving the purpose for which they are prepared. Reports must be functional.
Unnecessary report writing is a costly undertaking, while insufficient reporting
can reduce the efficiency of the operation and effectiveness of good record
keeping.
The best way to evaluate the adequacy of a report is to ask a few simple
questions.
• Is the original intent or goal of the report satisfied? Is the intended
audience being reached?
• What information is being conveyed? Can it be easily understood by the
audience?
• Is the report a useful tool? If not, should the report be dropped or
restructured?
REFERENCES
• "Water Utility Management," AWWA Manual M5. Chapter 12 deals with accounting
records and procedures; Chapter 18, with personnel records; and Chapter 22,
with annual reports.
• "The Safe Drinking Water Act; Self-Study Handbook; Community Water Systems,"
AWWA, 1978. Chapter 5 outlines basic record keeping procedures and has
example forms; Chapter 6 discusses the reporting procedures required by the
SDWA.
• Urban Public Works Administration, W.E. Korbitz, ed., International City
Management Association, 1976. Chapter 3 includes the use of computers for
record keeping, information systems, and performance evaluations.
k-k
-------
PART I - INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES
PAGES
SECTION 5 - EXTERNAL INFLUENCES
AND OBLIGATIONS
Regulations and Standards
1
Rational for NIPDWR 3
Meeting Primary
&• Secondary Standards 4
Legal Rights and Liabilities 5
Public Relations and Public Notification 5
Economic and Energy Trends 6
References 7
SX
-n
-
IS
> p.
-------
SECTION 5
EXTERNAL INFLUENCES AND OBLIGATIONS
Supplying of water to the public for domestic, commerical, and industrial
purposes is itself a commercial undertaking involving financial and professional
responsibility. The quantity and quality of water supplied affects the health and
economic well being of everyone in the community. For these and other reasons,
local, state, and Federal laws and regulations have been developed which seek to
protect water users against inadequate or hazardous water supplies.
Water supply is a public trust. Water purveyors have many legal obligations,
and they must be responsive to many external influences.
The need to produce a sufficient, safe supply of water at a reasonable cost
presents water managers with many questions to be answered if proper decisions
are to be reached. Some common questions include:
1. What are the regulations? (See Appendix A-Also see State regulations)
2. What are the reasons for the regulations? (See Appendix B)
3. What are some of the options for meeting the regulations? (See pages
5-U, 5-5 and Section 8)
A. What are the potential health risks in drinking water? (See Appendix
B)
5. What are the trade-offs between cost and water quality? (See page 5-1*)
6. Where can detailed information be obtained on methods for treating
water in order to meet State standards and the National Interim Primary
Drinking Water Regulations (NIPDWR)? (See page 5-3 and Section 8)
7. What are some ways to involve the public in the decision making pro-
cess, particularly in the light of public notification requirements?
(See pages 5-5 and 5-6)
8. Water rights. (See page 5-5)
9. What are the effects of current economic trends and energy considera-
tions on water works operations? (See page 5-6)
10. What are the options available for the delivery of sufficient amounts
of water to meet emergency situations? (.See page 6-8)
REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS
There are state and federal regulations which affect all community and
non-community public water supplies. In some locations there may also be
5-1
-------
applicable city or county health department regulations. Under the 1974 Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) most states have assumed the primary responsibility
(primacy) for enforcing the NIPDWR. In a few states, the Federal Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), has this responsibility. Local and state jurisdictions
may have requirements in addition to those of EPA.
By Congressional passage of the 1974 SDWA, the EPA was delegated the respon-
sibility of developing water supply standards and an associated implementation
plan for the protection of public health. In response, the EPA promulgated the
NIPDWR, which became effective on June 24, 1977. These regulations, which are
currently in effect, establish maximum contaminant levels (MCL's) and monitoring
requirements for selected organic, inorganic, and microbiological contaminants.
The NIPDWR which were published in their entirety in the Federal Register, Decem-
ber 24, 1975, are summarized in Appendix A. They are applicable to all public
water supplies; however, may be superseded by more stringent state or local
requirements. Enforcement of the NIPDWR currently may be either or both a state
or an EPA responsibility, depending on location.
The SDWA also established a mechanism whereby the NIPDWR may be revised
based upon recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) or based on
other data. The objective is to amend the interim regulations such that the
resulting NIPDWR represent the state-of-the-art regarding health and technical
feasibility of potable water supply. The revisions to the NIPDWR recommended by
NAS are summarized in Appendix B. The amended standards are expected to be issued
sometime in 1980. Changes or amendments to the regulations can be made by the
states or EPA when merited.
An important aspect of the SDWA is the Public Notification Requirements
which were included in the Act to ensure that consumers are properly informed of
NIPDWR violations and the associated potential health hazards. Public notifica-
tion requirements address specific types of violations and are different for com-
munity and non-community public water supplies.
A community system has at least 15 service connections used by year-round
residents or serves at least 25 year-round residents. These water systems gener-
ally serve large apartments, institutions, communities, condominiums and mobile
home parks. .
A non-community system has at least 15 s.ervice connections used by travelers
or transients at least 60 days a year or serves 25 or more people daily for at
least 60 days a year. Examples include separate water systems which serve motels,
restaurants, campgrounds, churches, factories, lodges, medical facilities, rest
stops along interstate highways, roadside service stations, and day schools.
Please note that if the establishments mentioned above are served by a community
water system they are considered to be a part of that system and therefore are
not subject to separate regulations.
Requirements for community systems are summarized in Table 5-1. Non-commun-
ity water supplies are required to report non-compliance of NIPDWR in a manner
that will ensure the user is adequately informed of the violation and potential
risks. This distinction was necessary because non-community systems typically
5-2
-------
TABLE 5-1. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
FOR COMMUNITY PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES
Required notification
Type of non-compliance with NIPDWR
Violation of MCL
Failure to monitor
Failure to follow compliance schedule
Failure to use approved testing procedure
Having variance or exemption
Mail
X
X
X
X
X
Newspaper
X
Broadcast
X
serve transient users who are not exposed to communications by mail, newspaper,
or broadcast.
The drinking water regulations require notifications to be presented in a
manner that:
• Fully informs users concerning system non-compliance
• Is conspicuous, understandable, and not overly technical
• States all facts regarding the nature of the problem
• Includes, where appropriate, the MCL or regulation that has been
violated
• States appropriate measures to be taken by consumers in order to
protect their health
• Does not result in undue concern by the public
Notifications are recommended to explain the significance of the problem,
the steps taken by the water supply to correct the deficiency, and the results of
additional samplings.
The SDWA also includes provisions for obtaining exemptions or variances to
alleviate major difficulties in meeting regulations. These provisions recognize
the technical, time, and financial constraints in meeting requirements of the
act. The exemption is a procedural mechanism that allows the State and/or EPA to
provide additional time for a public water supply to come into compliance. This
procedure gives the public water supply one year to devise a schedule whereby it
must come into compliance with the SDWA by January 1, 1981, provided no immediate
health risk would result during that period. The exemption allows communities to
assess their situation, seek funds, complete the necessary engineering, etc.
Additionally, for systems seeking to regionalize, another two years, i.e.,
January 1, 1983, was provided to allow for the negotiations that would be
required. Variances were designed for situations where communities have exhausted
their options to come into compliance. The intent was to protect from a citizen
suit, water systems which had applied .the best available technology and still
5-3
-------
could not comply with the provisions of the SDWA (provided no immediate health
risk was present). It should also be clear that the exemption and variance do not
give a license for non-compliance. It merely protects the public water supply
from suit until such time as compliance can be achieved.
Several sample notices are presented in the EPA "Public Notification Hand-
book" as referenced at the end of this section.
EPA has promulgated Secondary Standards which deal with the aesthetic quali-
ties of potable water. These Standards are summarized in Appendix C. They are not
Federally enforceable, and are intended as guidelines for the states. Poor
aesthetic quality of public water supplies has no direct health effects, but may
indirectly affect health by causing people to seek drinking water which tastes,
looks, or smells better, but which may pose a higher health risks.
Rationale For National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations
The rationale for the NIPDWR is summarized in Appendix F. This table gives
the health effects of each contaminant, the basis for establishing the MCL, and
the sources of the contaminants. Further details along this line are given in the
information published in the Federal Register and also in the 1973 report of the
EPA Advisory Committee on the Revision and Application of the Drinking Water
Standards.
Cost effects as well as health effects were taken into consideration in
establishing the Primary Regulations. There are no further trade-offs between
costs and health risks to be made. The Standards are already minimum with respect
to health considerations. In cases where the health effects are well enough
established to determine accurately the safety factor provided (as indicated in
Appendix F), the safety factor is the minimum with respect to health safety. Most
of the MCL's apply to people of all ages, however the nitrate MCL is to protect
infants under 6 months of age against infant cyanosis or "blue baby" condition,
and the fluoride MCL is to protect the teeth of children during their years of
tooth formation.
Secondary Standards
As already mentioned, these proposed Standards are summarized in Appendix C.
They concern aesthetic qualities of potable water. They are not Federally
enforceable but may be by the State if they so desire. The possible trade-offs
between cost and conformance with the secondary standards, then, is a matter of
what is permissible under individual state requirements.
Options For Meeting the Primary and Secondary Standards
Information on ,these options is presented under Section 8, Treatment
Objectives, of Part 2, PRODUCTION. In addition to the installation of the treat-
ment facilities needed to reduce contaminant levels to acceptable limits, there
are other possibilities. One possibility would be to develop a new source of sup-
ply of better quality. Another would be to purchase water from another system
which has available water of acceptable quality. If technical assistance is
needed in considering these options, it might be obtained from a consulting
5-1*
-------
engineer, from the State Water Quality Agency, or from EPA where the state has
not assumed primacy. The U.S. EPA, Cincinnati has published a "Manual of Treat-
ment Techniques For Meeting The NIPDWR" in May 1977, as referenced at the end of
this Section.
LEGAL RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES
The operation of community water supplies involves legal rights and respon-
sibilities. All public waterworks, whether publicly or privately owned, are
legally recognized as governmental activities. They maintain the right of eminent
domain and the authority to condemn private property for water supply needs.
In some states, depending upon enabling legislation, utilities also have
special rights associated with providing water service for fire protection. Water
utilities have the right to discontinue service if a hazard to the governmental
regulation as deemed appropriate for maintaining public service; therefore,
regional provisions of this type should be consulted. Nevertheless, public water
supplies are not protected against damage which is incurred through their own
negligence. This point may become increasingly more important with the advent of
the SDWA. The act defines specific water supply regulations to be met, providing
a mechanism whereby a utility can be challenged for negligence when in non-com-
pliance. It is important for utility management to be cognizant of these possi-
bilities and to avert such citizen legal actions by maintaining compliance with
approved state and federal reporting schedules and regulations. Waterworks may
also be sued for negligent operations that result in personal injury or property
damage.
Water rights law may have considerable influence in the selection and devel-
opment of new or augmented sources of water supply. Depending upon the state
having jurisdiction, water rights laws may apply to either groundwater or surface
water, or to both. Water rights determinations often rest more on case law than
statutory law. Although municipal water use generally has the highest priority of
all beneficial uses of water, there are great variations in water law. The dif-
ferences have developed or evolved as a result of widely different climatic and
geographical conditions which affect water supply and water use across the U.S.
Water rights laws are so diverse and so complex that it is not possible to sum-
marize all of them here. The best advice that can be given is to recommend to
water works officials that they contact their State water rights administrator
or an attorney who is experienced in the water rights law which prevails in the
case under consideration. This is a highly specialized field, and a person who is
an expert on one State's water laws may not be able to advise in other areas with
different laws and water conditions.
PUBLIC RELATIONS & PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS
Public relations have always been an important part of water supply manage-
ment. Recently good customer relations have assumed even greater proportions
because of the environmental and consumer movements and due to increased public
participation in ail public affairs and utility matters. A well informed public
can greatly assist utility projects, while an uninformed public can effectively
stop almost any project however deserving it might be. There are many ways to
.inform the public and obtain citizen support. One method is to form a Citizen's
5-5
-------
Advisory Committee to work with water system management and administration.
Hearings for public participation early in project formulation are important. A
public that is promptly and accurately informed during periods of normal util-
ity operation is much more likely to be helpful during emergency periods and
other difficult times for the water department.
Some potential benefits of an effective public relations program are:
• Greater consumer support for improving water system facilities
• Better public decision-making regarding increasing revenues, levying
taxes, and voting on bond Issues
• Improved employee attitudes and working conditions through pride in
community service
• Better public response to Public Notifications when such notification
becomes necessary
• Overall improved operations
• Allows the utility to clarify its position
Public relations programs may be different for small and large utilities.
However, the goal is the same - to inform the public and to secure public cooper-
ation in the water programs. Large utilities may have special public relations
staff, but in every case all employees must assist in this effort. They can do
this by the way they conduct themselves on the job and in the community and by
being alert to every opportunity to let the public know what the utility is doing
and what its future plans are.
The public notification requirements of the SDWA are intended to secure pub-
lic assistance in providing necessary water improvements by making all water
customers aware of existing water works deficiencies and their potential effects
on public health. The minimum notification requirements might well be supple-
mented by public meetings, newspaper articles, billing leaflets, and open discus-
sions of water works problems and potential solutions.
ECONOMIC AND ENERGY TRENDS
The current, rapid inflation rate and changes in the nation's economic
structure due to depletion of our natural resources have placed added pressures
and responsibilities on water supply management. These external influences are
more apparent for large utilities. It is, therefore, important for respective
managers to be cognizant of the changing energy and economic trends which may
directly influence future planning and operations. Substitute energy sources and
all other mitigation measures should also be carefully reviewed in advance of
expected needs for change. Water conservation methods should be studied. The
possibility of pumping water at times of off-peak electrical demand, by utili-
zation of storage, should be investigated.
5-6
-------
The costs of raw materials may also influence future use. Many chemicals,
such as chlorine, are highly energy intensive and, therefore, can be expected to
increase in cost proportional to increasing energy costs.
REFERENCES
• "The Safe Drinking Water Act, Self-Study Handbook; Community Water Systems,"
AWWA, 1978. Explains the requirements of the SDWA, Including quality regula-
tions, performance testing, and public notification procedures.
• "Water Utility Management," AWWA Manual M5. Chapter 3 deals with the legal
and moral responsibilities of a water purveyor. Chapter 21 deals with public
relations with respect to water utilities.
• "Technical Guidelines for Public Water Systems," U.S. EPA, June 1975, NTIS
//P 255 217. Chapter 8 includes a section on customer relations.
• "Public Notification Handbook For Public Drinking Water Supplies," U.S. EPA
Office of Drinking Water, Washington, D.C. 20460, May 1978.
• "Report of the EPA Advisory Committee on the Revision and Application of the
Drinking Water Standards," EPA, Washington, D.C., 1973.
• "Manual of Treatment Techniques For Meeting The IPDWR," U.S. EPA, 26 W. St.
Clair Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268, (EPA-600/8-77-005), May 1977.
5-7
-------
TJ
3)
-------
PART II
PRODUCTION
The production of potable water spans a broad range of activities which are
likely to become more complex with the increasing demands being placed on the
water purveyor. This part of the decision-maker's guide addresses the common
aspects of water production including planning, supply, transmission, treatment,
and distribution. Other aspects of potable water production dealing with disposal
of treatment plant wastes and operations are also discussed.
Water production activities from source of supply to consumer are shown
graphically by Figure 6-1.
The nature of potable water production is usually specific to each facility.
The information in these sections is presented as a guide to help the decision-
maker obtain an overview of water production, which should be helpful in identi-
fying the strengths and weaknesses of the water system. For specific problems it
may be advisable to seek help from a consultant. A reference list is included
with each section for obtaining specific information regarding the problem areas
identified in this overview.
H-l
-------
PART II PRODUCTION
I b PLANNING |
PROJECTING FUTURE
SYSTEM NEEDS - P. 4
EMERGENCY » STANDBY
SYSTEMS - P. 7
| ENERGY CONSIDERATIONS - P. 9 I |_
SUPPLY OPTIONS IN
EMERGENCY SITUATIONS-P. 9
REFERENCES - P. 13 \
17 SUPPLY]
[ QUANTITY-P. 2
RAW WATER QUALITY t
TREATMENT
REQUIREMENTS-P. 2
STORAGE-P. 4
ICONSEBVATION-P. 4 | I REFERENCES-p. 4
I TRANSMISSION |
(SEE SECTIONW)
I 8 TREATMENT |
I OBJECTIVES - P. 1 | ! PROCESS SELECTION-P. 2
CHEMICAL „
HANDLING - P. 9
I WASTE TREATMENT FOR CORROSION CONTROL-P. 9
I CJSB8.T!Pg.*10 I I "^'ABILITY-P. IJCII | REFERENCES-Pli"|
|9 WATER TREATMENT WASTES \-
LAICFILL DISPOSAL -P. 3
1SLUDCE DISPOSAL METHODS P. 2 I
I DEWATERING-P. 3 .
E TO S/NITARY | | REFERE>CES . p S
110 DISTRIBUTION |
I SERVICE - P 1 J I FIRE PROTECTION - P. 1 I
I STORAGE - P. 4 !
I DISTRIBUTION MAINS-P. 3 1
CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL - P. 4
REFERENCES- P. 5 I
I
fTT OPERATION t MAIMTENAMC
I ORGANIZATION* I I PROCEDURES* I I RECORDS - P~4~1 I REFERENCEsTT 1
I PERSONNEL-P. 1 J I EQUIPMENT-P 21 ^ ^"^ inBrfiPfi VSff r 1
I 12 SURVEILLANCE]
_i
OBJECTIVES! I
REQUIREMENTS -P 1 1
1
1
SAMPLING -P. 2 |
1
LABORATORY I
FACILITIES - P 3
|
INTERPRETATION & EVALUATION -P. .4 II REFERENCES - P. 4 1
II-2
-------
o>
PART II -PRODUCTION
SECTION 6 -PLANNING
Projecting Future System Needs 4
Appropriate Projection Techniques
for Static Conditions 5
Appropriate Projection Techniques
for Dynamic Conditions 5
Emergency and Standby Systems 7
Supply Options in Emergency Situations 9
Energy Considerations 9
Sources 10
Conservation 10
Redundancy and Reliability 12
References 13
-------
SECTION 6
PLANNING
There are several questions which can be posed to aid in consideration of
water system planning: •
1. How can planning be used to provide the new water works facilities
needed to meet water quality requirements of the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA)? (See this page below)
2. How can future needs of the water system be projected? (See page 6-5)
3. How can needed water works improvements be implemented? (See page 6-6)
4. What emergency conditions may affect water system planning? (See page
6-7 to 6-10)
5. What plans should be made to provide necessary redundancy and reliabil-
ity? (See page 6-12)
6. What plans should be made for conservation of water and energy? (See
pages 6-10 to 6-12)
7. How does the water utility planning fit into the overall growth pattern
of the community? (see page 6-7)
Planning is an important management activity of all waterworks systems. The
utility's planning policy may reflect general goals of the community and sur-
rounding regions in addition to the specific objectives of the water department.
Interactions between government and community activities are important; moreover,
any practical program should be formulated within the financial, social, and
regulatory constraints of the community.
There are several levels of planning including:
Area master plan
Sub-area master plan
201 and 208 planning
Project planning and interfacing with other agencies
Capital improvement plans
Concurrent planning,;replacement, and repair or reinvesting to offset
depreciation
Plans which affect water works operation to varying degrees are prepared by
Federal, state, regional, county, municipal and other agencies. Historically,
water works planning has been based almost solely upon providing unlimited water
service to the public as needed. This practice was based on the unquestioned
responsibility of the water utility to meet the water service needs of the area
served under all conditions. Recently, water works planning has been modified to
take into account a number of political questions which cannot be ignored. Such
6-1
-------
PROTECTION OF SOURCE OF SUPPLY
AGAINST CONTAMINATION - AND
RAW WATER QUALITY MONITORING
STREAM, RIVER,
OR LAKE
WATER TREATMENT
PLANT WASTES -
DISPOSAL OR
RECLAMATION
CROSS
CONNECTION
CONTROL
GENERAL OVERSIGHT
BY STATE & EPA
WATER TREATMENT |
WHOLESALE
PURCHASE OF
WATER FROM
ANOTHER
SUPPLIER
FINISHED WATER -
QUALITY CONTROL
AND MONITORING
PLANT STORAGE
WATER DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM AND STORAGE
SERVICE METER
WATER SERVICE
TO CONSUMER
TAP WATER -
QUALITY MONITORING
CONSUMER REACTION
TO PRODUCT
Figure 6-1. Water Production Activity
6-2
-------
considerations include land use planning, growth control, wastewater planning,
the goals and plans of other local, state, regional, and Federal agencies, and
public desires.
Planning is the continuous process of assessing utility operations and
short- and long-term water supply needs and facility operation. Good historical
records of community growth and existing facility operations are important for
accurately assessing community needs. This fact should be considered in general
plant management. Comprehensive development plans are generally required for
projecting long-term supply needs, especially for large utilities. Comprehensive
planning programs will vary among communities depending on size, local
regulations, local customs, and available technical assistance. The general
process for formulating major policy should include the following steps:
• Outline supply goals and non-supply interests
• Evaluate and analyze program alternatives
• Prepare short- and long-term plans
• Implement plans, assess the program and its interactions and provide
feedback for future actions or planning
The managers of a water supply system are not solely responsible for formu-
lating departmental master plans. Planning is an integrated process that involves
other departments, city or community leaders, operations personnel, and community
interaction. In this regard, it is the duty of a water supply administrator in
the planning process to:
• Collect and evaluate available information
• Transmit information to other departments, community leaders, and the
public
• Promote community interest in policy making
• Coordinate inter- and intra-departmental activities relative to plan
development and implementation
• Consider compatibility with regional plans and land use plans
• Promote projects or establish priorities that satisfy goals and oppose
objectionable policies
• Implement approved projects
The major concerns of a comprehensive water supply plan include projecting
future system needs, evaluating emergency and standby systems, and assessing
changing regulations. The quantity of water available from the source of supply
and its long term quality are most important.
6-3
-------
PROJECTING FUTURE SYSTEM NEEDS '
Estimates of future water demand represent the basis for sizing water system
facilities. The design period for such predictions depends upon the nature and
permanence of the structures and the cost of capital financing. An equitable
division of the financial burden among present and future consumers suggests pro-
visions be made for 10 to 30 years in advance of the present requirements. The
typical design period for distribution systems and surface supply works is 50
years; for treatment facilities, a ten to 25 year planning period is generally
used.
It is increasingly difficult to build water impoundments, so classical
approaches to water supply design may have to be supplemented by consideration of
other measures. For example, in planning sources of supply, it may be necessary
to decide whether to design raw water storage for a 100-year drought, or whether
it may be possible by special conservation measures during drought periods to
design source storage for a less severe drought condition.
Water demand estimates are based on population projections, commercial and
industrial growth, water use trends, climate, metering, extension policies, and
changes in service area boundaries. Detailed predictions may be developed by sum-
ming the projected domestic use, commercial use, industrial use, fire demand and
other municipal uses and loss due to unaccounted-for water (typically 10 percent
of average use). Unaccounted for water includes leakage, water for fire fighting,
street flushing, and use by the water system and the City for main flushing,
bearing cooling, and meter testing. Commercial use is ordinarily related either
to number of employees or gross area for each specific enterprise. Similarly,
industrial demand may be estimated per unit of production.
Fire demand is an important component in system sizing. The local fire
department and local fire insurance agents can supply information on the rating
system used in the community and the fire flows required in different areas. The
flow requirement for fighting fires, even in a residential area, may necessitate
considerably larger mains than the domestic demand alone. In some cases, it is
not feasible to provide full fire flows in the initial stages of plan develop-
ment; however, since the life of distribution mains is generally in excess of 50
years, it is wise to install mains that are sized to convey the future fire flows
so they will not have to be replaced at a later date. High service pumps, distri-
bution mains, and treated water storage facilities are sized to meet the larger
of peak hourly demands or fire requirements plus average demands of the maximum
day. Reliable metered data is requied to arrive at maximum daily flows and peak
hourly flows which are needed for design purposes. In the central city, water-
front areas, or industrial sections dual (domestic and fire) water distribution
systems may be advantageous.
Population forecasting is the most important component in estimating future
water supply needs. Population data may be available from local or state planning
agencies. Many methods have been developed for estimating the size and make-up of
the households to be served by the water-providing agency. The size and household
make-up of future residents of any service area will be influenced by potentially
complex demographic, economic and land use factors, jf conditions with regard to
these factors within the service area and the economic region are not changing,
6-k
-------
but are static, then historical data on population can be used to extrapolate the
past into the future in order to project the make-up and size of residential
water users and estimate their future demands, for water. But if any of these
conditions are dynamic, which means that they are changing or are likely to
change in the future, then the nature of those changes has to be analyzed and
their interactions considered in order to forecast future water demands from
households.,
Appropriate Projection Techniques For Static Conditions
If economic, demographic and land use influencing conditions are static,
population projection is appropriate. The following methods are frequently
used:
• Arithmetic increase method assumes the rate of population growth
remains constant. Projections are made by linear extrapolation of his-
torical growth into the future.
• Geometric increase projections may be employed for rapidly growing comr
munities. In this case, the growth rate is assumed proportional to pop-
ulation size following an exponential pattern, i.e., a constant per-
centage of growth is assumed for equal time periods.
• Declining-rate geometrical increase is a modification of the geo-
metric forecasting method which assumes a declining rather than a con-
stant proportionality with population size.
• Comparative projections are based on the growth patterns of several
larger cities with similar commercial, industrial and population char-
acteristics to the community in question. Growth records of the ana-
logous communities are used for predicting future population growth.
Appropriate Projection Techniques for Dynamic Conditions
If demographic, economic and land use conditions are dynamic, population
forecasts are frequently derived from estimates of changes likely to result
from: ,
• Natural demographic changes (births, deaths and new household
formations)
• Net migration and
• Housing market and development changes
Unless the nature of the service area is such that most of those who work in
the area also live in the area, the assessment of natural demographic changes and
migration is usually performed on a regional basis. Then housing market and
development assessments are considered to allocate appropriate portions of the
regional population to the service area.
6-5
-------
Natural demographic changes are most freqently forecast using a cohort-sur-
vival method, to project changes in specific parts of the present population. In
most cases, the existing population is categorized' by age and sex. Changes in
these two groups are then forecast on the basis of estimated survival rates, fer-
tility rates, and new household formations. Natural demographic changes can be
forecast with the judgmental extrapolation of historic' trends.
Migration in and out of the region or service area (if the service area is
large enough so that it includes the work places of its residents) is usually
forecast by linking migration rates to forecasts of future employment. Employment
in various sectors of the region can be forecast by various economic techniques.
Frequently, the techniques draw upon the historic relationship between population
and the growth of jobs in the. region. Judgments concerning the comparative advan-
tages of the region for various kinds of .economic activities can also be used to
forecast future employment. Frequently too, employment forecasting begins by
estimating future jobs in basic industries (those that export goods or services
from the region), followed by estimates of the future for local population-
serving businesses.
By whatever means changes in the economic base of the region is forecast,
the link between jobs and population is made through the estimation of labor
force participation rates. Estimates of these rates permit the forecaster to
judge the number of employed households likely to be attracted to the region by
the jobs available in future years, and the number of households in the work
force likely to migrate away from the region.
Housing economics, (including the availability of buildable land and the
relative demand for housing locations in the service area) have to be considered
in order to estimate future housing development options and the likely occupancy
of present dwellings. Land use plans, transportation plans, and appropriate hous-
ing development regulations also are considered in light of the likely housing
economics in order to estimate future housing availability in the service area.
If the service area is smaller than the region, the forecaster must allocate a
share of the region's future household population to the service area.
Project implementation is an important management function. A comprehensive
program for the water department should be integrated with other community needs
and financial requirements. A common developmental approach provides the system
components of the ultimate plan that are immediately required, or are not well
suited for staged development, in the initial construction phase. Remaining
facilities can be added in phases as they are needed. This approach minimizes the
initial investment and financial burden on the existing customers. Another
approach involves a gradual development through construction of independent
treatment units as needed, thereby distributing financing over an extended per-
iod. In either case, the planning program involves a continuous assessment and
reasessment of system and community needs. Water planning must be coordinated
with sewer system planning.
In order to provide lead time for construction, system expansion Is indi-
cated when the demand approaches not more than 80 percent of the rated capacity
of installed facilities. For major capital improvements, the lead time should be
6-6
-------
sufficient to allow for engineering investigations and design, environmental
Impact analyses, financing, and construction.
EMERGENCY AND STANDBY SYSTEMS
The water supply system is a vital community service in many ways. This must
be considered in facility planning. Power failures, equipment breakdowns, routine
servicing requirements, distribution line failures, and severe fluctuations in
the quantity and quality of supply are periodic occurrences in all water supply
systems. In addition, certain regions may be subject to violent storms, hurri-
canes, flooding, earthquakes, strikes, or other natural or man-made disasters
that could disrupt operations. Vulnerability assessment is a very important part
of planning for emergencies. The impacts of such problems can be minimized
through flexible system design and development of emergency programs in advance
of the need.
Reserve capacity, storage, and system flexibility contribute greatly to sys-
tem reliability, especially for small systems. Treated water storage should pro-
vide service during the time needed for plant repairs if treatment facility
duplication is not practical.
Whenever possible, dual units or multiple water, supply and treatment trains
should be provided. Overall system reliability can be improved significantly by
augmenting surface water supplies with groundwater sources when possible. Dupli-
cate basins, equipment, and pipelines may be needed for continuous operation.
Auxiliary power units should be installed to maintain minimum standby services,
particularly in those systems not having a large reserve storage capacity. High
service pumping stations, treatment plants, and wells that pump directly into
distribution systems should be equipped with standby power. Emergency power
should be designed to produce and deliver average daily water demands.
Water systems that employ direct pumping into transmission mains without
storage are extremely susceptible to equipment malfunctions and power outages.
Multiple pumps should be used in this case. Recommended practice is to provide
three pumps of equal capacity where any two can deliver the peak demand.
Design of distribution systems also is important for assuring supply reli-
ability. Multiple transmission mains and looped-grid distribution patterns pro-
vide desirable system redundancy.
Reliable water service can also be assured through effective system mainte-
nance and emergency training programs. All personnel should be well versed in
appropriate emergency plans and the importance of preventive maintenance. This
requires periodic training sessions directed at these specific objectives.
The American Water Works Association (AWWA) recommends the personnel .
requirements for meeting contingency plans as outlined in Table 6-2 • Obviously,
allocation of the listed duties will vary according to system size and complex-
ity. Likewise, emergency training needs will vary for specific community needs.
6-7
-------
TABLE 6-2. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONTINGENCY PLAN
PERSONNEL 'REQUIREMENTS
Vulnerability analysis
Protective design
Utility liaison
Security
Hazard assessment
Personnel safety
Emergency operation
Emergency repairs
4J
c
0)
en
ifl
c
2
X
X
X
X
Cn
c
-H
n
<1>
0)
c
tp
c
X
X
X
X
X
W
0
4J
(0
(1)
81
X
X
CO
4J
(0
•H
U
X
X
4J
s
H
CM
,
0)
O
§
c
.
-------
An ongoing training program is essential to ensure effective service in the
event of major system upsets, especially for small communities. The objectives of
an emergency planning program should be clearly outlined, and specific duties
established and posted to eliminate confusion during unusual situations.
SUPPLY OPTIONS IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS
States assuming primacy under the SDWA are required to develop a State Emer-
gency Plan. Historically, in water works operation, the two most common and most
disastrous types of emergencies have been drought and flood. The kinds of water
system failures which are likely to occur during drought and flood are rather
well documented (see last two references at the end of this section) and gener-
ally can be planned for in advance.
Drought. The San Francisco Bay Area encompasses one of the most complex and
extensive water conveyance systems in the world. Some valuable lessons were
learned here during the 1976-1977 drought. Water needs were met by a combination
of supply augmentation and demand reduction.
Supply augmentation was accomplished by use of emergency surface supplies,
use of dead storage, development of new wells, activation of old wells, broader
utilization of treated wastewater, leak detection and repair, construction of
temporary pipelines, and water hauling.
Demand reduction through rationing played a key role in getting through the
drought. Both mandatory and voluntary rationing were employed. Reductions in
water use were as great as 45 percent by apartment dwellers and 75 percent by
single family residences.
Flood. There are numerous examples of flood damage to public water supplies,
but the Kansas River flood of 1951 probably had as many serious and prolonged
effects as any. Analysis of water supply failures in 37 cities showed the most
frequent causes were; power failure, flooded wells, flood treatment plants, dis-
tribution system damaged, and low lift pump station flooded. The emergencies were
met by providing temporary emergency power by means of portable generators, port-
able water purification units, improvised mutual aid among neighboring cities,
water hauling, volunteer labor, water conservation, emergency communication by
radio, and coordination of activities by state and Federal agencies. Good records
of valve location, and plans and maps of water distribution lines were valuable
tools in the restoration of water service.
ENERGY CONSIDERATIONS
The present importance of energy conservation may make it advisable for many
water systems to employ engineering consultants to advise . them in this regard,
including special system studies and reports. Recent shortages and the high costs
of electricity, fuels, and chemicals have become important considerations in
water system planning. The need for instituting energy conservation measures
will become increasingly apparent as traditional fuel supplies dwindle and asso-
ciated costs rise. The cost of energy will be felt Indirectly In the availability
of consumable products. The cost of chemicals (alum, lime, polymers, and
chlorine), which are essential for water treatment, have increased in past years
6-9
-------
and will continue to do so as the energy required for their production becomes
more expensive. This fact reinforces the need for the consideration of energy
requirements in water system planning.
Means for reducing energy costs are alternative sources development and
water and energy. These methods are easily incorporated in new facilities;
however, retrofit modifications to existing facilities may often be feasible.
More water storage may permit water pumping to be done at off-peak periods of
power use. During periods of peak power consumption flow into the water
distribution system could be by gravity from storage. Another means of energy
conservation is through reduction of unaccounted-for water through leak detection
and repair.
During the design of water system improvements, If there are options, con-
sider energy requirements. The economics and trade-off between capital and O&M
costs are changing. If possible provide sufficient storage of water so that pump-
ing can be done at off-peak times. Give attention to increasing storage in ele-
vated locations versus storage that which requires repumping.
Sources
The traditional sources of energy for water supply are electricity, natural
gas, and fuel oil. As energy demands and consumption increase, these sources of
energy will become more scarce and costly. Alternative means of supplying part or
all of the power needed for water works may be appropriate in the future.
Solar energy for building heat is a possible substitute for gas heating.
Solar collectors can be retrofitted at reasonable cost and may represent a sub-
stantial energy savings for small or simple systems. A heat pump is also an
effective device for space or water heating. The effectiveness of utilizing heat
pumps is dependent on the size of the system and the total energy demands.
In determining the type of energy to be used for water systems, the future
availability of energy under the particular local conditions should be analyzed.
Conservation
With energy costs for water supply, treatment, and distribution being pro-
jected by experts in the field to double or triple within the next ten years,
programs to reduce consumption deserve attention. Energy consumption at existing
facilities can be reduced by improving pumping efficiency. The design of new
facilities should include study of the potential means for minimizing electricity
and fuel demands.
Pumps should be operated at the highest efficiency possible. This may
require some system modifications, a change in operations, and the repair of
existing mechanical equipment. A thorough examination of the existing system and
a cost-effectiveness analysis will indicate the areas where pumping changes will
be most effective in reducing energy use. Some aspects of operation which may
reduce pumping energy include:
6-10
-------
• More frequent pipeline cleaning to reduce friction and increase the
effective diameter of existing pipes
• Better utilization of storage so pumps are operated more uniformly for
longer times and at lower heads
• Use smaller pumps rather than oversized ones which require throttling
to suit system conditions with waste of energy
• Having all valves completely open during pumping
• Off-peak pumping
• Treatment of water for corrosion control to reduce friction losses in
pipelines
• Make use of variable speed pumps
Minimizing energy consumption should be considered in planning and imple-
menting system improvements and expansions. Possible trade-offs which reduce
energy should be analyzed on an overall cost-effectiveness basis including opera-
tion and maintenance, not merely on a capital cost basis. Additional considera-
tions include the following:
• Increasing transmission and distribution line diameters to reduce fric-
tion and therefore pumping head, with due consideration to the cost of
larger pipe. Energy requirements increase as the 1.85 power of the head
loss.
• Comparing different pipe materials to minimize friction and pumping
head
• Investigating alternative source locations and different raw water
treatment needs to optimize delivery and treatment costs
• Comparing various storage alternatives such as raw water, treated
water, and distribution storage
• Evaluating fixed versus variable speed pumps and optimizing pumping
schedules
• Comparing various treatment processes to produce the highest quality
product for the least cost (including use of chemicals that minimize
the quantities of energy used for manufacture)
• Utilizing dual distribution systems where advantageous
• Utilizing heat recovery systems in lime recalcination and carbon regen-
eration systems
6-11
-------
• Computerizing process and distribution controls to maximize treatment
efficiency, minimize chemical consumption, and stabilize pumping
operations
• Reclamation and reuse of water for appropriate purposes in situations
where this saves energy
Energy conservation is highly system specific. What may be effective for one
system or set of conditions, may not be for another. Each energy conservation
program should be carefully studied to make sure it will actually reduce energy
consumption.
The preceeding discussion has centered around energy conservation rather
than around water conservation. This was done because fossil energy is a limited
non-renewable resource, while water is a renewable resource. Water is renewed in
the natural hydrolpgic cycle, or it can be renewed by man through application of
proper treatment. One way to save energy is to use less water. However, there are
many situations where water conservation, per se, is vital. One of the foremost
is in areas of groundwater "mining", that is where the total use from an aquifer
exceeds the average rate of recharge of the aquifer. Water conservation during
drought, as already pointed out, may also be practiced to reduce capital expendi-
tures required to maintain normal water consumption rates.
In times of drought, water demand management can be exerted by: adjusting
rate structure, installation of water conservation devices in homes, conservation
education, and rationing.
Redundancy and Reliability
Public health and economic considerations of public water supply dictate
that a reliable source of high quality water be provided to meet reasonable
customer demands. This means that even under emergency conditions, operations
must continue. A certain amount of redundancy is provided in supply and process
equipment to ensure reliable service under emergency conditions. The same must be
true of the power and fuel sources.
The standby power requirements will, of course, be dependent upon the size
of the system and the minimum equipment needed to provide services. Facility
design should provide two independent sources of power for all essential mechan-
ical and electrical equipment. Depending on the location of the facilities, an
on-slte auxiliary generator or a second independent electric service line may be
appropriate. Adequate distribution storage may also be used to ensure service
under emergency conditions. The standby power supply need only be adequate to
operate essential mechanical and electrical equipment (lights, pumps, etc.), not
necessarily all facilities (air conditioning, etc.).
The operations staff should be thoroughly familiar with emergency plant
operations. Standby power equipment or service should be checked and operated
periodically to be sure that it is fully operational in the event of an emerg-
ency. Fuel reserves should be used sparingly in case of an extended energy
shortage.
6-12
-------
Use of treatment chemicals should be optimized. A 30-day supply of chemicals
should be kept at the treatment plant since a widespread energy crisis may limit
chemical production, or strikes may occur, making delivery schedules unreliable.
The less dependent on energy a system is, the easier it will be to operate
under emergency conditions or if the nation's energy reserves become seriously
strained. Redundancy of power supply is important in the design of water systems
to provide reliable service. Equally important, however, is minimizing the basic
system demands for energy, both primary and secondary. Energy conservation and
system reliability are compatible.
REFERENCES
• "Emergency Planning for Water Utility Management," AWWA Manual M19. Gives
positive guidelines for the development of emergency plans, including disas-
ter effects, vulnerability assessment, protective measures, emergency
operations planning, and training.
• "Technical Guidelines for Public Water Systems," U.S. EPA, June, 1975, NTIS
#PB 255 217, Chapter 1 gives general guidelines for planning a water system,
including general considerations, capacity sizing techniques; treatment
requirements, distribution systems and appurtenant facilities.
• "Energy Conservation in Municipal Wastewater Treatment," U.S. EPA, MCD-32,
March, 1977. Contains curves to determine energy demands for unit wastewater
treatment processes, many of which are applicable to water treatment; also
describes energy saving measures such as solar heating, furnace heat
recycling, etc.
• "Operation of Wastewater Treatment Plants; A Manual of Practice," WPCF, MOP
11, 1975, Chapter 28. Discusses energy conservation practices in wastewater
treatment, some of which are applicable to water supply systems.
• "North Marin's Little Compendium of Water Saving Ideas," John 0. Nelson,
March 1977, North Marin County Water District, Novato, CA 94947.
• "Interruptions To Water Service By The Kansas Flood of 1951", D.F. Metzler
and R.L. Gulp, JAWWA, p. 780, Sept. 1952.
• "Urban Drought In the San Francisco Bay Area: A Study of Institutional and
Social Resiliency", M. Hoffman, et al, JAWWA, p. 356, July 1979.
6-13
-------
PART II-PRODUCTION
PAGES
SECTION 7-SUPPLY 1
Quality 2
Raw Water Quantity and Treatment Requirements 2
Storage 4
4
Conservation
References
-------
SECTION 7
SUPPLY
Selection of the source of supply affects many parts of the total water sys-
tem, so that it is important to ask several questions in order to optimize the
source selection process.
1. What are the primary features to consider in selecting a source of
water supply? (See pages 7-1 and 1-2}
2. How are future quantity requirements estimated? (See page 1-2)
3. What are desirable raw water quality characteristics? (See page 1-2)
4. Is raw water storage needed? (See page 1-h)
5. What benefits accrue to source of supply from water conservation? (See
page 7-^0
The raw water source of a waterworks influences the overall system design,
operation, and management in many ways. For example, specific characteristics of
each source may affect the available yield, treatment requirements, operations,
and the ultimate water quality that reaches the consumer. Some of the primary
considerations for evaluating the characteristics of a particular water supply
are:
Water quality
Treatment requirements and cost
Environmental concerns
Safe yield
Location
Economics of development
Water rights and long-term availability
Energy use
Source requirements are specific for each community, being a function of the
geography, topography, hydrology of the watershed, and the community size.
Groundwater sources are generally preferred when available in sufficient quantity
since they typically are of higher quality and, thus, require less treatment.
Except for some springs and artesian wells, most groundwater sources require
pumping. The raw water storage provided by groundwater aquifers is advantageous•
In warm months, the temperature of groundwater is generally lower than that of
surface waters in the same general location.
Surface waters are the principal source of potable water in the U.S. because
they generally are available in larger quantities than groundwater. In mountain-
ous areas, surface waters collected or stored in high areas can often be trans-
ported and distributed by gravity flow to the points of use. However, the com-
parative availability of ground and surface waters varies greatly from place to
7-1
-------
place. There are many regions in the U.S. where only one or the other (ground or
surface) supply is available in quantities which permit practical development.
In areas where water supply is short or of poor quality requiring extensive
treatment, or where there are nearby sources of supply already developed by
others, it may be prudent to consider the purchase, on a wholesale basis, of raw
or treated water from another purveyor.
QUANTITY
The delivery capacity of a waterworks supply source should exceed antici-
pated demand for a reasonable time period in the future. A reasonable design per-
iod for wells may be 5 to 10 years, for small surface supplies 10 to 25 years,
and for large surface supplies involving long construction times may be 25 to 50
years. Safe yield for a water source to meet annual average demands is calcu-
lated for 50- to 100-year drought conditions. The supply should be assessed
using the best hydrologic information available for the watershed. If adequate
records are not available, estimates may be performed by various methods using
local precipitation records. The U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Weather Bureau
may be consulted for this information.
An impounding reservoir or some other means of storage is required when min-
imum stream flows do not meet maximum daily demands. A complete water budget
should be prepared for determining the safe yield. Water balance computations
employ all important stream records, runoff information, and include calculations
for surface evaporation and loss due to seepage. For extreme drought conditions
as much as 4 years of carryover storage may be required. As already mentioned,
conservation may reduce storage needs for drought.
The safe yield from well water supplies should meet maximum daily demand
with the largest well out of service. The yield from each well can be estimated
from pumping tests, well location and construction, and the minimum static water
level and minimum groundwater level permitted during drought conditions. Drawdown
of existing wells should be checked and recorded periodically for future projec-
tions of supply needs. A basin-wide groundwater management program may be advis-
able to prevent overdraft and excessive drawdown during drought.
RAW WATER QUALITY AND TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
The raw water quality is an important consideration in overall system per-
formance and economics. The treatment plant requirements are a direct function
of source water quality and the required product water quality. A sanitary survey
by qualified personnel is required to assess the applicability and treatment
needs for each specific water source. A sound policy is to use the highest qual-
ity water source available in order to minimize treatment and the potential risk
to consumer public health. Cost, environmental effects, and reclamation potential
are other factors to be considered.
General characteristics for ground and surface waters are listed in Table
7-1. Certain groundwater sources may contain high amounts of dissolved inor-
ganics which may necessitate treatment to achieve acceptable water quality. On
the other hand, surface waters are exposed to contamination and may vary in
7-2
-------
TABLE 7 -1. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WATER SOURCES
Source
Type
Comments
Groundwater
Springs
Well
Infiltration galleries
All
Quality and quantity are functions of
water-bearing strata, shallow springs are
often susceptible to surface water
contamination.
Uniform quality, low turbidity, good
bacteriological quality
Typically "hard," containing many
dissolved inorganics -
May contain trace organic substances
Surface
water
Streams, rivers, and lakes
Exposed to surface contamination
Variable quality and quantity
Typically "soft," containing few dissolved
salts or inorganics
Variable turbidity
Variable or questionable bacteriological
quality
Many organic impurities with associated
color, taste, and odors
Usually requires more treatment than
groundwater
-------
quality due to storms, seasonal changes, excessive runoff, etc. In order to main-
tain a high quality product water under variable raw surface water conditions, a
flexible treatment scheme is necessary, and process operation must be monitored
regularly and adjusted according to prevailing conditions. All source waters,
ground or surface, should be properly protected from contamination that will
adversely affect plant operations and product quality. This requires careful con-
sideration of the source of supply location relative to potential contaminant
sources.
STORAGE
Source of supply storage facilities should be provided to meet water demands
under extreme drought conditions (50- to 100-year drought). Under severe con-
ditions four years of carryover storage may be required. Furthermore, the overall
capacity of the watershed reservoir (ground or surface) should be assessed inter-
mittently to determine the long-term adequacy of the source. If the average res-
ervoir demand is greater than its rate of replenishment, then the system will not
meet the long-term needs of the community. Long-term source depletion may also
result in unexpected contamination from adjacent water systems, such as saltwater
reservoirs which can destroy a supply source with little advanced warning. A good
indicator of source contamination of this type is the trend of raw water quality
over an extended time period, and the quality changes in monitoring wells.
CONSERVATION
The production and distribution of potable water is a capital- and energy-
intensive activity. Accordingly, there has been increased interest in the
potential benefits which may be realized by consumer water conservation. This
interest is due to competition for supply sources, escalating costs for energy
and energy-intensive chemicals and materials, and the increased production costs
associated with the need for higher quality water. The useful period of a water
supply system for meeting community demand may, in some cases, be extended by
increased efficiency in water use. This may represent a major cost savings in
certain cases, especially if the cost of developing additional or new water sup-
plies is very high. Water conservation should be considered by all water utili-
ties in water-short areas to save water, and in all areas where pumping is
involved to save energy.
REFERENCES . i ,
• Water Supply and Wastewater Removal, G.M. Fair, et al, John Wiley & Sons,
1966. Chapters 6 through 11 give detailed information on sources and collec-
, tion of water for domestic supply. i
• Water Supply Engineering Design, M.A. Al-Layla, et al, Ann Arbor Science
Publishers, Inc., 1977. Chapter 3 discusses various sources of water;
Chapter 4, the collection of water from these sources; and Chapter 5, the
distribution of water from source to impoundment and treatment.
• "North Marin's Little Compendium of Water Saving Ideas," John 0. Nelson,
March 1977, N. Marin Co. Water District., Novato, CA 94947.
-------
PART II-PRODUCTION
SECTION 8 - TREATMENT
Objectives 1
Process Selection 2
Simple Disinfection 2
Turbidity Removal 5
Water Treatment for Corrosion Control 9
Chemical Handling 9
Operation and Control 10
Reliability 10
References 11
90
PAGES I
-------
SECTION 8
TREATMENT
Some of the most important questions concerning the treatment required to
meet State and EPA quality standards are:
1. Why is water treatment required? (See Appendix F).
2. What are the objectives of water treatment? (See page 8-1, Appendix A,
and Appendix C)
3. If an MCL is exceeded, how are excess concentrations removed? (See pages
8-1 and 8-2)
4. How are treatment processes selected? (See page 8-2)
5. What disinfectant should be used? (See pages 8-2 to 8-5)
6. What are the most effective general treatment methods for removal of
various contaminants? (See page 8-7)
7. How reliable should water treatment processes be? (See pages 8-10 and 8-ll)
Treatment is a critical aspect of public water supply. Inadequate treatment
has been directly linked to several epidemics and suspected in many others. As an
example, a chlorination failure led to a Salmonella outbreak in Riverside, Cali-
fornia, in 1965. Over 16,000 illnesses were reported, 70 people were hospital-
ized, and three deaths were linked to the consumption of inadequately treated
water. The National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NIPDWR) have been
adopted to ensure that health standards are maintained for potable water.
The water utility is responsible for providing a safe, aesthetically pleas-
ing water. The treatment required depends on the source and characteristics' of
the raw water supply. Since the passage of the SDWA and adoption of the NIPDWR,
this task has become more straightforward in that there are clear goals to be
met. This section presents only basic treatment processes that, when properly
applied, will produce an acceptable product. Removal of certain constituents may
be difficult and require more complex treatment systems than those discussed
herein. Furthermore, future changes in regulations may necessitate even further
treatment. In most cases it is advisable to employ a consulting sanitary engineer
who is expert and experienced in water purification to select the treatment
processes needed under given conditions.
OBJECTIVES
The principal objective of potable water treatment is to .provide a safe
aesthetically appealing product for human consumption at reasonable cost. This
requirement has been clearly defined by the establishment of maximum contaminant
levels (MCL) for specific pollutants. These regulations, defined in the NIPDWR,
8-1
-------
must be met by all public water purveyors. Detailed discussion of the primary as
well as the secondary regulations is contained in Section 5 of this guide.
The MCL's for the regulated pollutants are summarized in Appendices A and C.
These criteria are based on potential public health effects of consuming unsafe
water and on extensive experience with the technical feasibility of achieving the
MCL's as described in Appendix F.
Utilities should also be aware of unregulated problems which are presently
beyond the scope of the NIPDWR.
PROCESS SELECTION
Although the basic objective of providing a high quality product is common
for all water utilities, the specific steps required to do this will be different
for each system because no two raw waters are exactly of the same quality. The
type of treatment provided depends primarily on the quality and variability of
the source of supply. As a minimum for all waters, disinfection must be provided
to remove biological contaminants. Surface waters generally require filtration
for turbidity removal and disinfection as minimum treatment. Groundwaters may
require various mineral removal processes in addition to disinfection, depending
on the inorganic composition of the well water. Both surface and groundwaters may
contain organic compounds which require attention in treatment. A tabular summary
of various processes which are effective in removing pollutants when properly
applied is given in Table 8-1.
To determine fully all seasonal treatment requirements, a detailed sanitary
survey must be completed. The most economical treatment system to meet the qual-
ity requirements can then be developed. Efficient operation involves varying the
treatment operations as necessary to accommodate changing raw water
characteristics.
If a water contains excessive concentrations of a substance for which an MCL
has been established, there are economical treatment methods available for reduc-
tion of the concentration to acceptable limits. Discussions of these methods are
beyond the scope of this report, but they are already described in detail and
.rather completely in an EPA publication, No. 600/2-78-182, "Estimating Costs For
Water Treatment As A Function of Size and Treatment Plant Efficiency", MERL Cin-
cinnati, Ohio, August 1978, as well as in "Manual of Treatment Techniques For
Meeting the NIPDWR," EPA-600/8-77-005, MERL, Cincinnati, Ohio, May 1977. The EPA
manual on treatment techniques discusses removal of radionuclides, inorganics,
and organic substances. Each substance for which there is an MCL is discussed.
Simple Disinfection
*
Simple disinfection is considered the minimum treatment required for any
water supply. It is used to destroy or inactivate biological contaminants in the
raw supply. It may be the only treatment required in cases where the source is of
high, consistent quality, such as groundwater or snowmelt. Alternate disinfection
methods involve the use of chlorine dioxide, ozone, or chlorine-ammonia
treatment.
8-2
-------
TABLE 8-1. MOST .EFFECTIVE TREATMENT METHODS FOR CONTAMINANT REMOVAL
Contaminant
Most effective treatment methods
Arsenic:
Barium:
Cadmium:
Chromium:
Virus and
Coliform Organisms:
Fluoride:
Lead:
Manganese fi Iron:
Mercury:
Nitrate:
Organic Contaminants:
Radium:
Selenium:
Silver:
Sodium:
Sulfate:
Turbidity:
Taste & Odor:
Color:
Iron S Manganese:
As+5 _ Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH 6-8; alum
coagulation, pH 6-7; excess lime softening
As+3 _ Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH 6-8) alum
coagulation, pH 6-7; excess lime softening
NOTE; Oxidation required before treatment for As*3
Ion exchange with activated alumina or bone char
adsorption
Lime softening, pH 10-11; ion exchange softening
Ferric sulfate coagulation, above pH 8; lime soften-
ing; excess lime softening
Cr+3 - Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH 6-9; alum
coagulation, pH 7-9; excess lime softening
Cr+6 _ ferrous sulfate coagulation, pH 7-9.5
Disinfection; coagulation, and filtration plus
disinfection
Ion exchange with activated alumina; lime softening
Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH 6-9; alum coagula-
tion, pH 6-9; lime softening; excess lime softening
Inorganic - Oxidation/Sedimentation/Filtration
Organic - Oxidation, Alum-lime coagulation, pH 9-9.6
Inorganic - Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH 7-8
Organic - Granular activated carbon
Ion exchange
Powdered activated carbon; granular activated carbon
Lime softening
Se+4 - Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH 6-7; ion ex-
change; reverse osmosis
Se+6 - ion exchange; reverse osmosis
Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH 7-9; alum coagulation,
pH 6-8; lime softening; excess line softening
Ion exchange; reverse osmosis
Ion exchange; reverse osmosis
Coagulation, settling, and filtration, or direct filtration
Chlorine dioxide, breakpoint chlorination, powdered
and granular activated carbon, chlorine-ammonia,
copper sulfate
Coagulation, powdered and granular activated carbon, or
pre-oxidation with ozone and filtration through GAC -
sand media
Oxidation, coagulation, filtration, softening, ion
exchange
8-3
-------
Disinfection is most commonly achieved using chlorine in the gaseous form
for large treatment facilities or in the form of a hypochlorite compound for
small systems. Chlorine gas is a heavy, greenish yellow substance that has a very
low solubility in water. It is generally transported in containers in a liquified
state. It is a respiratory irritant, requiring extreme care in handling. Hypo-
chlorite compounds may be either dry or liquid. Except for small plants, they are
generally more expensive than chlorine gas; however, they do not present the same
dangers in handling as does elemental chlorine.
The risks involved in using chlorine gas, particularly in and near large
metropolitan areas, have forced the use of alternative chlorine sources in cer-
tain cases. Sodium hypochlorite most closely matches the disinfecting properties
of elemental chlorine; however, it is not stable for long periods of time and is
required in proportionally higher volumes. An alternative to frequent deliveries
is to generate the compound at the site of application. Several electrolytic pro-
cesses have been developed using sodium chloride to generate sodium hypochlorite
on site. These are most cost-effective if there is a nearby source of saltwater
or waste brine.
The effectiveness of chlorine as a disinfectant is influenced by several
factors. The pH of the supply determines the form of chlorine in the water.
Hypochlorous acid is predominant at low pH (6.5 or less) while hypochlorite ion
predominates at high pH (8.5 or greater). Of the two, the acid is more effective
as a disinfectant. Therefore, the ideal pH for disinfection with chlorine is less
than or near neutral (pH = 7.0 or less).
Turbidity may interfere with disinfection by sheltering the pathogenic
organisms. Process effectiveness is higher with less turbid waters. Other chemi-
cal compounds can also interfere with the disinfection process. Ammonia or other
nitrogenous compounds react readily with chlorine to form chloramines. Although
the various chloramine compounds are effective disinfectants, their reaction rate
is not as rapid as the hypochlorous acid.
The three most important aspects of effective chlorination are supplying an
adequate dosage, providing proper mixing, and providing sufficient contact time.
A minimum residual should remain in the distribution system to prevent recontam-
ination of the product. The biggest threat of recontamination in the system is
cross connections. An adequate residual or the reapplication of a small amount of
chlorine in the distribution system can greatly reduce the potential for delivery
bacteriologically unsafe water. The hydraulics of the treatment facility must be
such that thorough mixing and sufficient contact are provided to allow complete
disinfection. Short-circuiting can result in inadequate or uneconomical
disinfection.
Recent revelations regarding the production of potentially harmful by-prod-
uct in some instances where pre-chlorination is used have caused concerned per-
sons to take a closer look at the use of chlorine and at the possible use of
alternative means for pre-oxidation and disinfection. One of the principal
results of this closer look to date has been to reserve the use of chlorine for
final disinfection of the purest quality water present in the plant, and to use
other oxidants earlier in the water treatment process. This may be a means for
reduction of chlorine by-products (notably the trihalomethanes). The recent
8-it
-------
regulatory activity of EPA regarding triholomethanes (THM) means that water util-
ities should look more closely at the disinfection processes and procedures which
they employ. Ozone, chlorine dioxide, potassium permanganate, chlorine-ammonia,
hydrogen peroxide, and other oxidants have been used. Not much is known about
by-products from the use of these materials, but the production of chloro-organic
compounds is reduced. Oxidants other than chlorine have successfully replaced
chlorine in many applications for color removal, taste and odor control, algae
control, and as an aid to coagulation of organic matter.
Despite its replacement in many pre-treatment applications, chlorine is
still relied upon as the principal means for final disinfection. Ozone, chlorine
dioxide, and other chemicals have found limited use as the final disinfectant.
Removal of Coliform Organisms. The EPA "Manual of Treatment Techniques For
Meeting The IPDWR" (hereinafter - in this section - referred to as the EPA
Treatment Manual) discusses this subject under the topics of MCL's, turbidity,
disinfection byproducts, chlorination, ozone, chlorine dioxide and costs on pages
42-52.
Removal of Inorganic Contaminants. The EPA Treatment Manual presents methods
for removal of arsenic, larium, cadmium, chromium, fluoride, lead, mercury,
nitrate, selenium, and silver both in existing and new treatment facilities on
pages 7-36.
Turbidity Removal
See the EPA Treatment Manual pages 44-52.
Low turbidity is a good measure of the safety of water. Low turbidity allows
the use of reduced doses of disinfectant, and provides a greater degree of pro-
tection. Under the NIPDWR, the turbidity of supplies from surface waters must be
measured on a daily basis. With the limitation being 1 TU on a monthly average,
virtually all surface supplies will require filtration for turbidity removal. As
well as meeting the federal quality requirement, turbidity removal may be neces-
sary to provide adequate disinfection, to maintain a chlorine residual, and to
allow accurate bacteriological testing.
The common methods for removing turbidity are direct filtration, or chemical
coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation, followed by filtration. The first
method is used for raw water with a fairly low initial turbidity (generally less
than 25 JTU), while the second is effective on sources with a high or variable
turbidity. The basic process trains for these two systems are shown on Figures
8-2 and 8-3 . They also include disinfection as described previously.
Filtration is the process by which suspended and colloidal particles are
removed from water by passing it through a bed of granular material. As the water
passes through the medium, the fine particles are trapped in the spaces between
grains or are adsorbed on the surface of the filter media. Chemical aids are
often used to enhance the performance of filtration. Coagulants such as alum or
polymers promote flocculation of the suspended materials and adsorption on the
filter grains.
8-5
-------
FILTER
AID
RAW
WATER
RAPID
MIX
FILTER
r
BACKWASH
WATER
BACKWASH
WASTE
t:
c
1 1 1 1 1 1
DNTACT BASIN
PRODUCT
WATER
Figure 8-1. .
Schematic diagram of direct filtration for
turbidity removal and disinfection.
CHEMICAL
COAGULANT
WATER
RAPID
MIX
FLOCCULATION
BASIN
SEDIMENTATION
BASIN
FILTER
CHEMICAL
SLUDGE
BACKWASH
WATER
BACKWASH
WASTE
PRODUCT
WATER"}
IF
CONTACT BASIN
Figure 8-2.
Schematic diagram of conventional treatment for
turbidity removal and disinfection.
8-6
-------
Granular media filters' can be classified by a number of features, including
type and arrangement of media, direction of flow, flow rate, or pressure or grav-
ity operation. Each characteristic has advantages and disadvantages which must be
assessed for the particular application.
• Filter media may be a single, uniform material or layers of different
size and specific gravity of materials. Sand was among the first media
used for filtration. Dual media filters have a layer of anthracite coal
of larger effective size that is supported by a layer of sand. This
design greatly increases the effective depth of the filtration over
that provided by a simple sand filter. Mixed media filters typically
contain three types of media graded from coarse to fine, with coal on
the top, sand in the middle, and crushed garnet on the bottom. This
arrangement can offer improved performance, as measured by length of
filter runs and the final product quality, for many applications.
• Most potable water filters are downflow, and backwashing is upflow from
the bottom of the filter which drives the trapped particles to the sur-
face of the filter through the layers of media. In the U.S. water back-
wash is usually supplemented by hydraulic surface scour. In Europe
air-water backwash is commonly preferred.
• Filters are generally classified as either high rate or low rate. Rapid
sand filters operate in a range of 2 to A gpm/sq ft (gallons per minute
per square foot) and require frequent backwashing. (Mixed or dual media
filters may be run at rates above 5 gpm/sq ft). Slow sand filters are
operated at a maximum of about 0.10 gpm/sq ft of bed area; therefore,
they require much more space than rapid filters.
• Filters can be designed to operate under pressure or by gravity flow.
Most filters for public water supplies are open gravity units. Some
states permit the use of pressure filters for treatment (usually
softening or iron or manganese removal) of high quality well waters.
Because pressure filters are closed, it is not possible to observe the
condition of the media, nor is it possible to visually monitor the loss
of media during backwashing. Residual pressure from the pressure fil-
tration process can be utilized for water distribution. Gravity filters
are constructed with open tops, allowing observation of the media
during operation and backwashing. Gravity filters are much more suita-
ble- for surface waters.
The three most common types of filters used in water treatment are rapid
gravity, rapid pressure, and slow gravity. In general, mixed or dual media fil-
ters can tolerate higher input turbidities (up to 50' JTU) whereas the single sand
media filters must have lower turbidities (less than 10 JTU) for efficient opera-
tion because of their lower effective bed depth.
Often coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation will be required prior to
filtration. These processes can remove color as well as turbidity when properly
applied.
8-7
-------
• Coagulation is a very rapid process which occurs when a coagulating
chemical, generally an aluminum or iron salt, is added to the water.
The colloidal particles, which cause the turbidity, carry electrical
charges that tend to hold them apart. The addition of the coagulant
reduces these charges so the small particles will agglomerate (floccu-
lation) forming particles large enough to settle by gravity. Coagula-
tion can be used immediately preceding filtration for low turbidity
waters, but is often followed by flocculation and settling to remove
some solids and prevent excessively short filter runs.
• Flocculation is a much slower process in which aggregation occurs
during prolonged, gentle mixing to create large, readily settleable
particles. As opposed to the relatively short contact time in rapid
mixing (20 sec to 2 min), flocculation is best if a slow mixing or
gentle agitation is carried out for 15 to 45 minutes.
• Sedimentation, or clarification, allows the flocculant solids formed by
chemical addition to settle out of. the water by gravity. The accumu-
lated chemical sludge is removed from the bottom of the clarifier per-
iodically for subsequent disposal. Recently, high rate settling has
been accomplished by the development of tube settling devices which
employ principles of shallow depth sedimentation to reduce the surface
area requirement of settling basins.
Numerous factors affect the performance of chemical processing. These
include:
• The pH of the raw water - there is an optimum range for each source
• The dissolved solids content - this influences the optimum coagulant
dose, the flocculation time, and the residual coagulant concentration
in the effluent, and can shift the optimum pH range
• The nature of the turbidity - amount of clay and other mineral
particles
• The type of coagulant - alum is the most common, sometimes oxidants or
polymers are added to enhance floe formation
One way to determine optimum dosages for chemical clarification is to run
laboratory jar tests. Properly done.these results can provide basic design and
operating parameters for a specific supply. In some cases Zeta potential or
colloidal titration may be used. A better way to control chemical coagulation is
by installation of a pilot filter or coagulant control center designed for the
purpose (see page 109 in the first reference at the end of this section).
Chemical clarification followed by filtration has been shown to reduce the
concentrations of turbidity, color, certain heavy metals, pesticides, inorganics,
radionuclides, and bacterial contaminants and to aid disinfection processes.
8-8
-------
Removal of Organic Contaminants. This subject is discussed on pages 53-61 of
the EPA Treatment Manual, under the topics as follows: occurrence of pesticides
in drinking water; Endrin; Lindane; Toxaphene; 2, 4-D; 2, 4, 5-TP (Silvex);
Methoxychlor; cost; and adsorption with PAC and GAC.
Removal of Radioactive Contaminants. The EPA Treatment Manual presents tech-
niques for this purpose on pages 62-72. Topics include: alpha emitters; radium
(by ion exchange, lime or lime-soda softening, and reverse osmosis); disposal of
treatment water; costs; and manmade radionuclides, or Beta and Photon emitters.
WATER TREATMENT FOR CORROSION .CONTROL
Corrosion control can reduce the rate of deterioration of pipelines and the
loss of carrying capacity. It also can prevent adverse health effects which might
arise from the solution of cadmium, lead, copper, or zinc, or the suspension of
asbestos from the interior of pipes by aggressive water followed by the drinking
of the contaminated water. There is ho generally accepted index of corrosion, but
corrosion control is widely practiced.
Chemical control of corrosion is a supplement to protective construction
measures against corrosion which include use of copper or copper alloy for ser-
vice line piping, coating pipes with zinc (steel pipe) or coal tar (cast iron
pipe), lining with cement, and in-place coating after main cleaning. Chemical
control of corrosion requires constant surveillance. Low calcium, alkalinity, and
pH favor corrosion. It is possible to maintain proper concentrations and vital
interrelationships among these factors by control of treatment in filter plants,
or by the addition of chemicals for pH control to water in storage or in the dis-
tribution system. Also, polyphosphates, sodium silicate, bimetallic phosphates,
and other chemical additives may be used effectively in some situations.
CHEMICAL HANDLING
Chemical handling can be a fairly simple, safe task if the equipment is well
designed and properly maintained. The basic factors influencing the operabllity
of chemical handling equipment area as follows:
• Application - the point of application should assure maximum treatment
efficiency and flexibility, and ease in maintenance.
• Feed equipment - the feed equipment should be adequately sized for
operation at maximum flow; conveniently located near point(s) of appli-
cation; readily accessible for servicing, repairs, and observation; and
manually or automatically controlled with feed rate proportional to
flow.
• Feed lines - feed lines should be as short as possible to minimize
clogging; constructed of durable, corrosion-resistant material; easily
accessible throughout entire length; protected against freezing; and
readily cleanable.
8-9
-------
• Storage - storage capacity should be for at least thirty days and
arranged so that oldest chemicals are used first, in a convenient loca-
tion, and clearly marked; chemicals should be stored in original
shipping containers if possible; safety practices should be outlined
for acidic, caustic, toxic, explosive, and combustible chemicals.
• Safety - safety while handling chemicals cannot be overstressed; opera-
tors should be trained and familiar with all procedures for storing,
mixing, and feeding chemicals; work areas should be well ventilated;
equipment for handling chemicals (gloves, etc.) and for emergencies
(air packs, fire extinguishers, respirators, eye washes, etc.) should
be clearly marked and readily available for use; spills should be
cleaned up immediately and general good housekeeping should be
practiced.
Specific details on handling each of the chemicals used in water treatment
can be found in Water Quality and Treatment; A Handbook of Public Water Supplies,
AWWA, 1971, Chapter 17, and in Water Purification Control, Hopkins and Bean,
Williams and Wilkins Co., Baltimore, 1966.
OPERATION AND CONTROL
The importance of proper plant operation cannot be overstressed. Regardless
of how well a treatment facility is planned and designed, it serves little pur-
pose if not properly operated and managed. The basic processes commonly used in
water treatment are few, and monitoring of performance is quite easy. If done
correctly and regularly, operation will be efficient and economical.
Chlorine dosage can be automatically adjusted by plant • flow and chlorine
residual. Simple, reliable equipment is available to automatically control
chlorine feed, and it should be used. Other chemical feeds can also be controlled
by readings from continuous monitors. Continuous turbidity monitoring of filter
effluent can be used to control filter operations.
The specific details of operating each treatment process should be provided
by the equipment manufacturers and the design consultant. A comprehensive Opera-
tions and Maintenance manual, as described in Section 9 of this manual, should
contain all of the pertinent information required to operate and maintain water
treatment facilities.
RELIABILITY
The reliability provided in water systems is generally greater than that in
.sewerage systems and about equal to that of electric power systems. Even greater
reliability could be obtained at higher costs. The reliability of water supply is
an important consideration in system design and operation. Certain emergencies
that may disrupt water service are uncontrollable, but many can be avoided.
Since water treatment is a continuous activity, routine maintenance and
repairs also have the potential for disrupting service. To minimize the inconve-
nience of planned or unplanned interruptions in service, the following basic
elements should be considered.
8-10
-------
Plant capacity should be sufficient to meet customer demands•
At least two of each unit should be provided whenever possible, even at
very small facilities; one can be operated while the other is being
serviced.
Standby capacity should be sufficient to ensure operation with the
largest unit out of service.
Spare parts for common repairs and hard to get parts should be kept on
hand.
Chemical supplies should be sufficient for at least 30 days of plant
operations.
Regular servicing of all mechanical equipment will minimize emergency
shut-downs.
At least two independent sources of power should serve the treatment
plant.
The operating staff should be familiar with emergency procedures.
Water storage facilities can improve the reliability of the water sup-
ply, particularly during peak demand periods.
REFERENCES
New Concepts in Water Purification, R.L. Gulp, and G.L. Gulp, Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company, New York, 1974. Newly developed and improved processes for
water treatment including filtration, sedimentation, and disinfection;
design criteria, operational control, and typical costs are included.
"Water Treatment Plant Design," AWWA, 1971. Gives detailed design informa-
tion for common water treatment processes.
"State of the Art of Small Water Treatment Systems," U.S. EPA, August, 1977.
Unit processes for meeting primary and secondary drinking water requirements
are discussed in terms of design, performance, controls, operation, and
applicability; examples of upgrading existing facilities are also given.
Water Quality and Treatment; A Handbook of Public Water Supplies, 3rd Ed.,
AWWA, 1971. Common unit processes for water treatment are described in
detail. Chapter 17 describes the characteristics, use, handling, etc., of
all chemicals used in water treatment.
"Technical Guidelines for Public Water Systems," U.S. EPA, June, 1975, NTIS
#PB 255 217, Chapter 3 details design criteria and application of unit
processes used in water treatment. Chapter 4 covers chemical handling,
application, and safety practices.
8-11
-------
• "Estimating Costs for Water Treatment as Function of Size and Treatment
Plant Efficiency," U.S. EPA, August 1978, EPA 600/2-78-182. Chapter II deals
with treatment methods available to meet the NIPDWR.
• "Manual of Treatment Techniques for Meeting the IPDWR", EPA-600/8-77-005,
MERL, Cincinnati, Ohio, May 1977.
• "Water Purification Control", Hopkins and Bean, 1966, Kreiger Publishing
Company, Huntington, N.Y.
• "Handbook of Chlorination", G.C. White, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., N.Y.
8-12
-------
PART II-PRODUCTION
PAGES
SECTION 9 - WATER TREATMENT WASTES
Sources 1
Sludge Disposal Methods 2 3
Reclamation and Reuse 2 ||
c»m
Alum Recovery 2 "to
Alternative Reuses 2
Sludge Dewatering 3
Landfill Disposal 3
Discharge to Sanitary Sewers 5
References 5
-------
SECTION 9.
WATER TREATMENT WASTES
1. For many years basin sludge and filter backwash water from water treat-
ment plants were returned to streams from whence they came - why do
they now require special handling prior to discharge? (See page 9-2)
2. What are the presently available alternatives for disposal of water
treatment plant wastes? (See page 9-3)
3. Are there opportunities to recycle treatment chemicals and wastewater
within filter plants? (See page 9-2)
4. What methods are available for sludge dewatering? (See page 9-3 and
Table 9-1)
It has only been within the past few years that the wastes produced during
water treatment have received significant attention. In the 1950's, over 90 per-
cent of basin sludge and other solid wastes and 80 percent of filter backwash
from water treatment were discharged to surface waters. Water pollution control
laws (notably Water Pollution Control Act as amended in 1979) instituted in the
early 1970's prohibited such practices. Sludge from water treatment plants is now
considered an Industrial waste and is subject to the same regulations regarding
treatment and disposal. Arsenic, fluoride, and radiological wastes, when present
in water treatment sludges, are considered as hazardous materials by EPA.
Since waste disposal represents a newly introduced expense for most water
utilities, all efforts to reduce costs should be considered. Water conservation
and increasing operational efficiency are straight-forward means for reducing the
quantity of wastes produced. This may warrant process modification for existing
facilities. For example, substituting polyelectrolytes for part or all of the
alum used in coagulation can substantially reduce the amount of chemical sludge
produced, but at higher chemical cost.
Various aspects of water treatment waste disposal are discussed in the fol-
lowing paragraphs. The methods actually employed by different .plants will vary
considerably, depending on the size and location of the facility, treatment pro-
cesses employed, climatic conditions, and local and state rules governing dis-
posal practices.
SOURCES
The principal sources of waste from water treatment are the natural solids
removed from raw water and the precipitates formed by chemical addition. It is
difficult to typify the nature of wastes generated during production since the
characteristics of raw water vary greatly.
Alum is the most common chemical coagulant used for removing solids from
water; an alternative is ferric chloride. Sludges are mainly metal hydroxides
9-1
-------
with entrained organic and inorganic particulate matter. Most alum sludges are
particularly difficult to dewater due to their gelatinous nature. The specific
characteristics of the sludge depend on the raw water being treated. Sludge vol-
ume usually represents about one percent of the raw water treated and liquid
sludge typically has a solids content of 0.5 to 2.0 percent.
The solids removed during granular filtration are wasted in filter backwash
water. The components in the backwash water are highly dependent on the raw water
characteristics and on any pre-filtration processing. They may include polymers,
metal oxides, carbonates and silicates, organics, and carbon. The volume of
filter backwash is usually 1 to 5 percent of the volume of raw water treated. It
has a low solids content, ranging from 0.01 to 0.1 percent, and may be recycled
through the treatment process.
SLUDGE DISPOSAL METHODS
Some sludge handling methods are concerned only with direct disposal, others
provide for recovery and reuse of treatment chemicals and salvage and reprocess-
ing of wastewater. Some of the alternates are: discharge to sanitary sewers
(where permitted); disposal in lagoons; use of sand drying beds; dewatering by
vacuum filtration, centrifugation, filter pressing, lime sludge pelletization,
heat treatment, or freezing; alum recovery by acid or alkaline methods; magnesium
carbonate recovery; and lime recalcinlng and reuse.
RECLAMATION AND REUSE
The increasing cost of chemicals and the new regulations regarding disposal
have directed attention toward reclaiming the chemicals used iri water treatment.
Lime recovery has been practiced at many larger treatment facilities employing
softening, but alum recovery has not been found to be economical except in a few
cases. Recently, there has been progress in improving the methods used to recover
alum from the chemical coagulation process.
Alum Recovery •
Alum can be recovered from coagulation sludge using an acid processing tech-
nique. Thickened sludge is treated with acid (commonly sulfuric acid) to dissolve
the aluminum salts. The residual (waste) solids are then removed by gravity.
Although the potential benefits of alum recovery may be significant in terms of
production and process energy conservation and chemical costs, there are some
potential drawbacks associated with the practice. The accumulation of heavy
metals and other impurities has been a deterrent to the use of alum recovery.
Ongoing studies with the acid process and with other alum recovery methods like
liquid ion exchange may provide useful information for planning such systems.
Alternative Reuses
Two principal alternatives to in-plant chemical reuse have been proposed.
One is to use either alum or lime sludge as a soil conditioner. Both enhance the
cohesiveness of the soil. The lime sludge can be used to neutralize acidic
soils.
9-2
-------
Another alternative for reusing chemical sludges from water purification is
in wastewater treatment. Water treatment sludges are often beneficial in waste
water treatment, but this depends on local circumstances which must be
investigated.
SLUDGE DEWATER1NG
Dewatering sludge reduces the volume of sludge to be disposed. Sludges con-
centrated to at least 20 percent solids are reduced in volume by 75 percent and
are much more easily handled by mechanical equipment and do not present the same
disposal problems of thinner sludges (less than 5 percent). Dewatering can be
achieved by physical or mechanical methods. Process' selection depends on the
source and quantity of sludge, its dewatering characteristics, the availability
of land near the treatment plant, and the method of ultimate disposal or reuse.
Sand beds and lagoons are methods typically used at smaller facilities which
have land available. They are dependent on climatic conditions for proper per-
formance. If landfill disposal is practiced, additional dewatering may be neces-
sary to achieve a manageable solids concentration. Common mechanical methods for
dewatering include vacuum filtration, centrifugation, and pressure filtration.
These achieve higher solids concentrations for chemical sludges, but may require
preconditioning for optimum performance. Table 9-1 summarizes the alternatives
for water treatment sludge dewatering.
LANDFILL DISPOSAL
The most common method of ultimate disposal of water treatment sludge is
landfill. For small systems in rural areas, lagooning may be used; in this case,
a lagoon is simply filled, stabilized, and abandoned.
Landfilling operations are favored. They must be controlled to protect
groundwaters and surface waters from leachate and runoff contamination. The vari-
ability of sludge characteristics can present problems in planning and operating
a landfill for such sludge. In many states, water treatment sludge is considered
an industrial waste, which may limit the landfill disposal options. As previously
mentioned, EPA classifies arsenic', fluoride, and radiological wastes in water
treatment plant sludge as hazardous materials requiring special disposal.
Sludge dewatering is almost always essential prior to landfill disposal
since it reduces the volume and the potential for runoff and leachate
contamination.
The planning and operation of a sludge landfill depends on several basic
factors. These should be considered in the overall evaluation and economic analy-
sis of the project.
• Location of water treatment plant
• Type and quantity sludge to be disposed of
• Proximity to existing landfills; available capacity for chemical sludge
disposed
9-3
-------
TABLE 9-1. ALTERNATIVE SLUDGE DEWATERING METHODS
Method
Application
Comments
Physical
Sand Beds
Lagoons
Chemical coagulation
sludges may dewater to
20 percent solids
Chemical coagulation
dewater to 10 percent
solids
Need large land area and long detention times; weather-
dependent; decant water and under'-drainage are discharged
sanitary sewer, surface water, or returned to plant; high
labor demand for cleaning beds; applicable to small
systems
Common method for small systems; takes advantage of
natural freezing and evaporation to aid in de'watering;
can be used for temporary storage; low operating
costs; can promote insect breeding; may need further
dewatering before use in landfill
Mechanical
Vacuum Filtration
Centrifugation
Filter Presses
Limited application
in water treatment
Conditioned alum
sludge dewatered
to 15 to 20.
percent solids
Conditioned alum
sludge dewatered
to 30 pecent
solids
Precoatlng filter with diatomaceous earth is necessary
for vacuum filter dewatering of alum sludge; high -
costs, both capital and O&M . :
May require polymer'addition for effective operation.
Alum sludge must sludge dewatered be conditioned with lime
before dewatering; filtrate disposal may be. a problem
since it has a high pH and may have a high heavy metal
concentration; disadvantages include short life of filter
cloth and need for manual control.
-------
• Labor and energy requirements for landfill operation
• Alternatives to disposal at a landfill
• Local regulations
DISCHARGE TO SANITARY SEWERS
Under certain circumstances, discharge of chemical sludge to sanitary sewers
may be an acceptable or beneficial means of disposal. In some cases, this prac-
tice merely represents transferring the solids handling from one plant to
another; but for other communities, it may be the most economical solution to the
overall solids disposal problem. Factors to be considered in discharging water
treatment wastes to wastewat'er plants include:
• The hydraulic and solids capacity of the wastewater treatment plant and
sewers
• The compatibility of water treatment sludge with the wastewater treat-
ment process and the effect on effluent quality
• The hydraulic capacity of the sewers from the water plant to the waste-
water treatment plant; if the velocity is insufficient, solids deposi-
tion can clog or greatly reduce the hydraulic capacity of the sewers
• Classification of water treatment wastes; industrial pretreatment
standards may be imposed
REFERENCES
• "Water Treatment Plant Sludges - An Update of the State of the Art: Parts 1
and 2," Commitee Report, JAWWA, September and October, 1978. Part 1 details
the current regulatory requirements, sludge production and characteristics,
and minimizing production of water treatment wastes; part 2 outlines proces-
sing methods, including nonmechanical and mechanical methods of dewatering
sludge and methods of ultimate disposal.
• "Alternate Processes for Treatment of Water Plant Wastes," S.L. Bishop,
JAWWA, September, 1978. Discusses alternate methods of handling wastes pro-
duced in water treatment, including recently developed processes for alum
sludge processing.
• Water Quality and Treatment; A Handbook of Public Water Supplies, 3rd Ed.,
AWWA, 1971, Chapter 19. Presents sources quantities, characteristics, and
processing of water treatment residues; includes environmental and legal
aspects.
• "State of the Art of Small Water Treatment Systems," U.S. EPA, August, 1977,
pp. IV-61-70. Presents sources, quantities, and characteristics of wastes
produced in water treatment; various treatment methods; and ultimate dis-
posal practices.
9-5
-------
"Manual of Treatment Techniques For Meeting The IPDWR," U.S. EPA 600/8-77-
005, 26 W. St. Clair Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268, May 1977.
"New Concepts In Water Purification," Chapter 5, Disposal of Sludges, G.L.
Gulp and R.L. Gulp, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1974.
"Beneficial Disposal of Water Purification Plant Sludges In Wastewater
Treatment," John 0. Nelson, Chas. A. Joseph, R.L. Gulp, EPA Report
S-803336-01-0, Cincinnati, 1978.
9-6
-------
PART II-PRODUCTION
SECTION 10- DISTRIBUTION
Service
Fire Protection
Distribution Mains
Storage
Cross Connection Control
References
PAGES
3
4
4
5
2
S !±
-------
SECTION 10
DISTRIBUTION
Water distribution systems should be sized to handle variable customer
demands and requisite fire flows. Quality standards must be met throughout the
system. Good circulation of water should be provided and cross connections
prevented.
Various general aspects of water distribution are discussed in this section.
Many requirements are system-specific.
Some common questions concerning the distribution of water are:
1. Why is it important from a public health standpoint to consider fire
demands on a water distribution system? (See pages 10-1 and 10-2)
2. What range of water pressures provides acceptable water service? (See
page 10-2)
3. What functions are served by storage of water on distribution systems?
(See page 10-3)
4. Why is a program of cross-connection control essential to safe water?
(See pages 10-1* and 10-5)
SERVICE
Many water utilities provide service to more than one type of customer.
Potable water supplied for domestic and commercial uses must meet the quality
criteria established by the SDWA. In certain cases, industrial process water may
have more stringent limitations for certain constituents, whether or not they are
met by the water purveyor or through supplemental treatment by the industrial
user will depend on individual circumstances.
The overall demands on the system can be estimated from total flow records
and from the demands of similar communities. Careful distribution analysis is
important to ensure that localized flow demands are met. For example, a densely
populated business area may have exceptionally high daytime demands and low eve-
ning and weekend needs. On the other hand, a large industry operating 24 hours a
day will require a steady supply on a continuous basis. Such service factors, as
well as seasonal source and demand variations, will influence the overall plan-
ning and operation of a system.
FIRE PROTECTION
Providing adequate fire protection is important to public safety and to min-
imize cost of fire insurance. It is also important because large withdrawals of
water from mains which are too small for fire fighting often produce low pres-
sures or negative pressures in water mains - a health hazard due to back
10-1
-------
syphonage. Communities are rated by the Insurance Service Offices (ISO) or other
fire underwriters (see the local insurance agents) according to the level of fire
protection they provide. A system of deficiency points, assigned in an evaluation
of the water supply, the fire department, fire service communications, and fire
safety control, determines the relative class of the area and the associated
insurance rates.
The evaluation of the water supply system for fire protection afforded is
based on many factors including, but not limited to:
Deliverable flow rates
Adequacy and reliability (duplication of vital facilities)
Storage facilities
Reliability .of power supply (standby for electric service)
Multiplicity of water supply to the service area
Sources of emergency supply
Distribution system characteristics such as layout, minimum pipeline
size (recommended practice is six inches), minimum residual pressure
(recommended minimum pressure = 20 psi), location of valves and
hydrants, etc.
• Gravity service and pumping facilities
• Hydrant and valve location records
The basic fire flow rate is determined by the representative fire potential
of most large properties in the district. Individual rates are calculated using a
formula which includes the type of building materials, the total floor area, and
the number of stories or height of the building. Once the basic rate has been
calculated, reductions and increases are made for factors such as sprinkler sys-
tems, degree of hazard, proximity to other buildings, etc.
The minimum fire flow for any single building, including all reductions is
500 gpm, while the maximum rate is 12,OOQ gpm. The basic fire flow rate is added
to the average consumption on the day of maximum use in order to determine the
minimum system capacity. Depending on the system water use characteristics, this
value may be exceeded by peak hourly consumption during the maximum month of
use.
The fire protection provided by a utility should be periodically assessed to
be sure it is adequate. When substantial improvements to the system are made, a
reassessment by ISO may be warranted. It must be remembered, however, that
factors other than water supply contribute to the fire protection rating and the
associated fire insurance rates.
%
Three publications of the Insurance Services Office (160 Water Street; New
York, N.Y.; 10038) should be consulted for additional information regarding fire
protection.
• "Guide for Determination of Required Fire Flow"
• "Grading Schedule for Municipal Fire Protection"
• "Commentary on the Grading Schedule for Municipal Fire Protection"
Also see local insurance agents regarding rating system they use.
10-2
-------
DISTRIBUTION MAINS
The distribution system should be capable of providing reliable water deliv-
ery with a minimum of service interruptions. The utility may have a formidable
job in maintaining service if all or parts of the system are old or if several
independent systems have been joined together to form a single system.
Considerations in the design of new systems or in the upgrading of existing
systems include:
• Locating mains to provide service to all present customers so that
extensions can easily be made for future expansions
• Maintaining adequate pressures in the system (minimum 20 psi at deliv-
ery point; normal static pressure of 60 to 75 psi; maximum 100 psi)
• Maintaining adequate flow in all points in the system (minimum pipe
diameter of six inches)
• Ease of operation and maintenance; minimizing potential service and
traffic disruptions during emergency repairs and routine maintenance
• Following a consistent pattern for locating valves, hydrants, and other
connections
• Minimizing the potential for cross connections with sewer lines,
drains, and other sources of contaminants
• Loop lines which connect dead ends and provide water circulation are
preferred over dead-end lines in system extremities
The materials used for the distribution system should be selected to suit
the local conditions and service applications. Pipelines may be ductile iron,
steel, reinforced concrete, and plastic meeting AWWA standards. All plastics are
not universally accepted since some may contain leachable toxic materials. A
consideration in selecting pipe materials is corrosion control. Corrosion can be
caused by reactions between the water and pipe material as well as by the soil
and the pipe material. In some cases, it is most economical to line and/or coat
the pipe with a non-toxic, non-reactive material to prevent corrosion rather than
substitute a different material.
Valves are included in pipe systems to isolate sections of the system and to
allow lines to be drained for repairs. Valves should be located to provide the
maximum flexibility in isolating lines while minimizing the disruption in serv-
ice. The actual location in the system 'depends on the size and type of line.
The following are general guidelines for the location of valves. Specific system
requirement may dictate the exact location of some valves. (See TableJ.0-1).
Records of valve locations should be maintained.
Fire hydrants should be located throughout the system but only on lines cap-
able of delivering flows of at least 500 gpm. To ensure the adequacy of hydrant
locations, the ISO guidelines should be consulted.
10-3
-------
TABLE 10-1. GUIDELINES FOR LOCATING DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM VALES
Application Location
Transmission Lines According to operational requirements
Feeder Mains Every 3,000 ft for 16-in. or smaller
lines; 4,000 ft for 20-in. lines
Service Mains Adequate to shutdown with minimum
service interruption
Residential Service Every 1,000 ft on 6- and 8-in. lines;
2,000 ft for 10- and 12-in. lines
Creek, Railroad, or Each side of crossing
Highway Crossings
Hydrant Branch Control valve on each branch
STORAGE
Finished water storage can be designed to serve several purposes. Storage
can be used to meet variations in production and system demands, to provide fire
protection, and to serve in the event of a system failure.
Storage makes it possible to process water at times when the demands are
low, for later use. This can reduce the required capacity of both treatment and
transport facilities. Storage facilities can be located near the high demand
areas and in high places to make maximum use of patterns and topographical
features of the service area. Properly located storage facilities can reduce
operating costs by minimizing pumping requirements, particularly during peak
demand times for water. With the development of energy shortages,, consideration
has been given to doing as much water pumping as possible during off-peak demand
periods for electrical power by use of storage.
Storage for fire protection depends on certain system features such as the
minimum fire flow demands, the amount of system redundancy, the standby power
system, and the emergency operation program.
There are three basic types of storage structures - elevated, ground level
at an elevation which provides gravity flow into the system, and ground level
requiring repumping. Finished water storage should be covered to protect against
contamination. A certain amount of water should be drawn from storage on a daily
basis to provide the circulation and mixing needed to minimize tastes and odors.
Large reservoirs with long holding times should include provisions for water
circulation.
CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL
Cross connections are any direct or indirect physical connection with the
potential for contaminating a potable supply with non-potable water or liquid.
Cross connections cannot be allowed even on a temporary basis.
10-4
-------
Cross connections fall into two general categories, pumping hazards and back
syphonage. Backflow hazards from pumping are caused when the contaminating pri-
vate water source is pumped, to a higher pressure thari the public supply. To pro-
tect against such hazards, the basic cause should be eliminated by providing the
public supply to the service through an air gap system or backflow prevention
device. Another pumping hazard is the creation of low (below 20 psi) pressure on
the suction side of booster pumps. This can be avoided by means of a low pressure
pump cut-off device installed in the suction line. Back syphonage occurs when
negative pressure develops in the system due to dewatering of a pipeline or from
excessive demand on the main. It is often a problem in tall buildings with inad-
equate water systems.
A comprehensive cross connection control program is essential in providing
high quality water and protecting public health. Several general factors should
be considered in minimizing the dangers presented by cross connections..
• Locate water lines as far from sewers as possible. If they must be near
each other, have water lines above sewers (never in the same trench to
eliminate possible contamination of the water) and operating at higher
pressures.
• Prevent negative pressures by minimizing planned shutdowns, maintaining
adequate supplies, providing adequate capacity in lines, and using
booster pumps to serve high areas in the system.
• Assure an adequate inspection program for potential cross connections
on customer premises.
• Require adequate backflow prevention devices such as air gap systems,
double-check valve assemblies, reduced-pressure-principle backflow pre-
venters, etc. and adequate maintenance of such devices.
Cross connection control must be practiced and the regulations enforced if
the quality of the system is to be maintained and the public health protected.
Check with the State Health Officer to see if there is a State cross
connection control program, and what State requirements are.
REFERENCES
• "Technical Guidelines for Public Water Systems," U.S. EPA, June 1975, NTIS
#PB 255 21.7, Chapters 6 and 7. Chapter 6 discusses the storage of finished
water, including the type, location, capacity, and protection of storage
basins. Chapter 7 summarizes distribution system requirements and standards;
includes design criteria, materials and installation methods, valve loca-
tions, protection of system, etc.; cross connection prevention and correc-
tion discussed.
• "Water Distribution Training Course," AWWA Manual M8. Covers all aspects of
distribution systems including planning, design, installation, operation and
maintenance of pumps, storage, and pipelies.
10-5
-------
• "Guide for Determination of Required Fire Flow," "Grading Schedule for
Municipal Fire Protection," and "Commentary on the Grading Schedule for
Municipal Fire Protection," Insurance Services Office, 160 Water Street, New
York, N.Y. 10038. Outlin.es fire flow requirements and procedures for
evaluating system for insurance purposes.
• "Cross Connection Control Manual," U.S. EPA, 1973.
• "Cross Connections and Backflow Prevention," by Gustave J. Angele, Sr., AWWA
Manual.
10-6
-------
PART II -PRODUCTION
PAGES
SECTION 11 - OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Organization and Personnel 1
Procedures and Equipment 2
O & M Manual 2
Routine Operations 3
Maintenance 3
Tools, Equipment and Supplies 4
Records 4
References 5
15
II
-------
SECTION 11
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
A sound operation and maintenance program Is an Important key to running a
successful water utility. Regardless of how well a system is designed, a high
quality product cannot be delivered on a regular basis if the system is not oper-
ated correctly. Proper maintenance can also extend the useful life of a facility.
The topics discussed in this section cover the basic areas to be considered in
planning or revising an O&M program. Some pertinent questions include:
1. How should operations and maintenance be organized? (See page 11-1)
2. What should be included in an O&M (Operations and Maintenance) manual?
(See pages 11-2 and 11-3)
3. What routine basic operations are involved in water system operations?
(See page 11-3)
4. What role does maintenance play in reliability of water service? (See
pages 11-3 and 11-10
5. What tools, equipment, and supplies are essential to good O&M programs?
(See page 11-M
6. What records of O&M are useful? (See page k-3)
ORGANIZATION AND PERSONNEL
The organization and training of the staff is important to proper operations
and effective maintenance. Supervisors should be qualified for the jobs they hold
and must be given the authority to carry out their responsibilities. Many states
have certification programs which serve as an effective way of evaluating an
individual's qualifications. The staff should be assigned to jobs which suit
their knowledge, skills, and experience.
Following certain basic management practices will minimize the organiza-
tional problems encountered in operating a water utility.
• There should be a clearly defined, easy to follow operational program.
Routine jobs should be scheduled and the schedules followed. Periodic
tasks should be integrated into the regular operations program.
• All personnel should have specific job assignments. Reporting proce-
dures should be such that duties and tasks are self-monitoring. This
minimizes the amount of direct supervision and transfers more responsi-
bility to individual staff members.
• For larger facilities, operations and maintenance may be carried out by
two separate groups of people. Distinct channels for communication
should be established among all staff groups, but particularly between
the operations and maintenance staffs.
11-1
-------
• Regular, informal facility inspections and reviews of the organiza-
tional structure will give an indication of the effectiveness of the
management program. The efficiency of plant operations demonstrate
whether or not the personnel are carrying out their assigned jobs. The
attitudes of the staff members are the main indicator that they are
happy with their jobs and that the organization is functioning well.
More detailed information on personnel is given in Section 3.
PROCEDURES AND EQUIPMENT
The requirements of an effective O&M program vary with the system size, age,
and specific facilities. As a minimum, most water utilities operate supply,
treatment, and distribution facilities. In some systems, the treatment process
will demand the most attention. On the other hand, an old distribution system may
need extensive servicing and frequent repairs if it is to remain operational.
The basic elements of a good O&M program are discussed in the following
paragraphs.
O&M Manual
Preparing and maintaining a comprehensive, up-to-date operation and mainte-
nance manual is important for effective and efficient system performance. A
minimum manual would consist of a loose-leaf binder including the manufacturers'
O&M instructions for each piece of equipment. More comprehensive information,
again bound in a manner that lends itself to easy revision, is preferable. It
should include the information collected by the consulting engineer, material
supplies, and contractor during project construction. The O&M manual should be
indexed by process, function, or facilities, and should be stored in a conven-
ient, accessible ' location. Useful information contained in the O&M manual may
include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:
• Detailed schematic diagrams of pipelines, valves, and controls
• Precise, detailed instructions on how various pieces of equipment are
to be operated, maintained, and repaired
• Routine maintenance schedules (including grounds maintenance and 'rou-
tine "housekeeping")
• Lubrication charts including lists of recommended lubricants
• Sample recording and reporting forms, with completed examples
• Emergency and safety procedures, and related telephone numbers
• An index of manufacturers' literature and O&M instructions
• Lists of basic spare parts and supplies, and suggested inventory con-
trol and restocking procedures
11-2
-------
• References containing additional useful information
In order to be used, the O&M manual should be simple and easy to follow. Any
changes in the manual should be reviewed by the plant staff at the time they are
made. The O&M manual should be used in training programs for staff.
Routine Operations
A program of routine operations should be developed for each aspect of the
water system. It would include:
• A description of the task to be performed; the individual responsible
for doing it; and reporting procedures
• Supplies and tools needed for the job
• A list of indicators of malfunctions
• Interrelationship with other system operations
• Emergency operations and safety precautions
Examples of routine operations may include, but are not limited to the
following:
Valve and fire hydrant testing
Rotation of pump use
Sample collection, analysis, and reporting
Filter backwashing
Carbon regeneration and lime recalcination, where applicable
Emergency generator operation
Safety inspections
The overall performance of the water system is the best means of assessing
the adequacy of the operations program. If the water produced meets expected
quality standards and can be delivered in sufficient quantity to satisfy customer
demands at a reasonable cost, then it is likely that the operations program is
adequate.
Maintenance
System maintenance falls into two general categories. Routine or preventa-
tive maintenance are those activities which are done on a regular, scheduled
basis. They are done in accordance with a set of standardized procedures and are
aimed, at optimizing performance, minimizing breakdowns, and extending the useful
life of facilities. Unscheduled or emergency maintenance is service required in
the event of a system failure. Such activities cannot be predicted; however,
emergency repairs can be greatly reduced by an effective routine maintenance pro-
gram. System failures may accompany severe weather or natural disasters such as
heavy rain or snow storms, high winds, flooding, etc.
11-3
-------
As with the operation program, a good maintenance program must be developed
and followed if it is to be effective. The basic program will be different for
each system and perhaps different for various elements within the same system.
For routine maintenance, a card system has been found effective by many utili-
ties. In this system, each piece of equipment has an identification card with a
list and description of the required work, the frequency and time when the work
is to be done, who is responsible for doing the work by job category, and a
recording form for maintenance work performed. The supplies, parts, tools, and
other equipment needed to do the required maintenance may also be listed on the
card. Other cities, such as Denver and Philadelphia use a computer system for
maintenance records rather than a card system.
When performing routine maintenance, the staff should always be on the look-
out for warning signs of possible malfunctions. Any abnormalities should be
reported and investigated. Prompt remedial action could avert an equipment break-
down, interruption of service, or costly repairs.
A log of unscheduled maintenance and repairs should be kept. The report
should include information such as the specific work down, the materials or sup-
plies used, the length of time needed to make the repairs,, the probable cause of
the failure and, of course, the individuals responsible for the work. The log
should be reviewed periodically to assess the adequacy of the routine maintenance
program and to identify recurring weaknesses in the system. A leak or failure
record of the disruption system should be kept showing the date, location, method
of repair, and cause of each leak or failure.
Tools, Equipment, and Supplies
All of the tools, equipment, and supplies necessary for system operation and
maintenance should be stored in a central location. The treatment plant mainte-
nance shop or garage is the obvious storage area. The specific inventories should
be selected to meet the system demands. Commonly used spare parts usually will be
listed in the manufacturers' O&M literature; there may also be a list of basic
tools needed for various types of maintenance and repairs.
One individual on the staff should be responsible for the supply and parts
inventory. A standardized procedure should be followed to make sure orders are
made to replenish stock well before they are needed. Care should be taken to use
older supplies first, especially if they have limited shelf life.
Tools and equipment, particularly if small, have a tendency to be easily
lost or misplaced. To minimize costly replacement and to ensure the availability
of tools when they are needed, a sign-out system should be instituted. Tools
should be returned to storage location if they are no longer being used.
RECORDS
Recordkeeping is an essential function "f plant operations and maintenance.
See Part I, Records and Reports, page k-3.
11-1*
-------
REFERENCES
"Basic Water Treatment Operators' Manual," AWWA Manual M18. This gives spe-
cific information on unit processes, laboratory testing, safety, etc., for
water treatment plants.
"Water Utility Management," AWWA Manual M5, Chapter 16. This discusses
equipment maintenance - routine maintenance programs, spare parts, reporting
forms, etc.
"Water Distribution Training Course," AWWA Manual M8, Chapter 8. This dis-
cusses system maintenance and control, including inspection, testing, equip-
ment, records, etc.
"Installation, Operation, and Maintenance of Fire Hydrants," AWWA Manual
M17. This short pamphlet summarizes requirements of fire hydrants.
Manufacturers' O&M Instructions - These should be kept for all equipment;
they include operating procedures, maintenance schedules, troubleshooting
guides, etc.
11-5
-------
PART II - PRODUCTION
PAGES
SECTION 12 - SURVEILLANCE
Objectives and Regulations 1
Sampling 2
Laboratory Facilities 3
Interpretation and Evaluation 4
References 4
N>
-------
SECTION 12.
SURVEILLANCE
The only means of ensuring the quality of the delivered water is by close,
careful monitoring of the raw supply, the treatment processes, the finished
water, and the product delivered to the consumer at his tap. A certain minimum
surveillance of community and non-community supplies is required by law. Con-
scientious attention given to a comprehensive monitoring program can yield high
returns in customer satisfaction, system control and operations, and economic
savings.
There are three basic considerations in a good surveillance program - repre-
sentative sampling, proper laboratory procedures, and careful data evaluation.
Some typical questions which arise concerning surveillance follow:
1. Should a water utility provide its own laboratory and technical staff
or should it contract for laboratory services with the State or a pri-
vate laboratory? (See page 12-3)
2. What is one of the most frequent violations of the NIPDWR? (See insuf-
ficient number of samples collected, page 12-3).
3. What is the required frequency of sampling? (See Table 12 -1, page
12-2)
OBJECTIVES AND REGULATIONS
There are two basic reasons for monitoring a water system. The first is
legal. Minimum sampling, testing and reporting requirements are dictated by the
SDWA. The requirements are discussed in Section V of this report and summarized
in Appendix A which contains the newly adopted primary drinking water standards.
These requirements are designed to guarantee that a safe product is delivered to
all water customers; they are by no means adequate to ensure that the system is
run efficiently. As noted in Table 12-1, the samples are collected at different
points in the distribution system. They do not reflect the basic quality of the
raw water source or provide information regarding individual process operation
and control.
Efficient plant operation will undoubtedly require additional monitoring.
This, of course, will depend on many system-specific factors such as the sources
of supply, the treatment train, the age of the system, the distribution network,
the proximity of sanitary sewers, etc. Comprehensive monitoring can be cost-
effective, particularly if treatment processes are not functioning properly, are
being operated incorrectly, or are not needed due to seasonal or long-term
changes in the raw water characteristics. Adequate testing can identify areas
where the system is not performing as designed.
12-1
-------
TABLE 12-1. REQUIRED SURVEILLANCE SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND FREQUENCY
Frequency
Test
Inorganics
Organic s
Turbidity
Sample location
Consumer's faucet*
Consumer ' s faucet
At point (s) where
Community
Once /y ear »
Once/3 years'
Daily
Non-community
State option*
State option
Daily
water enters the
distribution
system
Coliform bacteria Consumer's faucet See Appendix A Once/quarter*
Radiochemicals
Natural
Man-made
Consumer's faucet Once/4 years * State option
Consumer's faucet
Once/4 years
*
State option
* Must be representative of conditions within the system
§ Surface water systems; groundwater only, once/3 years
t All systems
! Surface water systems; groundwater only, State option
# Surface water systems serving more than 100,000 people, all others, State
option
Although it is not required by the SDWA or the NIPDWR, it is valuable, for
operational control of the water system to provide additional surveillance. This
can include weekly checks of turbidity at representative points within the dis-
tribution system, weekly total plate counts of every fifth bacteriological sample
taken for coliform analysis, and measurement of chlorine residual each time that
a bacteriological sample is taken.
Surveillance records provide a very valuable historical record of water sys-
tem operations. Such records are critical for future planning purposes as well as
for optimizing current service.
SAMPLING '
A sampling program must be planned for the individual system. It is not only
important that the samples be representative of the conditions which exist within
the system, but they must also be collected properly and within time
requirements.
12-2
-------
The first step in developing a sampling program is to determine the minimum
reporting requirements of the SDWA and the necessary source and process control
monitoring. This should be compared with any existing monitoring and the defi-
ciencies corrected. A regular schedule should be followed to ensure efficiency
and consistency. Certain inaccuracies in monitoring may occur and, therefore,
proper collection techniques and preservation methods should be followed to mini-
mize these effects. One aid in this regard is to collect more than the minimum
number of samples required so that one bad sample has less effect on the overall
result.
Procedures for sampling are discussed in the references cited at the end of
this section. If there are any questions regarding sampling procedures not
addressed in these references, the state laboratory personnel should be con-
sulted. The failure to collect the minimum number of samples required is one of
the most frequent reasons for failure to meet drinking water regulations.
LABORATORY FACILITIES
As with sampling, laboratory needs are also system-specific. With two minor
exceptions, the required tests and reports must be completed by a certified
laboratory. The decision to maintain a laboratory or go to an outside laboratory
depends on numerous factors such as, existing staff skills and facilities, the
extent of monitoring for source and process control, and overall economics. In
some cases, a small plant with a complex treatment system may maintain its own
laboratory with the chief operator being a certified laboratory technician. In
other cases, a larger system with a simple treatment scheme will opt to perform
its own plant control tests and have the required tests performed by a private or
governmental laboratory.
Another factor which influences the best location for laboratory testing is
the kind and number of tests needed for control of plant operations. Often, if
this laboratory need is met, facilities will be available to do the additional
sampling and testing needed for record purposes.
The information in Table 12 -2 may be helpful for estimating the minimal
laboratory requirements for various size water treatment plants. Necessary labo-
ratory apparatus depends on the tests to be performed. Standard Methods includes
a detailed list of the equipment required to run each analysis it describes (See
reference at the end of this Section). •'
At least one member of the staff of each surface water treatment plant
should be trained for turbidity even if a utility does not maintain a complete
laboratory. Under the SDWA, turbidity testing is required daily for surface water
supplies. This test need not be done by a certified laboratory technician, but
the individual must be approved by the state. Turbidity testing follows a simple
procedure and requires a minimum of equipment.
12-3
-------
TABLE 12 -2.
Plant capacity,
mgd
1 or less
1 to 5
5 to 10
10 to 25
25 or more
RECOMMENDED MINIMUM WATER
Laboratory floor
space, sq ft
180
.300
600
800
1,200
PLANT LABORATORY
Work bench
area, sq ft
12
18
24
30
36
REQUIREMENTS
Cabinet
volume, cu ft
200
300
500
650
800
Under certain circumstances, with state approval, chlorine residual testing
may be substituted for a portion of the bacteriological monitoring. As with tur-
bidity testing, this does not require a certified laboratory technician. Using
this monitoring alternative may represent a significant economic savings and
should be investigated, particularly by the smaller utilities.
INTERPRETATION AND EVALUATION
The analysis of test results is important to system operation and product
quality. Interpretation and reporting of required surveillance is straightfor-
ward and clearly outlined in the SDWA (see Section 5). Operational monitoring may
be more complex. Certain operational changes are easily made; (many may be auto-
matically controlled); however, some depend on accurate testing procedures and
quick detection and thorough analysis of abnormal conditions.
A comprehensive surveillance program is important to efficient system man-
agement. The aim of a water utility should be to provide the best quality water
for the least overall cost. Sampling and testing often represents only a small
portion of the total operations cost, yet the resulting information assures safe
water.
REFERENCES
• "The Safe Drinking Water Act; Self Study Handbook; Community Water Sys-
tems," AWWA, 1978. Outlines and explains the surveillance program required
for compliance with the SDWA and Interim Primary Drinking Water Require-
ments; includes basic testing procedures and reporting procedures.
• "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes," U.S. EPA, Technology
Transfer, 1974. Outlines procedures for monitoring water quality; includes
laboratory requirements and sampling programs.
• Standards Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 14th Edition,
1976. Gives detailed information on laboratory testing procedures,
equipment, reagents, safety, etc.
-------
"Technical Guidelines for Public Water Systems," U.S. EPA, June, 1975, NTIS
#PB 255 217, Chapter IX. Gives surveillance standards for source, treatment,
and supply of water, sampling and analysis requirements, reporting proce-
dures, interpretation of results, process control, etc.
12-5
-------
-------
PART III
FINANCE
The cost of providing potable water Is one of the most Important aspects of
water utility management. Without adequate financing, water systems cannot pro-
vide the service the public expects. Sufficient funds must be provided for needed
new construction projects as well as for operation and maintenance of existing
facilities. In addition, financial reserves must be established to meet emergency
O&M needs and to offset depreciation of the water system.
Water system costs are regionally and site specific, and are unique for each
utility. Long term capital expenditures and annual O&M costs must be balanced by
revenues. Estimates of cash flow requirements should be made every five years and
updated semi-annually.
This section of the Decision Maker's Guide summarizes cost considerations
and Information for all major water system expenditures. Capital costs are pre-
sented to show the magnitude of investments required to build various facilities
needed for water production and delivery.
Also discussed are various means for financing projects and O&M by user
charges. References are cited at the end of each section to provide additional
information on budgeting and financial assessments.
III-l
-------
PART III
FINANCE
| U COSTS
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES - P. 1
ANNUAL COSTS - P. 8
RECOMMENDED
REFERENCES - P, .16
14. INCOME
L
REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - P, 1
SOURCES OF
REVENUE - P. 2
RECOMMENDED
^REFERENCES - R. 5
|1S. FINANCING CAPITAL COSTS |
BONDS-P. 2 GRANTS & LOANS - P. 2
REVENUE RESERVES - P. 4
STOCK SALES - P. 4
BANK LOANS -P. 4
RECOMMENDED REFERENCES - R. 4 1
III-2
-------
s
3
s »_*
CO
PART III-FINANCE
PAGES
SECTION 13-COSTS
Capital Expenditures 1
Supply 2
Water Treatment 4
Waste Handling and Disposal 5
Distribution and Storage 6
Metering 7
Fire Protection 8
Administrative and O&M Facilities 8
Annual Costs 8
Water Treatment 10
Waste Handling and Disposal 10
Supply, Distribution, Storage,
and Metering 10
Monitoring and Surveillance 15
References
-------
SECTION 13
COSTS
1. What are the major items of capital expenditure for water systems? (See
page 13-1)
2. What variables affect water system costs? (See page 13-2)
3. What variables affect water use? (See pages 13-2 and 13-5)
4. What factors affect the design of water supply works, treatment plants.
pumps, distribution mains, and storage structures? (See page 13-2)
5. What are some typical capital costs for water systems of various
capacities? (See Table 13-1)
6. What options are there regarding source of water supply? (See page 13.2
and 13-10
7. What factors affprt the type and extent of water treatment required?
(See page IS-1!)
8. What water treatment processes are in common usage? (See pages 13-1* and 13-5)
9. What can be done with wastes produced during water purification? (See
page 13-5)
10. What factors affect distribution, storage, and pumping costs? (See
page 13-6)
11. What are the major items of annual cost in the operation and
maintenance (O&M) of water systems? (See page 13.11)
12. Roughly, what are typical O&M costs? (See pages 13-H thru 13-5)
13. What are approximate costs for monitoring and surveillance? (See pages
13-15}
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
The major areas of capital Investment In a water supply system are:
Supply or source development and transmission
Water treatment and wastes disposal
Distribution
Storage
Metering
Fire protection
Administrative and Operation and Maintenance (O&M) facilities
13-1
-------
The actual capital investment needed for any community is specific for the
water system in question. Some of the primary variables which influence capital
costs are: system size and geographic locations, type of service whether domes-
tic, commercial, or industrial, characteristics of the system design, labor
costs, availability of materials, and climatic and seasonal factors. Investment
costs are quite variable among water systems; nevertheless, a general feeling for
the relative contribution from major system components can be obtained from a
summary of typical capital cost estimates. Such information is helpful for water
supply management. Accordingly, this sub-section presents rough estimates of
costs for major system components of a water utility.
All costs are related to design capacity of the system rather than to popu-
lation served because per capita water use varies widely between humid areas with
high annual rainfall and arid areas, and with industrial water requirements of
different communities. The basis for capital cost estimates are included in
Appendix D.
A summary of approximate capital costs for major components of a water
supply system is contained in Table 13-1. Costs vary widely and are system
specific. A description of each follows. All costs ued in this report are derived
from an EPA Interim Report titled, "Estimating Costs As A Function of Size &
Treatment Efficiency", as referenced at the end of this Section.
Supply
Conventional water supplies are normally obtained from wells, springs,
impounding reservoirs, natural lakes, rivers, and streams, or a combination of
these sources. The construction costs for developing each of these sources varies
onsiderably. Water may also be purchased wholesale from another water purveyor.
Many cities in the United States, especially small cities, are served by
groundwater (wells), and there are a large number of systems utilizing surface
water supplies. Groundwater supplies may require less extensive treatment than
surface waters.
• Wells - The construction cost of well water supplies varies with local
conditions, such as depth, capacity, drilling conditions, distance
between wells, and other characteristics; the single most important
factor affecting the cost is the capacity of the system. The number of
wells needed is another factor. The average cost of construction
Includes the wells, well houses, power supply, pumping, electrical
equipment and controls, and collecting lines. For costs presented here,
the pumps are assumed to be capable of lifting water to the surface
with excess pressure of approximately 100 feet. Roughly, the capital
expenditure for developing a well supply ranges from $0.10 to $0.80 per
gpd (gallon per day) design capacity.
• Stream or lake intake - A water supply developed from a natural lake,
river or stream must be adequate to supply the maximum daily demand.
The estimated construction cost which follows includes the intake
structure piping, pumping to supply design capacity with 100 feet rated
13-2
-------
TABLE 13-JU SUMMARY OF ROUGH CAPITAL COSTS FOR VARIOUS SIZE
WATER SYSTEMS* (In Thousands of Dollars)
System size
Capacity, mgd (million
gallons per day)
0.1
1
!0
100
(Costs in thousands of dollars)
Supply
Wells
Stream or Lake Intake
Reservoirs
Treatment
Chlorination
Filtration/Chlorination
Sed. /Filt. /Chlorination
Wastes Disposal
Centrifuge/Haul
Thicken/Vacuum Filter/Haul
Drying Beds/Haul
Liquid Hauling
Transmission
Distribution
$ 80 $
160
— —
6
88
134
-§
' -
28
69
Varies
140
180
2,000
6
652
845
297
291
71
142
widely
$1,010 $10
950 7
2,800 16
37
2,170 9
3,100 17
414 1
502 1
481
647
with location
,100
,890
,000
180
,690
,400
,360
,710
-
—
Pumping
Mains
Storage
Admin., Lab. & Maintenance
Facilities
150 270 1,030
Varies widely with location
40
90
40
440
150
6,390
3,540
500
*The text includes a description of equipment and assumptions for each
alternative. See reference at end of this section for source of estimates.
§Dashes denote conditions outside typical range of application.
13-3
-------
discharge pressure, power supply, controls and other appurtenances. It
ranges $0.80 to $1.60 per gpd design capacity.
• Impounding reservoirs - Damming of an intermittent or continuously
flowing stream or river is a common method of storing water for use
during seasonal low flow periods. The storage capacity must be adequate
to meet average requirements thorughout the year with some safety
factor. The construction cost of an impounding reservoir will be
affected by local conditions, most importantly, capacity, topography,
geology, stream flow characteristics, construction materials available,
etc. The total cost of construction includes construction of the dam,
spillway, intake tower and piping, cleaning and grubbing, fences,
roads, and other necessary appurtenances. This cost varies from $0.16
to $2.00 per gpd (gallon per day).design capacity.
• Water Purchase - In some situations it may be advantageous to purchase
water from another system on a wholesale basis.
Water Treatment
The need for water treatment facilities depends on the quality of the raw
water. In general, surface waters cannot be used for a potable supply without
treatment. As a minimum, treatment of surface water would consist of turbidity
removal and disinfection. In other situations, the water may require more exten-
sive treatment for removal of hardness, tastes, odors, color, and organic and
inorganic contaminants.
Generally, groundwater sources are more constant in quality and require less
treatment than surface water supplies. In many situations, groundwater may only
require simple disinfection to render it potable. However, it may contain
undesirable levels of substances such as flouride, nitrates, organic contami-
nants, total dissolved solids (TDS), iron, manganese, hydrogen sulfide, and car-
bon dioxide. When any of these contaminants are present in sufficient
concentrations, treatment must be provided for their removal.
There are many other combinations and alternative processes which can also
be used to treat a water supply. Cost curves for 30 unit processes applicable to
contaminant removal are contained in an interim report prepared for EPA, entitled
"Estimating Costs for Water Treatment as a Function of Size and Treatment
Efficiency", August, 1978, EPA-600/2-78-182. (The final report contains costs for
99 unit processes). This reference is useful for comparing costs of alternative
processes and process trains in preliminary planning. It is available from the
EPA, MERL, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
Basic Treatment Alternatives—
Examples of basic treatment systems which are commonly used in municipal
water practice industry include:
• Chlorination - Simple disinfection by chlorination is considered to be
a minimal treatment system for both ground and surface water supplies.
Chlorine may be applied to water in one of these forms: as elemental
chlorine (chlorine gas), as hypochlorite salts, or as chlorine dioxide.
13-U
-------
Gaseous chlorine was employed for this analysis and installed costs
ranged from $0.002 to $0.06 per gpd (gallon per day) of capacity.
• Filtration/Chlorination - Direct filtration (with chemical filter aids)
followed by chlorination may be an acceptable treatment scheme for
water supplies with low turbidity and low suspended solids concentra-
tions. For 0.1 mgd, the cost given below is for a complete pressure
filter plant, including filter vessels, mixed media, piping, valves,
controls, electrical system, backwash system, surface wash system,
chemical feed systems (alum, polymer, and chlorine), raw water pumps
(no intake structure), one-hour detention pre-filter contact basin,
backwash/clearwell storage basin, building, and other ancillary items
required for a complete and operable installation. For plants with a
capacity of 1 mgd or greater, the costs for conventional gravity filter
facilities are used. These include chemical feed systems (for alum,
polymer, and chlorine), rapid mix, flocculation gravity filter struc-
ture, filter media, hydraulic surface wash system, backwash pumping
facilities, wash water surge basins, in-plant pumping, and clearwell
storage. Costs range from $0.10 to $0.88 per gpd of capacity.
• Sedimentation/Filtration/Chlorination - In estimating costs for plants
under 1 mgd, the cost of a package plant is assumed, and for flows of 1
mgd and greater, conventional unit process costs are used. Package
treatment plants include coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, fil-
tration, and chlorination all within factory preassembled units for
field assembled modules. Conventional treatment includes the same
process but in custom-designed units. The capital investment for this
type of treatment ranges for $0.17 to $1.34 per gpd of capacity.
Waste Handling and Disposal
There are several methods of waste handling and disposal which can be used
by a water utility. No specific method is most economical for all wastes since
the properties and quantity of waste solids are a function of the quality of the
water and of the chemicals added in water treatment. Very often, the selection of
an economical waste disposal method will depend on the solids concentration of
the waste material. Although there are other waste disposal alternatives, simpli-
fied cost estimates are presented for the following practices:
Centrifugation and sludge hauling
Gravity thickening, vacuum filtration, and sludge hauling
Sand drying beds and sludge hauling
Liquid sludge hauling
Discharge to sanitary sewers
Dewatering and Sludge Hauling—
Mechanical dewatering by vacuum filtration or centrifugation is one possible
method of handling water treatment wastes. For most small communities, high costs
for equipment, operation and maintenance, and disposal of dewatered waste solids
makes this alternative economically impractical. Total investment costs may range
from $10,000 to $300,000 per mgd of plant capacity.
13-5
-------
Sand drying beds and lagoons are more common methods of treating water
treatment plant wastes, particularly in small communities. In areas where ample
land is available at a relatively low cost (which is often the case near small
treatment plants) natural drying can be very economical. Typical investment costs
will range from $50,000 to $300,000 per mgd of plant capacity. Also, O&M costs
for drying beds and lagoons are much less than for mechanical dewatering.
A haul distance of 20 miles one-way has been assumed for all cases and land
costs are not included.
Liquid Sludge Hauling—
In some cases, it may be more economical to haul treatment wastes directly
to a landfill or to a land appplication site as a liquid rather than following
dewatering. The summary in Table 13.-1 includes the capital cost in facilities
for hauling liquid sludge 20 miles one way.
Discharge to Sanitary Sewer—
A popular method for disposal of water treatment plant wastes is the dis-
charge to a sewage treatment facility via sanitary sewers. Although this method
of disposal.is particularly inexpensive, it may not always be feasible. In some
cases, the wastewater treatment facilities may not be able to effectively treat
water treatment plant wastes due to the increase in solids and volume contributed
by the water utility. In this situation, the solids must be processed at the
water treatment plant and disposed elsewhere. Capital costs are not shown for
this alternative, although they are low. See reference at the end of this
section.
Hazardous Materials—
Water treatment plant wastes containing arsenic, fluoride, or radiological
wastes are considered hazardous materials and require special consideration for
disposal. The Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulates the dispo-
sal of these hazardous materials.
Distribution and Storage
Pumping Stations—
If the source of supply is not at an elevation adequate for gravity flow to
the point of use, it is necessary to provide pumping. Pumping facilities may be
located at the well; at an intake or pumping station in a lake, river, or stream;
or along a pipeline between the source and the point of use.
Pumping station cost estimates which follow are for facilities located along
a pipeline where heads of 100 to 240 feet may be required. Total pumping station
costs are dependent upon pump capacities, energy losses, number of stations, and
the estimated cost of each station.
Many factors are considered in preparing detailed cost estimates for pumping
stations, including capacity, pumping head, source of power, necessary reliabil-
ity, type of service, degree of instrumentation and control, aesthetic considera-
tions, noise levels and others. Such factors are reflected to varying degrees in
the average costs which range from $0.06 to $1.50 per gpd (gallon per day) of
plant capacity. The estimated costs shown are for a complete pumping station,
13-6
-------
including the structure, pumping equipment, piping, electrical equipment and con-
trols, surge protection facilities, and all other appurtenance for a complete
installation. The costs presented are applicable for pumping stations built as
separate structures, with heating and electrical systems and piping separate from
other area facilities.
Distribution Mains—
There are numerous pipe sizes, materials and methods of operation which must
be evaluated before pipelines can be designed. These factors along with local
conditions such as excavation conditions and depth of cover influence transmis-
sion line costs. The costs in Table 13 .-1 include pipe in place, fittings,
valves, special structures, controls, and a nominal allowance for stream, rail-
road, and highway crossings. These costs typically range from $0.01 to $1.00 per
gpd plant capacity.
Treated Water Storage—
. Treated water storage facilities should have the capacity to provide for
meeting the varying rate of water demand during the day, fire reserve, and emer-
gency reserve. Storage requirements for the cost analysis below are based on 125
percent of the design capacity of the treatment plant and would furnish a six-
hour emergency supply of water at a maximum day design rate. This capacity of 125
percent of design capacity is a minimum, and where higher factors apply, they
will mean higher costs.
Treated water storage often is provided in concrete tanks or above ground
steel tanks. In some cases the storage is built integrally with the plant struc-
tures and in others it is built as an adjacent but separate structure. Costs will
vary for different capacities, materials of construction, and different storage
configurations. Storage costs may range from $0.06 to $0.40 per gallon plant
capacity.
«
Metering
A part of the water utility's capital investment may be the purchase and
installation of water meters at customer service connections. Metering serves two
distinct purposes. It may reduce water demands by as much as 25 to 30 percent
by creating an awareness on the part of the users of the relationship between
consumption and cost. It is also necessary for any pricing system other than a
flat rate.
The potential cost savings realized by reduced consumption should be consid-
ered and compared to the cost of installing and maintaining water meters at serv-
ice connections. Many communities install meters for all dwelling units. The
average cost to install a meter i and box as part of a new system is estimated at
about $94 per residential service. The cost to install a meter on an existing
service may be as high as $650. The cost to read the meter and prepare a bill on
a bi-monthly schedule and maintain it in good repair is estimated to be $3.50 to
$4.00 per residential meter per year.
13-7
-------
Fire Protection
Depending on the population served, design of the water system, and method
used to supply required fire flows, a large capital investment by the water
utility may be necessary. This investment requires equitable service charges for
public and private fire protection systems since there are measurable costs and
expenses associated with providing both classes of service. Although there are no
strict rules for allocating these costs, there are two general methods
available:
• Capacity-Ratio Method - This method assumes that fire protection and
general consumption are of equal importance and value. The cost of
items of a joint-use nature are shared equally between the two func-
tions based on the relationship between the capacity required for pub-
lic fire protection and the capacity required for general consumption.
• Fire Protection As An Incremental Cost Method - This method assumes
that general consumption is the primary function of the water supply
system. Here, basic costs are first charged to general consumption
functions and the incremental costs associated with also providing fire
protection are then determined.
Public charges for fire protection should be based on the incremental cost
of providing that portion of the water system that contributes to fire protec-
tion, above and beyond water distribution requirements. The same methods outlined
for basic supply costs should be used to determine these costs. They are not
included in the summary table, Table 13-2, which follows.
Administrative and O&M Facilities
Administration buildings, garage, and shop buildings are often included in,
water treatment plant cpnstruction projects for small cities. These buildings
are intended to house personnel; laboratories; store records, materials and
tools; and enclose maintenance areas. If the department or district offices are
also incorporated at the plant, additional space is required. For planning of
costs associated with these buildings, it is best to determine the space require-
ments and use typical unit building costs (per square foot). Current costs for
laboratories range from $30 to $71 per square foot with a median value of $51.
Office buildings range from $28 to $47 per square foot with a median value of
$37. A typical administration building, being a composite of these will probably
range from $40 to $45.
ANNUAL COSTS
The annual costs of a utility include debt service for repayment of major
capital financing, as well as O&M costs. Typical annual costs for water utilities
are summarized in Tables 13 -2 to 13 -6. Estimates are shown relative to plant
design capacity and are outlined for the various major components of a typical
water supply system. Debt service and O&M costs are presented on a unit basis
(t/1000 gallons) to illustrate economies of scale. Debt service is computed as
respective capital expenditures ammortized for 20 years at 7 percent interest.
13-8
-------
TABLE 13-2**. SUMMARY OF APPROXIMATE TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS* (IN CENTS PER
THOUSAND GALLONS) FOR POTABLE WATER TREATMENT
Plant capacity, mgd
(million gallons per day)
0.1
1
10
100
(Cents per thousand gallons)
Chlorination
Debt Service
O&M
Total
Filtration/Chlorination
Debt Service
O&M
1.5*.
5.7
7.2
23
24
0.2*
0.7
0.9
17
14
0.1*
0.5
0.6
5.6
3.5
0.05*
0.32
0.37
2.5
2.5
Total
Sedimentation/Filtration/
Chlorination
Debt Service
O&M
Total
Admin., Lab. & Maintenance
Facilities
Debt Service
O&M
Total
47
31
35
62
97
22
36
0.9
5.3
6.2
9.1
8.0
6.0
14.0
0.3
1.3
1.6
5.0
4.5
4.9
9.4
0.1
0.4
0.5
* Including debt service for capital expenditures as well as O&M.
§ Dashes denote out of typical range of application.
**Derlved from information in first reference at end of this section.
For private utilities this is roughly equivalent to depreciation and return on
investment. The basis for computing O&M costs is contained in Appendix E. O&M
costs are itemized relative to labor, maintenance and materials, chemicals, and
energy as a percentage of the total O&M expense.
13-9
-------
As with previous cost estimates, this information is presented only to
illustrate the relative magnitude of various cost for major system components;
actual costs are different for each utility as influenced by local conditions.
Water Treatment
The annual costs for water treatment and on-site facilities, such as admin-
istrative, laboratories, and maintenance buildings, are summarized in Table
13-2. The cost of data service and O&M are about the same order of magnitude,
and economies of scale are apparent in both. Typically, small communities employ
groundwater sources of relatively high quality where simple chlorination is all
the treatment necessary to meet National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regula-
tions (NIPDWR). For this case, treatment costs are on the order of 1 to 7
-------
TABLE 13-3. O&M COSTS FOR INDIVIDUAL POTABLE WATER TREATMENT PROCESSES
AS A PERCENT OF TOTAL O&M EXPENSES
Plant capacity, mgd
Chlorination
Labor
Maint. & Materials"*"
Chemicals
Energy
Filtration/Chlorination
Labor
Maint. & Materials*
Chemicals
Energy
Sedimentation/Filtration/
Chlorination
Labor
Maint. & Materials"*"
Chemicals
Energy
Admin., Lab.& Maintenance
Facilities
Labor
Maint. & Materials"*"
Energy
0.1
88%
2
4
6
58
4
4
34
83
3
6
8
-§
-
1
(Percent of
63%
1
, 31
4
77
5
7
11
58
9
26
7
80
11
9
10
total O&M
31%
11
53
5
39
9
28
24
24
6
62
8
79
9
12
100
expenses)
14%
4
78
4
17
6
41
36
13
4
76
8
76
10
14
-Maintenance and materials cost
§Dashes denote out of typical range of application
13-H
-------
TABLE 13-4. SUMMARY OF TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS FOR WATER TREATMENT PLANT
WASTES DISPOSAL*
Plant capacity, mgd
Centrifuge/Haul
Debt Service
O&M
Total
Thicken/Vac. Filter/Haul
Debt Service
O&M
Total
Drying Beds/Haul
Debt Service
O&M
Total
Liquid Sludge Hauling
Debt Service
O&M
0.1 1
(Cents per
-§ 7.7*
15.7
23.4
7.5
6.0
13.5
7.4 1.8
15.3 2.9
22.7 4.7
17.8 3.7
7.7 9.1
10
thousands gallons)
1.1*
2.1
3.2
1.3
1.9
3.2
1 1-2
1.4
2.6
1.7
9.1
100
0.4*
1.0
1.4
0.4
0.9
1.4
-
-
-
Total
Discharge to Sanitary Sewer
User Charge"*"
25.5
0.3
12.8
0.3
10.8
0.3
0.3
*Annual costs in cents per 1000 gallons. Cost of land is not included. Includes
amortization of capital costs and O&M.
+User charges based upon a charge of $100 per million gallons of waste.
§Dashes denote out of typical range of application.
13-12
-------
TABLE 13-5. O&M COSTS FOR WATER TREATMENT PLANT WASTE DISPOSAL
AS A PERCENT OF TOTAL O&M COSTS
Plant capacity, mgd
Centrifuge/Haul
Labor
Maint. & Materials4"
Energy
Thicken/Vac. Filter/Haul
Labor
Maint. & Materials"*"
Energy
Drying Beds /Haul
Labor
Maint. & Materials4"
Energy
Liquid Sludge Hauling
Labor
Maint. & Materials4"
Energy
0.
-§
-
-
14
-
85
14
1
54
33
13
1 •' 1
(Percent of total
88%
5
8
45
11
32
86
11
negligible
56
32
13
10
O&M expenses)
86%
5
9
46
9
22
85
9
7
56
32
13
100
76%
7
17
42
-
29
-
—
_
-
•Maintenance and materials cost
§Dashes denote out of typical range of application
13-13
-------
TABLE 13-6.
SUMMARY OF ANNUAL COSTS FOR SUPPLY, DISTRIBUTION,
AND STORAGE
Capacity, mgd
Supply
Wells
Debt Service
O&M
Total
Stream or Lake Intake
Debt Service
O&M
Total
Reservoirs
Debt Service
Distribution
Pumping
Debt Service
O&M
Total
Transmission Line
Debt Service
O&M
Total
Storage
Debt Service
O&M
Total
0.1
. i
21*
26
47
42
20
62
206
20
20
40
26
0.4
26.4
10
0.4
10.4
1
(Cents per
3.6*
6.6
10.2
4.7
6.4
11.1
52
3.8
6.5
10.3
4.2
0.1
4.3
2.3
0.1
2.4
10
thousand gallons)
2.6*
5.1
7.7
2.5
3.8
6.3
7.3
1.9
3.9
5.8
X
1.0
neg;
1.0
1.1
neg.
1.1
100
2.6*
5.1
7.7
2.1
3.7
5.8
4.2
0.2
3.8
4.0
0.3
neg.
0.3
0.9
neg.
0.9
neg. = negligible cost
13-lU
-------
more than 5,000 persons generally use surface waters or a combination of surface
and groundwaters. Annual costs for source development may range from 2 to 50
4/1000 gallons. Similarly, distribution costs are generally in the same range.
Pumping cost (when applicable) may be a major component in distribution costs.
Pumping costs consist primarily of electrical energy costs which are a signifi-
cant variable for different communities.
Monitoring and Surveillance
In implementing the NIPDWR, all communities will have to bear the cost of
monitoring their drinking water. The total cost per capita to perform routine
monitoring is Illustrated in Table 13-7. Actual monitoring costs will depend on
the cost per analysis and on the institutional arrangements made by each system
for laboratory services. Some water utilities perform their own analyses, while
others depend on state health agencies or private commercial laboratories. The
monitoring costs shown in Table 13. - 7 are based on the following cost
estimates:
Analysis
Coliform
Complete Inorganic
Complete Organic
Cost Range ($) Per Analysis
5-10
70 - 170
150 - 260
TABLE 13-.7,
ESTIMATED MINIMUM ANNUAL MONITORING COSTS PER PERSON SERVED
VERSUS POPULATION SERVED AND TYPE OF COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEM
System size,
Unit cost, $/person/year
population served
1
10
1,
2,
5,
10,
100,
,000,
,000,
25
100
500
000
500
000
000
000
000
000
Surface supply
7.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
20
80
35
20
15
10
10
05
*
*
- 15
- 3.
- 0.
- 0.
- 0.
.05
75
75
40
30
- 0.25
- 0.
- 0.
- 0.
- *
20
15
05
Groundwater
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.35
.85
.15
.10
.05
.05
.05
.05
*
*
- 7.
- 1.
- 0.
- 0.
- 0.
- 0.
- 0.
- 0.
- 0.
- *
05
75
35
20
15
15
15
15
05
*Less than $0.05
13-15
-------
The lower values are based on costs Incurred in EPA laboratories, while the
higher costs are based on commercial laboratory estimates. It should be recog-
nized that these costs are only for routine monitoring, and that additional costs
will be incurred for non-compliance monitoring (monitoring required when a system
exceeds a MCL) and for monitoring to control system operations.
REFERENCES
• "Estimating Costs for Water Treatment as a Function of Size and Treatment
Efficiency," R.C. Gumerman, et al, EPA-600/2-78-182, Interim Report, August
1978. Contains construction and operation and maintenance cost curves for
three package water treatment systems and twenty-seven unit processes; final
report will have cost information on approximately 100 processes.
• "Study of the Beneficial Disposal of Water Purification Plant Sludges in
Wastewater Treatment," John 0. Nelson, Charles Joseph, and Russell Gulp, EPA
Grant No. S803336-01-0, 1977, Cincinnati, Ohio, Dr. B.V. Salotto, Project
Officer.
13-16
-------
8
F'ART III -FINANCE
PAGES
SECTION 14-INCOME
1
Revenue Requirements
Sources of Revenue 2
Water Sales 2
Taxes 5
References 5
-------
SECTION 14
INCOME
1. What are the sources of income available to water systems? (See page
14-2)
2. What expenses must be covered by water utility income? (See page lU-l)
3. What are the rate structures for water sales? (See Table 14 -2)
4. How may ad valorem taxes be used by water utilities? (See page 1^-5)
Utility revenues, including consumer service charges, should be designed to
cover all system financial obligations and establish a sound credit rating that
will attract future capital. They can be obtained through connection fees, direct
water sales, special user charges, payments by developers, ready-to-serve
charges, and taxation. There is a decreasing trend in the use of tax funds for
water works. An intelligent revenue policy is intended to recover the long-term
financial obligations and to distribute these costs equitably among present and
future users as well as to cover Operation & Maintenance (O&M) costs. However, it
is also necessary for the overall financial plan to be implemented in a practical
manner within constraints of the system, system management, and customer accept-
ance. Therefore, different revenue programs are needed to meet the various condi-
tions, and to continuously rebuild the water system. Special seasonal rates or
drought rates may be levied. Drought rates may provide for a special surcharge
with automatic termination at some maximum permitted usage.
REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
The revenue requirements for publicly owned utilities typically must cover
expenses for:
Operation and maintenance
Debt service
Capital Improvements or additions that represent normal plant
extensions
Payments in lieu of taxes
Contributions to other departments
Developer refunds
Annual capital replacements
Reserves for major improvements including replacement of depreciated
plant (reserves are usually State regulated or limited)
Whereas, the revenues of investor owned waterworks generally cover:
• Operating and maintenance expenses, including taxes
• Depreciation
• Return on investment value (typically regulated by State public utility
commissions)
lU-i
-------
SOURCES OF REVENUE
A summary of the various means, of obtaining revenue is contained in Table
lU-1. Water sales represent the primary source of income for most utilities.
Publicly owned utilities also issue special user charges or levy taxes in order
to recover facility costs which are specific to certain users. These may include
fire protection, main extensions, ready-to-serve charges or connection charges.
Some communities use taxation as a primary source of revenue, although this
practice is generally not recognized as an efficient allocation of costs among
users because such charges are a function of property value and not water use and
there is great competition for tax monies. Revenue can also be raised through
outside investments or interest on bank loans. A discussion of the various types
of rate structures and means of taxation follows.
Water Sales
The primary source of revenue for most utilities is through direct water
sales. This is generally recognized as the most equitable means of distributing
service costs among consumers because rates may be structured to account for
fixed service, commodity, and ready-to-serve costs.
• Fixed charges include meter reading, billing, accounting, and other
services that are not a function of use.
• A commodity charge is based on the amount of water actually used during
a billing period.
• A ready-to-serve charge accounts for service costs that are associated
with construction to meet water system needs especially with those to
meet peak demand requirements.
Many utilities structure water rates to reflect the different service needs
and costs of the various consumer classes. Residential users typically have a
higher demand factor (ratio of peak to average use) than large industrial users.
A high demand factor requires extra system capacity on a ready-to-serve basis;
therefore, residential users are typically charged higher unit-volume rates in
order to .recover the associated costs. Ready-to-serve charges may also be levied
on vacant lots where service is provided but unused. Other system costs may be
specific to certain users and charged accordingly. Fire service is one example.
All community residents benefit from public fire protection; however, some bene-
fit preferentially due to higher property value. Such costs may be apportioned
through service charges or taxes. Private fire protection charges are generally
handled separately from standard service on a relative, available- protection
basis. The rate making policies of almost all investor-owned utilities are regu-
lated by state commissions, and some states also regulate publicly owned
utilities.
Table 14 -2 summarizes the predominant rate structures employed for water
sales in the U.S. Medium and large utilities typically employ metered sales,
using a declining block rate structure. The declining block structure is often
used, but is being increasingly questioned as an equitable means of allocating
lk-2
-------
TABLE 14-1. SUMMARY OF REVENUE SOURCES AND APPLICATION
Sources
Types
Comments and typical applications
Water Sales
Metered
-Declining Block*
-Inverted Block
-Fixed Block
Flat Rate
Principal source of revenue;
usually structured to achieve
customer equity, promote efficient
allocation of resources, and
discourage waste, except that
flat rate may not discourage
waste
Special User
Charges
Taxes
Miscellaneous
Fire Protection
Connection Fee
Local Facility
Improvements or
Extensions
Ad Valorem Property
Special Assessment
Districts
Municipal Utility
Interest on
reserves and
sinking funds or
Investments
Charges allocated to the specific
users of special services, facil-
ity extensions, or connection
costs
Generally available to publicly
owned utilities; typically employ-
ed for financing special services
such as main extensions, fire,
aid for major improvements, etc.
Publicly owned and investor owned
utilities
*Presently being questioned as an equitable means of allocating costs.
lU-3
-------
TABLE 14-2. RATE STRUCTURES FOR WATER SALES
Service type Rate structure.
Description
Discussion
Metered
Declining Block
Inverted Block
Fixed Block
Charge per unit
volume lower for
larger water users
Charge per unit
volume higher for
larger water
users
Charge per unit
volume regardless
of volume used
One commonly used means
of distributing costs
among consumers, but
does not promote
conservation
Promotes conservation
Balanced approach be-
tween declining and in-
verted block rate
structures
Flat Rate
Uniform Rate
Same charge per
customer
Modified
Charge per customer
based upon physical
features that indi-
cate relative con-
sumption such as
number of residents,
rooms, or fixtures
Least expensive and
simple to administer as
meters or meter readers
are not required, but
savings may be offset if
water is wasted, because
of greater production
requirements resulting
Advantages of uniform
flat rate but with
charges in proportion
to water use potential
-------
costs. The inverted block structure has the advantage of promoting conservation,
especially among large users.
Flat rate service does not require meters or meter reading. This may be a
significant advantage, especially for small utilities. This rate structure is
obviously the easiest to administer; however, it has little regard for services
required by individual users and may promote water waste. In order to improve
equity in cost allocation, some municipalities employ a modified flat rate struc-
ture that apportions costs according to number and type of plumbing fixtures,
inhabitants, or rooms. Flat rates may encourage water waste and encroach on plant
capacity.
Taxes
Taxes represent an indirect source of financing employed in combination with
service charges, usually for providing fire service, assessments for service
access to specific properties, and, on occasion, as an aid for constructing major
improvements. Waterworks services may be funded through ad valorem property
taxes, special assessment taxes, and municipal utility taxes.
An ad valorem property tax is based on assessed property values; therefore,
although in some cases it well represents actual costs of consumer services
(e.g., fire protection), more often, it does not represent an equitable distribu-
tion of costs.
Special assessment taxes are generally employed for service extensions or
fire protection to specific regions which benefit directly from the additional
service. They may be based on front property footage. They may also be levied on
an ad valorem basis. This method has the advantage of distributing special costs
equitably among present and future users of the special appurtenances.
A municipal utility tax may be levied relative to one or more of a commun-
ity's utilities, whether public or private.
REFERENCES
• "Water Utility Management," AWWA Manual M5. Chapter 11 details the proce-
dures for developing an equitable water rate structure.
• "Water Rates Manual," AWWA Manual Ml. Includes discussions of revenue
requirements, distribution of costs, and design of rate structures.
lU-5
-------
PART III-FINANCE
PAGES
SECTION 15 - FINANCING CAPITAL COSTS 1
Bonds 2
Grants and Loans 2
Revenue Reserves 4
Stock Sales 4
Bank Loans 4
References 4
-------
SECTION 15
FINANCING CAPITAL COSTS
1. What are the general ways of financing water utility capital costs?
(See page 15-2)
2. What state and Federal help is available? (see page 15-2)
3. What kinds of bonds can water utilities sell? (See page 15-3)
4. What are the capital financing options for municipal and private water
utilities? (See Taole 15-1)
There are numerous means of financing capital improvements for water utili-
ties. These vary with the ownership of the utility and the cost of the improve-
ments. Considering the complexity of financing, the recommendations of a profes-
sional financial consultant can prove very valuable in the development of a sound
financial program. This is particularly true for smaller utilities that lack the
in-house expertise of larger utilities and municipal agencies.
Publicly owned water utilities typically obtain financing through bonds,
industrial revenue bonds, advances from developers, government loans and grants,
and working capital. Privately owned utilities have the option of selling stock,
obtaining bank loans, or using revenue reserves. In either case, financing capi-
tal Improvements is easier if the utility has a sound credit base.
In January 1979, the Office of Drinking Water (WH-550), 'U.S. EPA, Washing-
ton, D.C. 20460, prepared a summary entitled "Financial Assistance Alternatives
For Water Supplies." It describes the federal financial assistance available
from:
1. Farmers Home Administration
2. Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture
3. Corps of Engineers
4. Economic Development Administration
5. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development
6. Federal Disaster Administration
7. Indian Health Service
8. Bureau of Reclamation
9. Small Business Administration i
10. Dept. of Interior, Office of Water Research and Technology
11. Dept. of Labor
12. Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare
13. Office of Revenue Sharing
This summary may be obtained by writing to EPA at the address given above.
15-1
-------
BONDS
i
The sale of bonds is the most common method for publicly owned utilities to
finance major capital improvements. They are serviced by taxes, assessments, or
revenues, depending on the financial policy of the utility. The three types of
bonds are discussed below; each has certain advantages and disadvantages as given
in Table 15-1.
• General Obligation Bonds - General obligation bonds are' backed by the
full taxing power of the issuer, with ad valorem or general property
taxes generally used to repay them, although they are often repaid from
utility revenues. In the latter case general obligation bonds are used
rather than revenue bonds because of lower interest rates. They ordi-
narily require the approval of the electorate, are limited to some per-
centage of the taxing power of the issuer, and become part of the
municipal debt. General obligation bonds are generally serial bonds
which mature on a sliding scale. They offer the most flexible and least
costly means of major capital financing.
• Revenue Bonds - Revenue bonds are issued on the condition that the
interest and redemption charges will be paid from the revenues of the
facility. These can be issued as term or serial bonds. If term bonds
are issued, the term should be equal to the life of the facilities.
Revenue bonds have a higher risk associated with them than general
obligation bonds, therefore the interest rates are usually higher. In
some states there are no legal limits on the amount of revenue bonds
issued by a utility however, in every case, the revenue potential of
the facilities should be carefully assessed prior to issuance of the
bonds.
• Special Assessment Bonds - Special assessment bonds may be issued to
pay for specific capital improvements in a portion of a service area.
The bonds are paid by a special tax assessment levied on the basis of
benefit in the area benefiting from the improvements. These bonds carry
a higher risk and therefore a higher Interest rate than general
obligation bonds, since they may not be backed by the general taxing
authority.
GRANTS AND LOANS
At various times, federal and state grants and loans are available for water
system Improvements. These programs are subject to a variety of constraints and
limitations. However, they can provide a viable, low cost means of capital
financing. Since they change frequently, it is not practical to describe them in
detail. In recent years, the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) and the Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) have had'numerous financing programs
available for all types of public works construction. Information on current pro-
grams may be available through a financial consultant or by inquiry to the refer-
ence given on page 15-lt.
15-2
-------
TABLE 15-1. CAPITAL FINANCINp OPTIONS
Type of
financing
Advantages
Disadvantages
Comments
PUBLICLY OWNED UTILITY
General High flexibility, low cost.
. Obligation No detailed technical or eco-
Bond (G.O.) nomic documentation of
facilities.
Easily marketed.
Personal income tax deduc-
tion.
Must receive voter approval.
(2/3 majority in some states)
Cannot exceed issuer's debt
limit.
Issuer must be able to levy ad
valorem property tax.
Backed by full credit of
issuer so risk is low.
Generally, not feasible for
less than $500,000.
Numerous small projects can
be funded by a single bond.
Revenue Can be used to finance pro-
Bonds jects outside city bound-
aries.
No-limit on amount.
Must receive 50* voter approval
in 'some states.
Extensive facility information
requirements.
Outside consultant must prepare
technical and economic analy-
sis.
Generally higher interest than
G.O. Bonds, and greater re-
serve requirements.
Less flexibility than G.O. bonds;
higher risk.
Can be used by institutions
lacking power to tax.
Can be used by municipalities
when their debt limit has
been reached.
Minimum effective issue of $1
million.
Special Only those directly bene-
Assessment fiting from improvement
Bonds pay, and then only in pro-
portion to benefit.
No vote necessary.
Generally, not backed by full
credit of taxing authority.
Higher risk.
Used when facilities only
serve a portion of the total
service area.
Grants &
Loans
May carry low interest rates.
Subject to availability and
much regulation; grantor
may place conditions on
grant or loan.
May be limited to certain
types or sizes of projects.
PRIVATELY OWNED UTILITY
Stock Less costly than bank loans.
Sales
Reduces control of corporate
decision-makers.
May not have sound economic
basis to attract potential
buyers.
More applicable to larger pri-
vate utilities.
Attractive to conservative in-
vestors.
Must obtain approval of PUC or
Federal Securities and Ex-
change Commission to issue
new securities.
Bank Loans Small scale, short-term
capital.
High interest cost.
Primarily used by very small
utilities with no other means
of financing capital improve-
ments .
BOTH
Revenue
Reserves
Least complex method of
financing.
No formal financial docu-
ments .
Consumer use rates higher.
Current.users paying for
future system.
Good for small-scale projects,
routine improvements, etc.
15-3
-------
REVENUE RESERVES
Revenue reserves or working capital can be used to finance improvements;
however, using this as a source of capital funds does have limitations. In
general, revenue reserves are only used on a short-term basis and not for major
improvements. Even when the cash is available to make major improvements, it may
be advisable to secure other long-term financing, thereby establishing a good
credit record.
Connection fees are often used to build revenue reserves. New customers are
charged for a share of prior capital investments made by the utility. The costs
of special services such as the extension of lines may also be included in the
connection fee.
Many water utilities annually commit 10 percent of their revenues to
replacement repairs, many of which are constructed using the utility's
employees.
STOCK SALES
Many times, the only means by which a privately owned water utility can
finance major improvements is by the sale of stocks, either preferred or com-
mon. A sound utility with a good earning record attracts more conservative inves-
tors than the more erratic industrial and business market.
BANK LOANS
For the small private utility, selling stock is not necessarily a viable
means of obtaining capital funds. If the company is willing to sell common
stock, there are not always willing buyers. Bank financing is often the only
means of obtaining capital funds. Short- or long-term notes and mortgages are
issued at or above the prime interest rate.
REFERENCES
• "Water Utility Management," AWWA M5 Chapters 9 and 10. Discussion of various
means of financing publicly (Chapter 9) and privately (Chapter 10) owned
water utilities; includes taxation, bonds, government loans and grants, bank
loans, stock sales, etc.
• "Financial Assistance Alternatives For Water Supplies," U.S. EPA, Office of
Water Supply (WH-550), Washington, D.C. 20460.
-------
PART IV-REFERENCES
PAGES
REFERENCES
-------
GENERAL REFERENCES
1. American Water Works Association, "Publications Catalog," 1979 AWWA Buyer's
Guide, page BG-95, AWWA Journal November 1978, Part 2.
2. "Water Utility Management," AWWA Manual Manual M3.
3. "Safety Practice for Water Utilities," AWWA Manual M3.
4. Clean Water Consultants, "Technical Guidelines for Public Water Systems,"
EPA Water Supply Division, NTIS PB 255 217, June, 1975.
5. "Decision-Makers Guide in Solid Waste Management," U.S. EPA SW-500, 1976.
6. Babbit, H.E., et al, Water Supply Engineering, 6th ed; McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
1967.
7. "The Safe Drinking Water Act; Self Study Handbook; Community Water Systems,"
AWWA, 1978.
8. "Emergency Planning for Water Utility Management," AWWA Manual M19.
9. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes," U.S. EPA Technology
Transfer, 1974
10. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 14th Edition,
1976.
11. "Distribution System Bacteriological Sampling Control and Guidelines," Sys-
tem Water Quality Committee, California-Nevada Section, AWWA, 1978.
12. "Water Supply Control," N.Y. State Dept. of Health, Bulletin No. 22.
13. Trainer, W.G. and Clopton, D.E., "A Water Utility Energy Management Program-
Dallas, Texas: JAWWA, March 1978, p 133.
14. Cornell, H., "A Consultant Looks at Future Water Utility Energy Problems,"
JAWWA, April, 1978, page 194.
15. Wesner, G. M. , et al, "Energy Conservation in Municipal Wastewater Treat-
ment," U.S. EPA, MCD-32, March, 1977.
I
16. "Operation of Wastewater Treatment Plants; A Manual of Practice," Water
Pollution Control Federation, MOP 11, 1975.
17. "Water Distribution Training Course," AWWA Manual M8.
18. "Basic Water Treatment Operator's Manual," AWWA Manual M18.
19. "Waterworks Systems Maintenance Standards and Policies," South Carolina
State Board of Health, September, 1969.
16-1
-------
20. "Installation, Operation, and Maintenance of Fire Hydrants," AWWA Manual
M17.
21. "State of the Art of Small Water Treatment Systems," U.S. EPA, August,
1977.
22. "Water Treatment Plant Sludges - An Update of the State of the Art: Parts 1
and 2," JAWWA September and October, 1978.
23. Bishop, S.L., "Alternate Processes for Treatment of Water Plant Wastes,"
JAWWA, September, 1978.
24. Water Quality and Treatment; A Handbook of Public Water Supplies, 3rd
Edition prepared by the American Water Works Association, McGraw-Hill Book
Company, 1971.
25. Gulp, G.L. and Gulp, R.L., New Concepts in Water Purification, Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company, 1974.
26. Fair, G.M., et al, Water Supply and Wastewater Removal, John Wiley & Sons,
1966.
27. Al-Layla, M. A., et al, Water Supply Engineering Design, Ann Arbor Science
Publishers, Inc., 1977.
28. "Water Rates," AWWA Manual Ml, 1972.
29. "Financing and Charges for Wastewater Systems," APWA, 1973.
30. "Rate Making Practices of State Regulatory Commissions," JAWWA, Sept.,
1976.
31. Korbitz, W.E., ed., Urban Public Works Administration, Institute for Train-
ing in Municipal Administration, 1976.
32. Culp/Wesner/Culp, "Management of Small & Medium Size Wastewater Treatment
Plants," U.S. EPA Contract No. 68-01-4917, Draft January 31, 1979.
33. U.S. EPA Technology Transfer Publications, 26 W. St. Glair St., Cincinnati,
Ohio, 45268.
34. Nation Technical Information Service, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Springfield,
VA 22161 -Misc. Water Publications.
16-2
-------
PART V-APPENDICES
PAGES
APPENDIXES
Appendix A - National Interim Primary A-1
Drinking Water Regulations (NIPDWR)
Appendix B - Recommended Revisions B-1
to NIPDWR
Appendix C - Secondary Drinking Water C-1
Standard
Appendix D - Bases for Capital Costs D-1
Computations
Appendix E - Bases for Annual 0 & M E-1
Cost Computations
Appendix F - Rational for National Interim F-1
Primary Drinking Water Regulation
-------
APPENDIX A
NATIONAL INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
(NIPDWR)
A-l
-------
TABLE A-l
IPDWR MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS FOR PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES
Type of contaminant
(community systems)
Inorganic
Chemicals
All Water Systemst
Organic
Chemicals
Turbidity
Surface Water
Systems Only
Microbiological
Contaminants
All Water Systemst
Radiological
Contaminants
(Natural) —
All Water Systemst
Radiological
Contaminants
(Man-made) — •
Surface Water
Systems Serving
Populations
Greater Than
100,000
Type of contaminant
(non-community systems)
Inorganic
Chemicals
All Wa.ter Systems — t
Nitrate only*
(all other contaminants
at state option)
Organic
Chemical s
(at state option)
Turbidity
Surface Water
Systems Only
Microbiological
Contaminants
All Water Systemst
Radiological
Contaminants
(Natural) —
(at state option)
Radiological
Contaminants
(Man-made) —
(at state option)
Maximum contaminant
levels (MCLS)
• Arsenic 0.05 mg/1
Barium 1 . mg/1
• Cadmium 0.010 mg/1
• Chromium 0.05 mg/1
• Lead 0.05 mg/1
Mercury 0.002 mg/1
Selenium 0.01 mg/1
Silver 0.05 mg/1
Nitrate (as N) 10. mg/1
Fluoride
(Annual average of maximum daily air
temperatures.)
a) 53. 7F & below 2.4 mg/1
b) 53. 8-58. 3F 2.2 mg/1
c) 58. 4-63. 8F 2.0 mg/1
d) 63. 9-70. 6F 1.8 mg/1
e) 70. 7-79. 2F 1.6 mg/1
f) 7.9. 3-90. 5F 1.4 mg/1
• Endrin 0.0002 mg/1
• Lindane 0.004 mg/1
• Methoxychlor 0.1 mg/1
• Toxaphene 0.005 mg/1
• 2, 4-D 0.1 mg/1
• 2, 4, 5-TP (Silvex) 0.01 mg/1
• 1 TO monthly average ' (up to 5 TO monthly
average may apply at state option) i OR
• 5 TO average of 2 consecutive days
When using membrane filter test:
Monitoring Requirement^
Surfacewater: every
year
Groundwater: every 3
years
Surfacewater only:
every 3 years or more
frequent at state
discretion
Surfacewater: daily
Groundwater: as
specified by Btata
• 1 colony/100 ml for the average of all monthly samples; and
• 4 colonies/100 ml in more than 1 sample. if less than 20 samples
are collected per mo. ; OR
• 4 colonies/100 ml in more than 5% of the samples if .20 or more
samples are examined per mo.
When using multiple-tube fermentation test: (10-ml portions)
• Coliform shall not be present in more than 10* of the portions
per mo.;
• Not more than 1 sample may have 3 or more portions positive when
less than 20 samples are examined per mo.; OR
• Not more than 5% of the samples may have 3 or more portions posi-
tive when 20 or more samples are examined per mo.
• Gross Alpha 15 pCi/1
• Combined Ra-226
and Ra-228 5 pCi/1
• Gross Beta 50 pCi/1
• Tritium 20,000 pCi/1
• Strontium-90 8 pCi/1
Every 4 years
•For all non-community water systems, initial sampling and testing must be conducted for nitrates.
ing, however, is at state option.
tSystems using surface and/or groundwater.
§For microbiological monitoring requirements; see Table A-2.
Routine tast-
A-2
-------
TABLE A-2
COLIFORM SAMPLES REQUIRED PER POPULATION SERVED
Population served
Minimum
no. of sam-
ples per mo.
Population served
Minimum
no. of sam-
ples per mo.
25 to l,000t 1
1,001 to 2,500.. 2
2,501 to 3,300 3
3,301 to 4,100 4
4,101 to 4,900 5
4,901 to 5,800 6
5,801 to 6,700 7
6,701 to 7,600. 8
7,601 to 8,500.. 9
8,501 to 9,400 10
9,401 to 10,300 11
10,301 to 11,100 12
11,101 to 12,000 13
12,001 to 12,900 14
12,901 to 13,700 15
13,701 to 14,600 16
14,601 to 15,500 17
15,501 to 16,300 18
16,301 to 17,200 19
17,201 to 18,100 20
18,101 to 18,900 21
18,901 to 19,800 22
19,801 to 20,700 23
20,701 to 21,500 24
21,501 to 22,300 25
22,301 to 23,200 26
23,201 to 24,000 27
24,001 to 24,900 28
24,901 to 25,000 29
25,001 to 28,000 30
28,001 to 33,000 35
33,001 to 37,000 40
37,001 to 41,000 45
41,001 to 46,000 50
46,001 to 50,000 55
50,001 to 54,000 60
54,001 to 59,000 65
59,001 to 64,000 70
64,001 to 70,000 75
70,001 to 76,000 80
76,001 to 83,000 85
83,001 to 90,000....... 90
90,001 to 96,000 95
96,001 to 111,000 100
111,001 to 130,000 110
130,001 to 160,000 120
160,001 to 190,000 130
190,001 to 220,000 140
220,001 to 250,000 150
250,001 to 290,000 160
290,001 to 320,000 170
320,001 to 360,000 180
360,001 to 410,000 190
410,001 to 450,000 200
450,001 to 500,000 210
500,001 'to 550,000 220
550,001 to 600,000 230
600,001 to 660,000 240
660,001 to 720,000 250
720,001 to 780,000 260
780,001 to 840,000 270
840,001 to 910,000 280
910,001 to 970,000 .290
970,001 to 1,050,000 300
1,050,001.to 1,140,000 310
1,140,001 to 1,230,000 320
1,230,001 to 1,320;000 330
1,320,001 to 1,420,000 340
1,420,001 to 1,520,000 350
1,520,001 to 1,630,000 360
1,630,001'to 1,730,000 370
1,730,001 to 1,850,000 380
1,850,001 to 1,970,000 390
1,970,001 to 2,060,000 400
2,060,001 to 2,270,000 410
2,270,001 to 2,510,000. 420
2,510,001 to 2,750,000 430
2,750,001 to 3,020,000 440
3,020,001 to 3,320,000 450
3,320,001 to 3,620,000 460
3,620,001 to 3,960,000 470
3,960,001 to 4,310,000 480
4,310,001 to 4,690,000 490
More than 4,690,001 500
Source: EPA
tA community water system serving 25 to 1,000 persons, with written permission
from the state, may reduce this sampling frequency, except that in no case
shall it be reduced to less than one per quarter. The decision by the state
will be based on a history of no coliform bacterial contamination for that sys-
tem and on a sanitary survey by the state showing the water system to be sup-
plied solely by a protected groundwater source, free of sanitary defects.
A-3
-------
APPENDIX B
PROPOSED REVISIONS TO NIPDWR
(NATIONAL INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS)
B-l
-------
APPENDIX B
PROPOSED REVISIONS TO NIPDWR
In the Federal Register of July 19, 1979, EPA published proposed revisions
to the NIPDWR. The Summary of these proposals follows:
"These proposed regulations amend the National Interim Primary Drinking
Water Regulations (NIPDWR), promulgated according to Section 1412 of the Safe
Drinking Water Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 300f et seq. at 40 FR 59566 (December
24,1975) and 41 FR 28402 (July 9, 1976). These proposed amendments provide
greater latitude to small public water systems for determination of compliance
with the microbiological maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), specify alternative
analytical techniques that have been approved by EPA for determining compliance
with existing maximum contaminant levels, endorse fluoridation practices and add
a statement to the NIPDWR clarifying the apparent contradiction between setting a
MCL for fluoride and the beneficial uses of fluoride, add a statement to the
NIPDWR that water samples taken by the State may be used to determine compliance,
add a statement to the NIPDWR that clarifies that water systems shall submit to
the State upon request any records required to be maintained by the NIPDWR,
require water systems that have completed a public notification to submit to the
State a representative copy of the public notification, change the time when
results of monitoring are requried to be submitted to the State, required com-
munity water systems to conduct monitoring and reporting for sodium levels in
finished drinking water and require community water systems to implement
corrosion control programs under State direction.
Modifications to the NIPDWR relating to non-community water systems are also
proposed. These proposed amendments increase the latitude of the States with
regard to non-community water systems by providing an additional year for comple-
tion of nitrate monitoring, allow some non-community systems to exceed the 10
mg/1 nitrate level up to 20 mg/1 under certain controlled conditions, provide
latitude in turbidity monitoring requirements and include modifications to the
bacteriological monitoring frequency and public notification measures.
In addition, Increased latitude is provided to the States with respect to
requirements concerning public notification through the media for community water
systems."
B-2
-------
APPENDIX C
SECONDARY DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
C-l
-------
TABLE C-l
SECONDARY MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS FOR PUBLIC WATER SYSTEMS*
Contaminant Level
Chloride 250 mg/1
Color 15 color units
Copper 1 mg/1
Corrosivity Non-corrosive
Foaming Agents 0.5 mg/1
Iron 0.3 mg/1
Manganese 0.05 mg/1
Odor 3 Threshold Odor Number
pH Range 6.5-8*5
Sulfate 250 mg/1
Total Dissolved Solids 500 mg/1
Zinc 5 mg/1
^Monitoring is suggested at frequencies for inorganic contaminants in the primary
regulations, annually for surface waters, and every three years for ground-
waters. More frequent monitoring may be appropriate for specific contaminants
as requested by the State.
C-2
-------
APPENDIX D
»
BASIS FOR CAPITAL COSTS COMPUTATIONS
D-l
-------
APPENDIX D
BASIS FOR CAPITAL COSTS COMPUTATIONS
Construction costs for most facilities fall under the following categories
which are employed in this evaluation:
• Excavation and sitework includes work related to the applicable pro-
cess, not general sitework such as sidewalks, roads, driveways, or
landscaping.
• Manufactured equipment includes the estimated purchase cost of pumps,
drives, process equipment, specific purpose controls, and other items
which are factory made and sold with equipment.
• Concrete includes the delivered cost of ready mix concrete and concrete
forming materials.
• Steel includes reinforcing steel for concrete and miscellaneous steel
not included with manufactured equipment.
• Labor associated with installing manufactured equipment, piping and
valves, constructing concrete forms and placing concrete, and reinforc-
ing steel.
• Pipes and valves includes the purchase of cast iron pipes, steel pipe,
valves, fittings, and associated support devices.
• Electrical and instrumentation includes the cost of process electrical
equipment and wiring and general instrumentation associated with other
process equipment.
• Housing represents all material and labor costs associated with the
buildings, including heating, ventilating, air conditioning, lighting,
normal 'convenience outlets, and the slab and foundation.
In this analysis, the capital cost factors were:
10 percent for engineering
5 percent for sitework,, piping, etc.
12 percent for general contractor's overhead
5 to 7 percent for legal, fiscal, and administration
7 percent of capacity cost for interest during construction (current
interest rates are higher)
The costs are current as of October, 1978. Table D-l summarizes the cost
indices used in determining the construction costs.
D-2
-------
TABLE D-l. COST INDICES AS OF OCTOBER 1978
Category ; Source Value
Excavation and sitework ENR* skilled labor 247.0
Manufactured equipment BLS** #114 221.3
Concrete BLS #132 221.1
Steel BLS #101.3 262.1
Labor ENR skilled labor 247.0
Pipes & valves BLS #114.901 236.4
Electrical & instrumentation BLS #117 167.5
Housing ENR building cost 254.8
^Engineering News Record
**Bureau of Labor Statistics
D-3
-------
APPENDIX E
BASIS FOR ANNUAL O&M COST COMPUTATIONS
(OPERATION AND MANTENANCE)
B-l
-------
APPENDIX E
BASIS FOR ANNUAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE (O&M) COSTS COMPUTATIONS
The annual costs for operating and maintaining a water utility are highly
variable, depending on local conditions. However, certain basic elements are com-
mon to all operations. These include:
• Labor
• Maintenance materials
• Energy
The total O&M costs for the common treatment processes are a composite of
labor, maintenance materials (including chemicals), and energy costs. They do
not, however, include the cost of monitoring and surveillance to comply with the
SDWA requirements, nor do they include administrative costs.
LABOR
The labor requirements represented in the O&M cost curves indicate the total
requirement to adequately operate and maintain the facilities. Manhour require-
ments for the treatment facilities are based on desirable levels of operator
attention for each type of plant, with some allowance made for both preventive
and unscheduled maintenance activities. The annual payroll manhours are based on
2,080 hours per year and an hourly rate of $10/hour (salary and fringe benefits)
was used to convert manhours to an annual cost.
MAINTENANCE MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES
Maintenance material costs include the cost of periodic replacement of com-
ponent parts necessary to keep the treatment facilities operating and functioning
properly. Examples of maintenance material items included are valves, motors,
instrumentation, and other process items of similar nature. The maintenance
material requirements do not normally include the cost of chemicals required for
process operation. Chemical costs are Included as part of the total O&M costs
based on the following:
Chemical Cost
Lime ' $40/ton
Alum $70/ton
Chlorine $300/ton
Sodium Hypochlorite $650/ton
Polymer $2/lb
Salt $30/ton
NaOH $200/ton
It should be noted however, that for small treatment facilities, the cost of
chemicals will be significantly higher than the estimates shown above. Table E-l
provides more realistic chemical costs for use by small treatment systems.
E-2
-------
TABLE E-l. WATER TREATMENT CHEMICAL COSTS FOR SMALL TREATMENT SYSTEMS
Chemical
Packaging size
Cost*
Activated Carbon
(Powdered)
Alum
65 Ib bags
100 Ib bags
1-14 bags, 44.45 cents per Ib
15-28 bags, 41.95 cents per Ib
29-50 bags, 39.45 cents per Ib
1-9 bags, $16 per bag
10-20 bags, $11 per bag
21-100 bags, $9.25 per bag
Chlorine
100 Ib cylinders
1-9 cylinders, $30 per cylinder
10-24 cylinders, $26 per cylinder
Hydrated Lime
Polymer (dry)
(wet)
50 Ib bags
50 Ib & 100 Ib
55 gallon drums
1-40 bags, $2.85 per bag
41-200 bags, $2.23 per bag
varies,use $2.25 per Ib
varies, use $0.30 per Ib
*Based on January 1977 price levels
E-3
-------
Energy requirements include both process energy and building related energy.
To determine a total annual energy cost, energy requirements first must be com-
puted in terms of kw-hr per year for electricity, and cubic feet per year for
natural gas. For the O&M estimates an average building-related demand of 102.6
kwh-hr/sq ft/yr was used. Process electrical energy and natural gas requirements
were calculated using manufacturers' data for different treatment plant com-
ponents. The total energy requirements were then converted to an annual cost
based on $0.03/kw-hr for electricity, $1.20/1000 cu ft for natural gas, and
$0.45/gal for Diesel fuel. Current prices for natural gas and Diesel fuel are
higher.
• Chlorine Gas Disinfection
2 mg/1 chlorine dose
<1 mgd - direct feed without storage
1-100 - direct feed with cylinder storage
• Direct Filtration/Chlorination
<1 mgd - package gravity filter plant
1-100 mgd - conventional unit process facilities
all capacities - 20 mg/1 alum dose
-0.1 mg/1 polymer dose
- 2 mg/1 chlorine dose
• Sedimentation/Filtration/Chlorination
<1 mgd - package complete treatment plant
1-100 mgd - conventional unit process facilities
all capacities - 50 mg/1 alum dose
- 0.2 mg/1 polymer dose
- 2 mg/1 chlorine dose
- 20 mg/1 sodium hydroxide dose
• Waste Processing and Disposal
all capacities - haul distance 20 miles, one-way
Mechanical Dewatering
all capacities - gravity thickening prior to basket centrifuge or
vacuum filtration
- dewatering
Sand Drying Beds
all capacities - land cost not included
Liquid Sludge Hauling
1-100 mgd - gravity thickening prior to hauling
Discharge to Sanitary Sewer .
all capacities - existing sewers used; sludge concentration 5,000 mg/1
- user charge of $100/mil gal waste treated
E-4
-------
APPENDIX F
RATIONALE FOR NATIONAL INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
F-I
-------
o
m
3)
Z
2
. m
TABLE F-l RATIONALE FOR NATIONAL INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
Ttrt or
CORMOIUBT
INORGANIC
CHEMICALS
ORGANIC
CHEMICALS
TURBIDITY
MICROBIOLOGI-
CAL CONTAMINANTS
RADIOLOGICAL
CONTAMINANTS
NAME OF
CONTAMINANT
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Sliver
Fluoride
Nitrate (as N)
CHLORINATED HYDR(
Endrin
CHLOROPHENOXYS-HE
2. *-D
?• iiJ'D
Turbidity
Ccliform
Bacteria
Natural Gross
alpha
Combined Ra - 226
and Ra - 228
Man-made Gross
beta
activity Tritium
Strontfuffl - 90
HEALTH EFFECTS OF CONTAMINANTS
Short term- 100 rag causes severe poisoning
Long term - Increased blood pressure, and nerve block
Short term- 550 DUE Is fital dose
Long term - Concentrates In liver, kidneys, pancreas, and
Long term - Skin sensitization, kidney damage
Long term - Constipation, loss of appetite, anemia, tenderness,
pain fi gradual paralysis in the muscles,
especially the arms. Cumulative poison. Use of
water with more than 2 mg/1 for 3 months can
be harmful.
the salivary glands, loosening of teeth. Mercury
poisoning may be acute or chronic
Long term - Red staining of fingers, teeth and hair, general
weakness, depression, irritation of the nose
and throat
mucous membranes
Long term - Stained spots on the teeth (mottling)-the amount
of discoloration depends on the amount of fluoride
ingested
Short term- Lethal dose is 2,000 mg/1
Short term- Serious or fatal blood disorder in infants, In
excess amounts of (500 mg/1 or greater)-irrltation
of the mucous lining of the gastrointestinal
tract and bladder.
ARBONS-PESTICIDES ]
Long term - Cause symptoms of poisoning which differ in
intensity. The severity is related to concentra-
tion of the chemicals in the nervous system,
primarily in the brain. Mild exposure causes head-
aches, dizziness, numbness and weakness of the
extremities. Severe exposure leads to spasms in-
volving entire muscle groups, leading in some cases
to convulsions. Suspected of beine carcinoaenic .
tBICIDES |
Long" term - Liver damage, gastrointestinal irritation
ing organisms, therefore possibly exposing the
consumer to disease causing organisms
disease-causing organisms may be present in
Long term - Bone cancer
Long term - Bone cancer
BASIS FOR ESTABLISHING MCL*
10% of typical daily intake
from threshold limit in air
27% of typical daily intake
Reasonable safety factor to
frevent dermal effects
afety factor of 2 for long term
exposure
25% of typical daily intake.
effects. 13% of typical daily
intake
Safety factor of 3. 10% typical
intake
body tissue. MCL .is set to avoid
discoloration with lifetime
exposure
Long and extensive experience
with natural fluoride water?
To protect majority of infants.
Does not appear to have safety
factor for all infants
pending complete survey
50% of safe level of In take -
pending complete survey
disinfection and to maintain
chlorine residual during
distribution
Bacteriological safety
pending complete survey
SOURCES
Well water, natural mineral deposits,
pesticides, herbicides
oalnt Industry
Electroplating, galvanized pipe, food
Wastes from chrotn- plating shops, cross con-
nections to chromate-treated cooling water
Food, air, water, tobacco smoke, lead pipe
Ubigultous in environment as result of
use in industry and agriculture. Chlor-
alkali mfg. plants. Slimlcldes. Mercurial
seed treatment
Shallow well waters. Natural in soils
Natural occurence in deep well waters
Natural occurence, principally in shallow
wells and springs, fertilizers, septic
Herbicides
Fecal pollution of water sources, or con-
tamination of water in distribution
Natural radionuclides, nuclear weapons,
nuclear fuels, Pharmaceuticals
ro
*Based on daily human Intake of 2 liters of water per day
-------
PART IV:
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
WATER PROGRAMS
National Interim Primary Drinking
Water Regulations
•WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 24, 1975
•FRIDAY, JUIY 9, W6
thurtdayi1 November £9, 1979
Tuesday. March II, 1980
Wednesday, August 27, 1980
-------
Subpart A—General
§ 141.1 Applicability.
This part establishes primary drinking
.water regulations pursuant to section
11412 of the Public Health Service Act. as
amended by the Safe Drinking Water
Act (Pub. L. 93-523); and related regula-
tions applicable to public water systems.
§ 141.2 Definitions.
As used in this part, the term:
(a) "Act" means the Public Health
Service Act, as amended by the Safe
Drinking Water Act. Pub. L. 93-523.
(b) "Contaminant" means any physi-
cal, chemical, biological, or radiological
substance or matter in water.
(c) "Maximum contaminant level"
means the maximum permissible level of
a contaminant in water which is de-
livered to the free flowing outlet of the
ultimate user of a public water system,
except in the case of turbidity where the
maximum permissible level is measured
at the point of entry to the distribution
system. Cbntaminants added to the water
under circumstances controlled by the
user, except those resulting from corro-
sion of piping and plumbing caused by
water quality, are excluded from this
definition.
(d) "Person" means an Individual,
corporation, company, association, part-
nership, State, municipality, or Federal
agency.
(e) "Public water system" means a
system for the provision to the public
of piped water for human consumption,
If such system has at least fifteen service
connections or regularly serves an aver-
age of at least twenty-five individuals
dally at least 60 days out of the year.
Such term includes (1) any collection,
treatment, storage, and distribution fa-
cilities under control of the operator of
such system and used primarily in con-
nection with such system, and (2) any
collection or pretreatment storage facili-
ties not under such control which are
used primarily In connection with such
system. A public water system is either
a "community water system" or a "non-
community water system."
(i) "Community water system" means
a public water system which serves at
least 15 service connections used by year-
round residents or regularly serves at
least 25 year-round residents.
(11) "Non-community water system"
means a public water system that Is not
a community water system.
(f) "Sanitary survey" means an on-
site review of the water source, facili-
ties, equipment, operation and mainte-
nance of a public water system for the
purpose of evaluating the adequacy of
such source, facilities, equipment, op-
eration and maintenance for producing
and distributing safe drinking water.
(g) "Standard sample" means the
aliquot of finished drinking water that is
examined for the presence of coliform
bacteria.
(h) "State" means the agency of the
State government which has jurisdic-
tion over public water systems. During
any period when a State does not have
primary enforcement responsibility
pursuant to Section 1413 of the Act, the
term "State" means the Regional Ad-
ministrator, U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency.
(i) "Supplier of water" means any
person who owns or operates a public
water system.
- (J) "Dose equivalent" means the prod-
uct of the absorbed dose from Ionizing
radiation and such factors as account for
differences In biological effectiveness due
to the type of radiation and Its distribu-
tion in the body as specified by the In-
ternational Commission on Radiological
Units and Measurements -.
or more individuals, and 4 years after . ,^
the date of promulgation for *"°
communities serving 10,000 to 74.999
individuals.
(c) The regulations set forth in 141.11
(a), (c) and (d); 141.14(a)(l);
141.21 (a), (c) and (i); 141.22 (a) and (e);
141.23 (a)(3) and (a)(4); 141.23(f);
141.24(a)(3); 141.24 (e) and (f); 141.2S(e);
141.27(a); 141.28 (a) and (b); 141.31 (a). ' fyx
(c). (d) and (e); 141.32(b)(3); and ^
141.32(d) shall take effect immediate^ f\j
upon promulgation.
(d) The regulations set forth in i41.4f
shall take effect 18 months from the date
of promulgation. Suppliers must
complete the first round of sampling and
reporting within 12 months following the
effective date.
(e) The regulations set forth in 141.42
shall take effect 18 months from the date
of promulgation. All requirements in
141.42 must be completed within 12
months following the effective date.
-------
Subpart B—Maximum Contaminant Levels
§ 141.11 Maximum contaminant levels for
Inorganic chemicals.
(a) The MCL for nitrate is applicable
to both community water systems and
non-community water systems except as
provided by in paragraph (d). The levels
for the other organic chemicals apply
only to community water"systems.
Compliance with MCLs for inorganic
chemicals is calculated pursuant to
S 141.23.
(b) The following are the maximum
contaminant levels for inorganic chemi-
cals other than fluoride:
Level,
milligrams
Contaminant per liter
Arsenic 0.05
Barium 1.
Cadmium —, 0.010
Chromium 0.05
Lead - 0.05
Mercury 0.002
Nitrate (as N) - 10.
Selenium 0.01
Sliver —- 0.05
(c) When the annual average of the
maximum daily air temperatures for the
location in which the community water
system is situated is the following, the
maximum contaminant levels for fluoride
are:
Temperature
Degrees
Fahrenheit
Drprocs Celsius
Level,
milligrams
per liter
5S.7 and below 12.0 and below 2.4
88.8to58.3 12.1 to 14.6 2.2
M.4to63.8 14.71017.6 2.0
6».9to70.6 17.7to21.4 1.8
70.7to79.2 21.5 to 26.2 1.6
79.81000.5 .- 26.31032.5 1.4
(c) Fluoride at optimum levels in
drinking water has been shown to have
beneficial effects in reducing the
occurrence of tooth decay.
(d) At the discretion of the State,
nitrate levels not to exceed 20 mg/1 may
be allowed in a non-community water
system if the supplier of water
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the
State that:
Jl) Such water will not be available to
children under 6 months of age; and
(2) There will be continuous posting of
the fact that nitrate levels exceed 10
mg/1 and the potential health effects of
exposure; and
. (3) Local and State public health
'authorities will be notified annually of
nitrate levels that exceed 10 mg/1; and
(4) No adverse health effects shall
result.
§ 141.12 Maximum contaminant levels for
organic chemicals.
The following are the maximum
contaminant levels for organic
chemicals. The maximum contaminant
levels for organic chemicals in
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section ' .
apply to all community water systems.
Compliance with the maximum .
contaminant levels in paragraphs (a)
and (b) is calculated pursuant to
§ 141.24. The maximum comtaminant
level for total,trihalomethanes in
paragraph (c) of this section applies only
to community water systems which •
serve a population of 10,000 or more
individuals and which add a . .
disinfectant (oxidant) to the water in
any part of the drinking water treatment
process. Compliance with the maximum
contaminant level for total
trihalomethanes is calculated pursuant
to § 141.30.
Level.
milligrams
per liter
(a) Chlorinated hydrocarbons:
Endrin (1,2,3,4,10, 10-hexachloro- 0.0002
6,7-epoxy-l,4, 4a,5,6,7,8,8a-octa-
hydro-l,4-endo, endo-5,8 - dl-
methano naphthalene).
Lindane (1.2,3,4.6,6-hexachloro- 0.004
cyclohexane, gamma Isomer).
Methoxychlor (1,1,1-Trlchloro- 0.1
2, 2 - bis [p-methoxyphenyl]
ethane).
Toxaphene (C10H10Cl,-Technlc»l 0.005
chlorinated camphene, 67-S9
percent chlorine).
(b) Chlorophenoxys:
2,4 - D, (2,4-Dlchlorophenoxyace- 0.1
tic acid).
2,4,5-TP Sllvex (2,4,5-Trlchloro- 0.01
phenoxyproplonlc acid).
(c) Total trihalomethanes (the sum of
the concentrations of
bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane,
tribromomethane (bromofonn) and
trichloromethane (chloroform])
0.10 mg/1.
§ 141.13 Maximum contaminant level*
for turbidity.
The maximum contaminant levels for
turbidity are applicable to both commu-
nity water systems and non-community
water systems using surface water
sources in whole or in part. The maxi-
mum contaminant levels for turbidity
in drinking water, measured at a repre-
sentative »ntry point(s) to the distribu-
tion system, are:
(a) One turbidity unit (TU), as de-
termined by a monthly average pursuant
to § 141.22, except that five or fewer
turbidity units may be allowed if the
supplier of water can demonstrate to the
State that the higher turbidity does not
do any of the following:
(1) Interfere with disinfection;
(2) Prevent maintenance of an effec-
tive disinfectant agent throughout the
distribution system; or
(3) Interfere with microbiological
determinations.
(b) Five turbidity units based on an
average for two consecutive days pursu-
ant to § 141.22.
§ 141.14 Maximum microbiological con-
taminant levels.
The maximum contaminant levels for
coliform bacteria, applicable to com-
munity water systems and'non-c
munity water systems, are as folll
(a) When the membrane filter tl _
nique pursuant to ! 141.21 (a) is used,
the number of coliform bacteria shall
not exceed any of the following:
(1) One per 100 milliliters as the
arithmetic mean of all samples
examined per compliance period
pursuant to § 141.21(b) or (c), except
that, at the primacy Agency's discretion
systems required to take 10 or fewer
samples per month may be authorized to
exclude one positive routine sample per
month from the monthly calculation if:
(i) as approved on a case-by-case basis
the State determines and indicates in
writing to the public water system that
no unreasonable risk to health existed
under the conditions of this
modification. This determination should
be based upon a number of factors not
limited to the following: (A) the system
provided and had maintained an active
disinfectant residual in the distribution
system, (B) the potential for
contamination as indicated by a
sanitary survey, and (C) the history of
ihe water quality at the public water
system (e.g. MCL or monitoring .
violations]; (ii] the supplier initiates a
check sample on each of two
consecutive days from the same
sampling point within 24 hours after
notification that the routine sample is <
positive, and each of these check
samples is negative; and (iii) the original
positive routine sample is reported and
recorded by the supplier pursuant to
{ 141.31(a) and § 141.33(a). The supplier
shall report to the State its compliance
with the conditions specified in this
paragraph and a summary of the
corrective action taken to resolve the
prior positive sample result. If a positive
routine sample is not used for the
monthly calculation, another routine
sample must be analyzed for compliance
purposes. This provision may be used
only once during two consecutive
compliance periods.
(2) Four per 100 milliliters in more
than one sample when less than 20 are
examined per month; or
(3) Four per 100 milliliters in more
than five percent of the samples when
20 or more are examined per month.
(b) (1) When the fermentation tube
method and 10 milliliter standard por-
tions pursuant to § 141.21 (a) are used
coliform bacteria shall not be present In
any of the following:
(i) More than 10 percent of the
portions (tubes) in any one month
pursuant to § 141.21 (b) or (c) except
that, at the State's discretion, systems
required to take 10 or fewer samples per
month may be authorized to exclude on
positive routine sample resulting in one
or more positive tubes per month from
the monthly calculation if: (A) as
approved on a case-by-case basis the
State determines and indicates, in
writing to the public water system that
-------
ao unreasonable risk to health existed
under the conditions of this
modification. This determination should
kba based upon a number of factors not
'limited to the following: (1) the system
provided and had maintained an active
disinfectant residual in the distribution
system, (2) the potential for •
contamination as indicated by a
sanitary survey, and (3) the history of
tha water quality at the public water
system (e.g. MCL or monitoring
violations); (B) the supplier initiates a
check sample on each of two
consecutive days from the sampling
point within 24 hours after notification
that the routine sample is positive, and
each of these check samples is negative;
and (C) the original positive routine
cample is reported and recorded by the
supplier pursuant to § 141.31(a) and
§ 141.33(a). The supplier shall report to
the State its compliance with the
conditions specified in this paragraph
and report the action taken to resolve
the prior positive sample result. If a
positive routine sample is not used for
the monthly calculation, another routine
sample must be analyzed for compliance
purposes. This provision may be used
only once during two consecutive
comoliance neriods.
(11) three or more portions In more
than one sample when less than 20 sam-
ples are examined per month; or
(111) three or more portions in more
I than five percent of the samples when
20 or more samples are examined per
month.
(2) When the fermentation tube
method and 100 milliliter standard por-
tions pursuant to 8 141.21(a) are used,
conform bacteria shall not be present In
any of the following:
(i) More than 80 percent of the
portions (tubes) in any month pursuant
to § 141.21 (b) or (c), except that, State
discretion, systems required to take 10
or fewer samples per month may be
authorized to exclude one positive
routine sample resulting in one or mere
positive tubes per month from the
monthly calculation if: (A) as approved
on a case-bv-case basis the State
determines and Indicates in writing to. ,
the public water system that no
unreasonable risk to health existed
under the conditions of this
modification. This determination should
bo based upon a number of factors not
limited to the following: (1] the system
provided and had maintained an active
disinfectant residual hi the distribution
oystem, (2) the potential for
contamination as indicated by a • •.
sanitary survey, and (iii) the history of
the water quality at the public water
oyotem (e.g. MCL or monitoring
violations); (B) the supplier initiates two
consecutive daily check samples from
the same sampling point within 24 hours
after notification that the routine sample
is positive, and each of these check
samples is negative; and (C) the original
positive routine sample is reported and
recorded by the supplier pursuant to
§ 141.31(a) and § 141.33(a). The supplier
shall report to the State its compliance
with the conditions specified in this
paragraph and a summary of the
corrective action taken to. resolve the
prior positive sample result. If a positive
routine sample is not used for the
monthly calculation, another routine
sample must be analyzed for compliance
purposes. This provision may be used
only once during two consecutive
compliance periods.
(11) five portions in more than one
sample when less than five samples are
examined per month: or
(ill) five portions In more than 20
percent of the samples when five or more
samples are examined per month.
(c) For community or non-community
systems that are required to sample at a
rate of less than 4 per month, compli-
ance with paragraphs (a), (b)(l), or
(b) (2) of this section shall be based upon
sampling during a 3 month period, ex-
cept that, at the discretion of the State,
compliance may be based upon sampling
during a one-month period.
(d) If an average MCL violation is
caused by a single sample MCL
violation, then the case shall be treated
as one violation with respect to the
public notification requirements of
§141.32.
§ 141.IS Maximum contaminant levels
for radium-226, radium-228, and
grow alpha particle radioactivity in
community water systems.
The following are the maximum con-
taminant levels for radlum-226, radlum-
228, and gross alpha particle radio-
activity:
(a) Combined radium-226 and radl-
um-228—5 pCl/1.
(b) Gross alpha particle activity (In-
cluding radlum-226 but excluding radon
and uranium)—15 pCl/1. .
8 141.16 Maximum contaminant levels
for beta particle and photon radio-
activity from man-made radionu-
elides in community water systems.
(a) The average annual concentration
of beta particle and photon radioactivity
from man-made radionuclides in drink-
Ing water shall not produce an annual
dose equivalent to the total body or any
internal organ greater than 4 millirem/
year.
(b) Except for the radionuclides listed
In Table A, the concentration of man-
made radionuclides causing 4 mrem total
body or organ dose equivalents shall be
calculated on the basis of a 2 liter per
day drinking water Intake using the 168
hour data listed In "Maximum Permis-
sible Body Burdens and, Maximum Per-
missible 'Concentration of Radionuclides
in Air or Water for Occupational Ex-
posure," NBS Handbook 69 as amended
August 1963, U.S. Department of Com-
merce. If two or more radionuclides are
present, the sum of their annual dose
equivalent to the total body or to any
organ shall not exceed 4 mlllirem/year.
TABLE A.—Average annual concentration*
ostvmed to produce a total body or organ
dote of ^ mrem/i/r
Subpart C—Monitoring and Analytical
Requirements
§ 141.21 Microbiological contaminant
sampling and analytical rcquire-
. menls.
(a) Suppliers of water for community
and non-community water systems shall
analyze or use the services of an
approved laboratory for coliform
bacteria to determine compliance with
S 141.14. Analyses shall be conducted in
accordance with the analytical
recommendations set forth in "Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater," American Public
Health Association, 14th Edition,
Method 908A, Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3—
pp. 916-918; Method 908O, Table 908:I—
p. 923; Method 909A, pp. 928-935, or
"Microbiological Methods for '
Monitoring the Environment. Water and
Wastes." U.S. EPA, Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268—EPA-600/8-78-
017, December 1978. Available from
ORD Publications, CERI, U.S. EPA.
Cincinnati. Ohio 45268. Part III. Section
B 1.0 through 2.e:2. pp. 108-112; 2.7
through 2.7.2(c). pp. 112-113; Part fll,
Section B 4.0 through 4.6.4(c), pp. 114-
118, except that a standard sample size
shall be employed. The standard sample
used in the membrane filter procedure
shall be 100 milliliters. The standard
sample used in the 5 tube most probable
number (MPN) procedure (fermentation
tube method) shall be 5 times the
standard portion. The standard portion
is either 10 milliliters or 100 milliliters as
described in § 141.14 (b) and (c). The
samples shall be taken at points which
are representative of the conditions
within the distribution system.
(b)"The supplier of water for a com-
munity water system shall take coliform
density samples at .regular time inter-
vals, and in number proportionate to the
population served by the system. In no
event shall the frequency be less than as
set forth below:
Kedlonucllde
Critical organ
pCl
per filer
Tritium Totalbody...
Btrontium-90 Bone marrow.
20,000
Population served:
25 to 1,000.-
1,001 to 2,500
2,501 to 3,300
3,301 to 4,100
4,101 to 4,900
4,901 to 5.800
5,801 to 6,700
6,701 to 7,600
7,601 to 8,500
8,601 to 9.400
9,401 to 10,300
10,301 to 11,100
11,101 to 12,000
12,001 to 12,900
12,901 to 13,700
13,701 to 14,600
14,601 to 15,500
15,501 to 16,300
16,301 to 17,200
17.201 to 18,100
18,101 to 18,900
18,901 to 19 800
19,801 to 20,700
20,701 to 21,500
21,501 to 22.300
22,301 to 23,200
23.201 to 24,000
24,001 to 24,900
24,901 to 25,000
25,001 to 28,000
Minimum number of
samples per month,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
g
8
10
11
.:. 12
._., 18
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
-------
28,001 to 33.000 ____________________ 35
33.001 to 37.000 ____ ................ 40
37.001 to 41,000 .................... 45
4i.ooi to 46.000 .................... 60
mmi I°2«S .................... eo
MOO! to 59 ooo"" ................ 66
egiool to 64:ooo::::::::::::"":i" 70
64,ooi to 70,000 .......... . ......... 75
7o',ooi to 76!oooIIII"IIIIIII _______ so
76,001 to 83,ooo ____________________ 86
83,001 to 90.000 .................... 90
90,ooi to 96,000. ..... . ............. 96
EfSo.* Mib0^— " ........... " \w
i»oo SiwoSo ................ "" i»
I6o'ooi to IQO'OOO ............ ".'."'. 130
i90.'ooi to 220,000 .................. 140
220,001 to 250.ooo .................. 160
250,001 to 290,000 .................. 160
290.001 to 320.000.. ................ 170
320.001 to 360.000- ................ 180
2S nm r 4™ nnn .................. 300
*w 001 to 500,000 ...... 1::::"::::: 210
eoo'ooi to sso ooo ...... .. 220
55o!ooi to soo.ooo .................. 230
eoo.ool to 660,000 ...... ------------ 240
660,001 to 720,000 .................. 250
720,001 to 780,000 .................. 280
2o m! E SfS'SS .................. llo
SIooo! to &70 OTO"~ ............... a!x>
970001 to 1050066" ........ 300
1,050,001 to 1,140,000 ............... 3io
1,140,001 to i,23o,ooo ............... 320
1,230,001 to 1,320,000 --------------- 330
1,320.001 to 1,420,000- ............. 340
1,420,001 to 1.520,000 ............... 360
i «o£i £ '?3o ooo ............... STO
1 73owl to ! uoooH ........ Hi:::: 380
i'.85o[ooi to i[970.ooo ............... 390
i[97o[ooi to 2]o6o!ooo _______________ 400
2,060,001 to 2,270,000 ---------- . ----- 410
2,270,001 to 2,510.000 ............... 420
2,510,001 to 2.750,000 ........ . ...... 430
" -. .............. tw
:::::::::::::: SS
3,620,001 tc 3,960,000 ............... 470
3,960,001 to 4,310,000 _______________ 480
4,310;001 to 4,690,000 ...... - ........ 490
4,690,001 or more .................. 600
Based on a history of no eoliform bac-
terial contamination and on a sanitary
by the State showing the water
to be suDDUed sokiy by a pro-
tecte ground water ^source ! and free of
a. pnmrminitv water svs-
as to S Dysons witti
writtenermiilion from the S may
reduce thta samSing ^Trequency except
(c) The supplier of water for a non-
shall be
bactena m each calendar quarter that
the system provides water to the public.
Such sampling shall begin within two
years after promulgation. The State can
adjust the monitoring frequency on the
basis of a sanitary survey, the existence
nfnrfHiHonnlsnfpoiiarHqmirhasa
of additional safeguards ouch as a
protective and enforced well code, or
accumulated analytical data. Such
frequency shall be confirmed or
modified on the basis of subsequent
surveys or data. The frequency shall not
be Juced until the non^onimunity
water system has performed at least one
coliform analysis of its drinking water
and shown to be in compliance with
§141.14.
When conform bacteria occur in all
five of the 100 ml portions of a single
sample (8 141.14(b)(2)>, at least two
''daily check samples shall be collected
and examined from the same sampling
p^t Additional check samples shall be
ejected daily, or at a frequency estab-
"^ed by the State, until the results ob-
talned from at least two consecutive
check samples show no positive tubes.
(4) The location at which the check
samples were taken pursuant to para-
graphs (d> (1) , (2) , or (3) of this section
shaU not be eilmmated from future sam-
without approval of the State. The
from all coliform bacterial analy-
ses performed pursuant to this subpart,
except those obtained from check sam-
pies and special purpose samples, shall be
u^d to determine compliance with the
maximum contaminant level for coliform
bacteria M established in § 141.14. Check
j»mpiesshaii not be included mcaicuiat-
Ing the total number of samples taken
each month to determine compliance
with 8 141.21 (b) or (C).
(e) when the presence of coliform
bacteria in water taken from a particular
sampling point has been confirmed by
any check samples examined as directed
ta Paragraphs (d) (1) . (2) , or (3) of this
***<>". the «uPP"er of water shall re-
P°r* *° the -State within 48 hours.
«> When a maximum contaminant
^el set forth In paragraphs (a) , (b) or
<«> <* « "1.14 Is exceeded, the supplier
! 141-32- ,
(g) Special purpose samples, such as
^os* taken to determine whether dis-
jnfectjon practices following pipe place-
ment, replacement, or repair have been
sufficient, shall not be used to determine
compliance with § 141.14 or 1 141.21 (b)
or A supplier of water of a corn-
mun}*y w&ter system or a non-com-
munlty water system may. with the
approval of the State and based upon a
sanltery survey, substitute the use of
chlorine residual monitoring for not more
than 75 percent of the samples required
to be taken by paragraph (b) of this
section, Provided, That the supplier of
conditions, within the distribution sys-
tern at the frequency of at least four for
each substituted microbiological sample.
There shall be at least daily determina-
tions of chlorine residual. When the sup-
plier of water exercises the option pro-
vided in this paragraph (h) of th:
section, he shall maintain no less thi
0.2 mg/1 free chlorine throughout tl1
public water distribution system. When a
particular sampling point has been
shown to have a free chlorine residual
less than 0.2 mg/1, the water at that loca-
tion shall be retested as soon as prac-
ticable and in any event within one hour.
if the original analysis is confirmed, this
fact shall be reported to the State within
48 hours. Also, if the analysis Is con-
firmed, a sample for coliform bacterial
analysis must be collected from that
sampling point as soon as practicable and
preferably within one hour, and the re-
sults of such analysis _ reported to the
State within 48 hours 'after the results
are known to the supplier of water.
Analyses for residual chlorine shall be
made in accordance with "Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater," 13th Ed., pp. 129-132.
Compliance with the maximum con-
taminant levels for coliform bacteria
shall be determined on the monthly mean
or quarterly mean basis specified in
§ 141.14, including those samples taken
as a result of failure to maintain the re-
quired chlorine residual level. The State
may withdraw its approval of the use of
chlorine residual substitution at any
time.
(i) The State has the authority to
.determine compliance or initiate
enforcement action based upon
analytical results or other, information
•compiled by.their sanctioned
representatives and agencies.
§ 141.22 Titf&faltty sampfeg and sncSyted
requirements.
(a) Samples shall be taken by
suppliers of water for both community
and non-community water systems at a
representative entry point(s) to the
water distribution system at least once
per day. for the purpose of making
turbidity measurements to determine
compliance with § 141.13. If the State
determines that a reduced sampling
frequency in a non-community system
will not pose a risk to public health, it
can reduce the required sampling
frequency. The option of reducing the
turbidity frequency shall be permitted
only in those public water systems that
practice disinfection and which
maintain an active residual disinfectant
in the distribution system, and in those
cases where the State has indicated in
writing that no unreasonable risk to .
health existed under the circumstances
of this option. The turbidity
measurements shall be made by the
Nephelometric Method in accordance
with the recommendations set forth ta
"Standard Methods for Examination of
Water and Wastewater." American
Public Health Association. 14th Editioal
pp. 132-134: or Method 180.1.1- "
Nephrometric Method.
•*;••
-------
(b) If the result of a turbidity analysis
Indicates that the maximum allowable
limit has been exceeded; the sampling
and measurement shall be confirmed by
resampling as soon as practicable and
preferably within one hour. If the repeat
sample confirms that the maximum al-
lowable limit has been exceeded, the sup-
plier of water shall report to the State
within 48 hours. The repeat sample shall
be the sample used for the purpose of
calculating the monthly average. If the
monthly average of the daily samples
exceeds the maximum allowable limit, or
if the average of two samples taken on
consecutive days exceeds 5 TU, the sup-
plier of water shall report to the State
and notify the public as directed in
§ 141.31 and § 141.32.
(c) Sampling for non-community
water systems shall begin within two
years after the effective date of this part.
(d) The requirements of this § 141.22
shall apply only to public water systems
which use water obtained in whole or in
part from surface sources.
(e) The State has the authority to
determine compliance or initiate
enforcement action based upon
analytical results or other information
compiled by their sanctioned
representatives and agencies.
§ 141.23 Inorganic chemical sampling
und anal) liciil requirements.
(a) Analyses for the purpose of de-
termining compliance with § 141.11 are
required as follows:
(1) Analyses for all community water
systems utilizing surface water sources
shall be completed within one year fol-
lowing the effective date of this part.
These analyses shall be repeated at
yearly intervals.
(2) Analyses for all community water
systems utilizing only ground water
sources shall be completed within two
years following the effective date of this
part. These analyses shall be repeated
at three-year intervals.
(3) For non-community water systems,
whether supplied by surface or ground
sources, analyses for nitrate shall be
completed by December 24,1980. These
analyses shall be repeated at intervals
determined by the State.
(4) The State has the authority to
determine compliance or initiate
enforcement action based upon
analytical results and other information
compiled by their sanctioned
representatives and agencies.
(b) If the result of an analysis made
pursuant to paragraph (a) indicates that
the level of any contaminant listed in
§ 141.11 exceeds the maximum contam-
inant level, the supplier of water shall
report to the State within 7 days and
initiate three additional analyses at the
same sampling point within one month.
(c) When the average of four analyses
made pursuant to paragraph (b) of this
section, rounded to the same number of
significant figures as the maximum con-
taminant level for the substance in ques-
tion, exceeds the maximum contaminant
level, the supplier of water shall notify
the State pursuant to 8141.31 and give
notice to the public pursuant to § 141.32.
Monitoring after public notification shall
be at a frequency designated by the State
and shall continue until the maximum
contaminant level has not been exceeded
in two successive samples or until a mon-
itoring schedule as a condition to a
variance, exemption or enforcement ac-
tion shall become effective.
(d) The provisions of paragraphs (b)
and (c) of this section notwithstanding,
compliance with the maximum contam-
inant level for nitrate shall be determined
on the basis of the mean of two analyses.
When a level exceeding the maximum
contaminant level for nitrate is found,
a second analysis shall be initiated within
24 hours, and if the mean of the two
analyses exceeds the maximum contam-
inant level, the supplier of water shall
report his findings to the State pursuant-
to 9 141.31 and shall notify the public
pursuant to § 141.32.
(e) For the initial analyses required
by paragraph (a)(l), (2) or (3) of this
section, data for surface waters acquired
within one year prior to the effective date
and data for ground waters acquired
within 3 years prior to the effective date
of this part may be substituted at the
discretion of the State.
(f) Analyses conducted to determine
compliance with § 141.11 shall be made
in accordance with the following
methods:
(1) Arsenic—Method ' 206.2, Atomic
Absorption Furnace Technique; or
Method ' 208.3, or Method 4D2972-78A.
or Method *301.A VII, pp. 159-162, or
Method 31-1082-78. pp. 61-63, Atomic
Absorption—Gaseous Hydride; or
Method ' 208.4, or Method 4D-2972-78A.
or Method '404-A and 404-Bf4),
Spectrophotometric, Silver
Diethyldithiocarbamate. " • -
(2) Barium—Method' 208.1. or
Method1301-A IV. pp. 152-155, Atomic
Absorption—Direct Aspiration: or
Method1208-2. Atomic Absorption
Furnace Technique..
(3) Cadmium—Method 1213.1. or
Method 4 3557-78A or B, or Method *
301-A II or III. pp. 148-152, Atomic
Absorption—Direct Aspiration; or
Method ' 213.2, Atomic Absorption •
Furnace Technique. .
(4) Chromium—Method 1218.1. or
Method 4D-1687-77D, or Method "301-
A II or III. pp. 148-152, Atomic
Absorption—Direct Aspiration; or
Chromium—Method ' 218.2, Atomic
Absorption Furnace Technique.
(5) Lead—Method ' 239.1. or Method 4
D-3559-78A or B, or Method * 301-A II
or HI, pp. 148-152, Atomic Absorption—
Direct Aspiration; or Method ' 239.2,
Atomic Absorption Furnace Technique.
(6) Mercury—Method * 245.1. or ;
Method 4D-3223-79, or Method * 301-A
VI. pp. 158-159. Manual Cold Vapor
Technique; or Method ' 245.2,
Automated Cold Vapor Technique.. ' .
(7) Nitrate—Method ' 352,1. or
Method 4D-992-71, or Method '419-D,
pp. 427-429, Colorimetric Brucine; or
Method '353.3, or Method 4D-3867-79B.
or Method * 419-C, pp. 423-427.
Spectrometric, Cadmium Reduction;
Method ' 353.1. Automated Hydrazine
Reduction; or Method ' 353.2, or.
Method 4D-3887-79A. or Method *605,
pp. 820-624, Automated Cadmium
Reduction.
(8) Selenium—Method ' 270.2. Atomic
Absorption Technique; or Method '
270.3; or Method * 1-1667-78. pp. 237-239,
or Method 4 D-3859-79, or Method * 301-
A VII, pp. 159-182. Hydride
Generation—Atomic Absorption
Spectrophotometry.
(9) Silver—Method ' 272.1, or Method *
301-A n, Atomic Absorption—Direct
Aspiration; or Method ' 272.2, Atomic
Absorption Techniques Furnace
Technique.
(10) Fluoride—Electrode Method, or
SPADNS Method. Method '414-B and C.
pp. 391-394, or Method ' 340.1,
"Colorimetric SPADNS with Bellack
Distillation," or Method '340.2.
"Potentimetric Ion Selective Electrode;"
or ASTM Method 4 D1179-72; or
Colorimetric Method with Preliminary
Distillation. Method '603, Automated
Complexone Method (Alizarin Fluoride
Blue) pp. 614-616; or Automated
Electrode Method, "Fluoride in Water •
and Wastewater," Industrial Method
#380-75VVE, Technicon Industrial
Systems. Tarrytown.-New York 10591,
February 1976, or "Fluoride in Water .
and Wastewater Industrial Method
#129-71W," Technicon Industrie?
Systems. Tarrytown, New York 10591,
December 1972; or Fluoride, Total,
Colorimetic, Zirconium—Eriochrome
Cyanine R Method *—1-3325-78. pp.
365-367.
§141.24 Organic chemical* other than
total trlhalmmthanea, sampling and
analytical requirements.
(a) An analysis of substances for the .
purpose of determining compliance with
§ 141.12(a) and § 141.12(b) shall be made
as follows:
(1) For all community water systems
utilizing surface water sources, analyses
shall be completed within one year fol-
lowing the effective date of this part.
Samples analyzed shall be collected dur-
ing the period of the year designated by
the State as the period when contami-
nation by pesticides is most likely to
occur. These analyses shall be repeated
at Intervals specified by the State but
in no event less frequently than at three
year Intervals.
(2) For community water systems
utilizing only ground water sources,
analyses shall be completed by those sys-
tems specified by the State.
(3) The State has the authority to
determine compliance or initiate
enforcement action based upon
analytical results and other information
compiled by their sanctioned
representatives and agencies.
(b) If the result of an analysis made
pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section
indicates that the level of any
contaminant listed in § 141.24 (a) and (b)
-------
exceeds the maximum contaminant
level, the supplier of water shall report
to the State within 7 days and initiate
three additional analyses within one
month. •
(c) When the average of four analyses
made pursuant to paragraph (b) of this
section, rounded to the same number of
significant figures as the maximum con-
taminant level for the substance in ques-
tion, exceeds the maximum contaminant
level, the supplier of water shall report
to the State pursuant to § 141.31 and give
notice to the public pursuant to § 141.32.
Monitoring after public notification shall
be at a'frequency designated by the State
and shall continue until the maximum
contaminant level has not been exceeded
in two successive samples or until a
monitoring schedule as a condition to ft
variance, exemption or enforcement ac-
tion shall become effective.
(d) For the initial analysis required
by paragraph (a) (1) and (2) of this
section, data for surface water acquired
within one year prior to the effective
date of this part and data for ground
water acquired within three years prior
to the effective date of this part may be
substituted at the discretion of the State.
[ej Analysis made to determine
compliance with § 141.12(a) shall be
made in accordance with "Methods for
Organochlorine Pesticides and
Chlorophenoxy Acid Herbicides in
Drinking Water and Raw Source
Water," available from ORD
Publications, CERI, EPA, Cincinnati.
Ohio 45268; or "Organochlorine
Pesticides in Water," 1977 Annual Book
of ASTM Standards, part 31, Water,
Method D3088; or Method 509-A, pp. .
555-565;2 or Gas Chromatographic
Methods for Analysis of Organic
Substances in Water,5 USGS, Book 5,
Chapter A-5, pp. 24-39.
(f) Analysis made to determine
compliance with § 141.12(b) shall be
conducted in accordance with "Methods
for Organochlorine Pesticides and •
Chlorophenoxy Acid Herbicides in
Drinking Water and Raw Source
Water," available from ORD
Publications, CERI, EPA, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45268; or "Chlorinated Phenoxy
Acid Herbicides in Water," 1977 Annual
Book of ASTM Standards, part 31,
Method D3478; or Method 509-B, pp. ...
555-5692; 2 or Gas Chromatographic
Methods for Analysis of Organic
Substances in Water,6 USGS, Book 5,
Chapter A-3, pp. 24-39.
1 "Methods of Chemical Analysis of Water and
Wastes," EPA Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory. Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 (EPA-
600/4-79-020). March 1979. Available from ORD
Publications, CERI, EPA. Cincinnati. Ohio 45268. Pot
approved analytical procedures for metals, the
technique applicable to total metals must be used.
'"Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater." 14th Edition. American
Public Health Association, American Water Works
Association. Water Pollution Control Federation.
1976.
§ 141.25 Analytical Methods for Radio.
activity.
(a) The methods specified in Interim
Radiochemlcal Methodology tor Drink-
ing Water, Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory, EPA-600/4^75-
008. USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268, or
those listed below, are to be used to de-
termine compliance with §S 141.15 and
141.18 (radioactivity) except In cases
where alternative methods have been ap-
proved in accordance with { 141.27.
(1) Gross Alpha and Beta—Method
302 "Gross Alpha and Beta Radioactivity
in Water" Standard Methods for the Ex-
amination of Water and Wastewater.
13th Edition, American Public Health
Association, New York, N.Y., 1971.
(2) Total Radium—Method 304 "Ra-
dium in Water by Precipitation" Ibid.
(3) Radium-226—Method 305 "Radl-
um-226 by Radon in Water" Ibid.
(4) Strontlum-89,90 — Method 303
"Total Strontium and Strontium-90 In
Water" Ibid.
(5) Tritium—Method 306 "Tritium In
Water" Ibid.
(6) Cesiura-134 — ASTM D-2459
"Gamma Spectrometry in Water," 1975.
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Water
and Atmospheric Analysis, Part 31,
American Society for Testing and Mate-
rials, Philadelphia, PA. (1975). -
(7) Uranium—ASTM D-2907 "Micro-
quantities of Uranium In Water by
Pluorometry," Ibid.
(b) When the Identification and meas-
urement of radionuclides other than
those listed in paragraph (a) is required,
the following references are to be used,
except in cases where alternative
methods have been approved in accord-
ance with § 141.27.
(1) Procedures for Radiochemlcal
Analysis of Nuclear Reactor Aqueous So-
lutions. H. L. Krieger and S. Gold, EPA-
R4-73-014. USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio,
May 1973.
(2) HASL Procedure Manual, Edited
by John H. Harley. HASL 300, ERDA
Health and Safety Laboratory, New
York, N.Y., 1973. - - .
(c) For the purpose of monitoring
radioactivity concentrations in drinking
water, the required sensitivity of the
radioanalysis is defined in terms of a de-
tection limit. The detection limit shall
be that concentration which can be
counted with a precision of plus or minus
100 percent at the 95 percent confidence
level (1.96 A gross alpha particle activity
measurement may be substituted for the
required radlum-226 and radium-228
analysis Provided, That the measured
gross alpha particle activity does not ex-
ceed 5 pCl/1 at a confidence level of 95
percent (1.65
-------
than half the maximum contaminant
levels established by § 141.15, analysis of
a single sample may be substituted for
the quarterly sampling procedure re-
quired by paragraph (a) (1).
(1) More frequent monitoring shall be
conducted when ordered by the State In
the vicinity of mining or other operations
which may contribute alpha particle
radioactivity to either surface or ground
water sources of drinking water.
(11) A supplier of water shall monitor
in conformance with paragraph (a) (1)
within one year of the introduction of ft
new water source for a community water
system. More frequent monitoring shall
ba conducted when ordered by the State
In the event of possible contamination or
when changes in the distribution system
or treatment processing occur which may
increase the concentration of radio-
activity In finished water.
(111} A community water system uslnc
tno or more sources having different con-
emtrafclona of radioactivity shall monitor
source water. In addition to water from
a free-flowing tap, when ordered by the
State. '.••*• '
(Iv) Monitoring for compliance with
1141.15 after the Initial period need not
Include radium-228 except when required
by the State, Provided, That the average
annual concentration of radium-228 has
been assayed at least once using the
Quarterly sampling procedure required by
paragraph (a) (1).
' -' (y) Suppliers of water shall conduct
. ftmymi monitoring of any community
• water system In which the radlum-226
concentration exceeds 3 pCi/1, when or-
dered by the State.
' (4) If the average annual maximum
contaminant level for gross alpha parti-
cle activity or total radium as set forth
in S 141.15 is exceeded, the supplier of a
community water system shall give no-
tice to the State pursuant to § 141.31 and
notify the public as required by § 141.32.
Monitoring at quarterly Intervals shall
ba continued until the annual average
concentration no longer exceeds the
maximum contaminant level or until a
monitoring schedule as a condition to a
variance, exemption or enforcement ac-
tion shall become effective.
(b) Monitoring requirements for man-
made radioactivity in community water
systems.
(1) Within two years of the effective
date of this part, systems using surface
water sources and serving more than
100,000 persons and such other com-
munity water systems as are designated
by the State shall be monitored for com-
pliance with § 141.16 by analysis of a
composite of four consecutive quarterly
samples or analysis of four quarterly
samples. Compliance with § 141.16 may
foe assumed without further analysis if
the average annual concentration of
gross beta particle activity Is less than
60 pCl/1 and if the average annual con-
centrations of tritium and strontium-90
are less than those listed in Table A, Pro-
vided, That If both radionuclides are
present the sum of their annual dose
equivalents to bone marrow shall not ex-
ceed 4 mllllrem/year.
(1) If the gross beta particle activity
exceeds 50 pCl/1. an analysis of the sam-
ple must be performed to identify the
major radioactive constituents present
and the appropriate organ and total body
doses shall be calculated to determine
•compliance with 1141.16.
(11) Suppliers of water shall conduct
additional monitoring, as ordered by the
State, to determine the concentration of
man-made radioactivity in principal wa-
tersheds designated by the State.
(Ill) At the discretion of the State,
suppliers of water utilizing only ground
waters may be required to monitor for
man-made radioactivity.
(2) For the initial analysis required
by paragraph (b) (1) data acquired
within one year prior to the effective date
of this part may be substituted at the
discretion of the State.
(3) After the Initial analysis required
by paragraph (b) (i) suppliers of water
shall monitor at least every four years
following the procedure given In para-
graph (b)(l).
(4) Within two years of the effective
date of these regulations the supplier
of any community, water system desig-
nated by the State as utilizing waters
contaminated by effluents from nuclear
facilities shall initiate quarterly moni-
toring for gross beta particle and lodine-
131 radioactivity and annual monitoring
for strontium-90 and tritium.
(1) Quarterly monitoring for gross beta
particle activity shall be based on the
analysis of monthly samples or the ana-
lysis of a composite of three monthly
samples. The former is recommended.
If the gross beta,.particle activity In a
sample exceeds 15 pCi/1, the same or an
equivalent sample shall be analyzed for
strontium-89 and cesium-134. If the gross
beta particle activity exceeds 50 pCl/1.
an analysis of the sample must be per-
formed to identify the major radioactive
constituents present and the appropriate
organ and total body doses shall be cal-
culated to determine compliance with
! 141.16.
• (11) For lodine-131, a composite of
five consecutive daily samples shall be
analyzed once each quarter. As ordered
by the State, more frequent monitoring
shall be conducted when iodine-131 is
identified in the finished water.
(ill) Annual monitoring for stron-
tium-90 and tritium shall be conducted
by means of the analysis of a composite
of four consecutive quarterly samples or
analysis of four quarterly samples. The
latter procedure Is recommended.
(Iv) The State may allow the substi-
tution of environmental surveillance
data taken In conjunction with a nuclear
facility for direct monitoring of man-
made radioactivity by the supplier of
water where the State determines such
data is applicable to a particular com-
munity water system.
(5) If the average annual maximum
contaminant level for man-made radio-
activity set forth in § 141.16 Is exceeded,
the operator of a community water sys-
tem shall give, notice to the State pur-
suant to § 141.31 and to the public as re-
quired by § 141.32. Monitoring at
monthly intervals shall be qontinued un-
til the concentration no longer exceeds
the maximum contaminant level or until
a monitoring schedule as a condition to
a variance, exemption or enforcement
action shall become effective.
5141.27 Alternate analytical techniques.
(a) With the written permission of the
State, concurred in by the Administrator
of the U.S. EPA, an alternate analytical
technique may be employed. An
alternate technique shall be accepted
only if it is substantially equivalent to
the prescribed test in both precision and
accuracy as it relates to the
determination of compliance with any
MCL. The use of the alternate analytical
technique shall not decrease the
frequency of monitoring required by this
part. ' ; .
§ 141.26 Approved laboratories.
(a) For the purpose of determining
compliance with § 141.21 through
§ 141.27, samples may be considered
only if they have been analyzed by a
laboratory approved by the State except
that measurements for turbidity, free
chlorine residual, temperature and pH
may be performed by any person
acceptable to the State.
(b) Nothing in this Part shall be
construed to preclude the State or any
• duly designated representative of the •
State from taking samples or from using
the results from such samples to
determine compliance by a supplier of
water with the applicable requirements
of this Part.
§ 111.29 Monitoring of consecutive jnili-
liv water systems.
When a public water system supplies
water to one or more other public water
systems, the State may modify the moni-
toring requirements imposed by this
part to the extent that the interconnec-
ion of the sysems jusifies treating them
as a single system for monitoring pur-
poses. Any modified monitoring shall be
conducted pursuant to a schedule speci-
fied by the State and concurred in by the
Administrator of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
{141.30 Total trlhalomethanes sampling,
analytical and other requirements.
(a) Community water system which
serve a population of 10,000 or more
individuals and which add a
disinfectant (oxidant) to the water in
any part of the drinking water treatment
process shall analyze for total
trihalomethanea in accordance with this
section. For systems serving 75,000 or
more individuals, sampling and analyses
shall begin not later than 1 year after the
date of promulgation of this regulation. '
For systems serving 10,000 to 7^.999
-------
individuals, sampling and analyseo shall
begin not later than 3 years after the
date of promulgation of this regulation.
For the purpose of this section, the
minimum number of samples required to,
be taken by the system shall be based
on the number of treatment plants used
by the system, except that multiple
wells drawing raw water from a single
aquifer may, with the State approval, be
considered one treatment plant for •
determining the minimum number of '
samples. All samples taken within an
established frequency shall be collected
within a 24-hour period. '•••'' •:
(b)(l) For all community water
systems utilizing surface water sources
in whole or in part, and for all
community water systems utilizing only
ground water sources that have not been
determined by the State to qualify for
the monitoring requirements of
paragraph (c) of this section, analyses •"•
for total trihalomethanes shall be
performed at quarterly intervals on at
least four water s'amples for each
treatment plant used by the system. At •
least 25 percent of the samples shall be
taken at locations within the •' •-•' '-
distribution system reflecting the
maximum residence time of the water in
the system. The remaining 75 percent
shall be taken at representative - -
locations in the distribution system, :
taking into account number of persona
served, different sources of water and
different treatment methods employed.
The results of all analyses per quarter .
shall be arithmetically averaged and
reported to the State within 30 days of
the system's receipt of such results.
Results shall also be reported to EPA
until such monitoring requirements have
been adopted by the State. All samples
collected shall be used in the
computation of the average, unless the '
analytical results are invalidated for
technical reasons. Sampling and
analyses shall be conducted in ••
accordance with the methods listed in
paragraph (e) of this section. • "• •-'•
(2) Upon the written request of a ' : '
community water system, the monitoring
frequency required by paragraph (b)(l)
of this section may be reduced by the
State to a minimum of one sample
analyzed for TTHMs per quarter taken
at a point in the distribution system '
reflecting the maximum residence time
of the water in the system, upon a '*''
written determination by the Stats that •
the data from at least 1 year of
monitoring in accordance with ••"•-•'
paragraph (b)(l) of this section and local
conditions demonstrate that total
trihalomethane concentrations will bS
consistently below the maxinu'~
contaminant level.
(3) If at any time during which the
reduced monitoring frequency
prescribed under this paragraph applies,
the results from any analysis exceed
0.10 mg/1 of TTHMs and such results are
confirmed by at least one check sample
taken promptly after such results are
received, or if the system makes any
significant change to its source of water
or treatment program, the system shall
immediately begin monitoring in
accordance with the requirements of
paragraph (b)(l) of this section, which
monitoring shall continue for at least 1
year before the frequency may be
reduced again. At the option of the
State, a system's monitoring frequency
may and should be increased_above the
minimum in those cases wheFe it is
necessary to detect variations of TTHM
levels within the distribution system.
(c)(l) Upon written request to the
State, a community water system
utilizing only ground water sources may
seek to have the monitoring frequency
required by subparagraph (1) of
paragraph (b) of this section reduced to
a minimum of one sample for maximum
TTHM potential per year for each
treatment plant used by the system
taken at a point in the distribution
system reflecting maximum residence
time of the water in the system. The
system shall submit to the State the
results of at least one sample analyzed
for maximum TTHM potential for each
treatment plant used by the system •
taken at a point in the distribution
system reflecting the maximum
residence time of the water in the
system. The system's monitoring
frequency may only be reduced upon a
written determination by the State that,
based upon the data submitted by the
system, the system has a maximum
TTHM potential of less than 0.10 mg/1
and that, based upon an assessment of
the local conditions of the system, the
system is not likely to approach or
exceed the maximum contaminant level
for total TTHMs. The results of all
analyses shall be reported to the State
within 30 days of the system's receipt of
such results. Results shall also be
reported to EPA until such monitoring
requirements have been adopted by the
State. All samples collected shall be
used for determining whether the system
must comply with the monitoring
requirements of paragraph (b) of this
section, unless the analytical results are
invalidated for technical reasons.
Sampling and analyses shall be
conducted in accordance with the
methods listed in paragraph (e) of this
section. . * •
(2) If at any time during which the
reduced monitoring frequency
prescribed under paragraph fc)(l) of this
section applies, the results from any
analysis taken by the system for
maximum TTHM potential are equal to
or greater than 0.10 mg/1, and such
results are confirmed by at least one
check sample taken promptly after such
results are received, the system shall
immediately begin monitoring in
accordance with the requirements of
paragraph (b) of this section and such
monitoring shall continue for at least
one year before the frequency may be
reduced again. In the event of any
significant change to the system's raw
water or treatment program, the system -
shall immediately analyze an additional
sample for maximum TTHM potential
taken at a point in the distribution
system reflecting maximum residence i
time of the water in the system for the
purpose of determining whether the
system must comply with the monitoring
requirements of paragraph (b) of this
section. At the option of the State, •
monitoring frequencies may and should
be increased above the minimum in
those pases where this is necessary to
detect variation of TTHM levels withim
the distribution system.
(d) Compliance with § 141.12(c) shall
be determined based on a running
annual average of quarterly samples
collected by the system as prescribed to
subparagraphs (1) or (2) of paragraph (bj
of this section, If the average of sampled
covering any 12 month period exceeds
the Maximum Contaminant Level, 'tha
supplier of water shall report to the
State pursuant to § 141.31 and notify the
public pursuant to § 141.32. Monitoring
after public notification shall be at a
frequency designated by the State and.
shall continue until a monitoring • ,.
schedule as a condition to a varianca,
exemption or enforcement action shall
become effective.
(e) Sampling and analyses made
pursuant to this section shall be
conducted by one of the following EPA
approved methods:
-—..(1) "The Analysis of Trihalomethsneo
in 'Drinking Waters by the Purge and
Trap Method," Method 501.1, EMSL,
EPA Cincinnati, Ohio.
(2) "The Analysis of Trihalomethanes
in Drinking Water by Liquid/Liquid
Extraction/Method 501.2, EMSL, EPA
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Samples for TTHM shall be
dechlorinated upon collection to prevent
further production of Trihalomethanao,
according to the procedures described in
the above two methods. Samples for
maximum TTHM potential should not be
dechlorinated, and should be held for
seven days at 25* C prior to analysis, >
(or
-------
according to the procedures described in
the above two methods. ... .
(f) Before a community water system
makes any significant modifications to .
its existing treatment process for the
purposes of achieving compliance with
§ 141.12(c). such system must Submit
and obtain State approval of a detailed
plan setting forth its proposed •:«
modification and those safeguards that
it will implement to ensure that the .,, <
bacteriological quality of the drinking
water served by such system will not be
adversely affected by such modification.
Each system shall comply with the
provisions set forth in the State-
approved plan. At a minimum, A State .
approved plan shall require the system
modifying its disinfection practice to:
(1) Evaluate the water system for
sanitary defects and evaluate the source
water for biological quality; : - -,n-,-
(2) Evaluate its existing treatment
practices and consider improvements ."•
that will minimize disinfectant demand
and optimize finished water quality
throughout the distribution system;
(3) Provide baseline water quality
survey data of the distribution system.
Such data should include the results
from monitoring for coliform and fecal
coliform bacteria, fecal streptococci, ,
standard plate counts at 35° C and 20" C,
phosphate, ammonia nitrogen and total
organic carbon. Virus studies should be
required where source waters are
heavily contaminated with sewage
effluent; .
(4) Conduct additional monitoring to
assure continued maintenance of
optimal biological quality in finished
water, for example, when chloramines
are introduced as disinfectants or when
pre-chlorination is being discontinued.
Additional monitoring should also be
required by the State for chlorate,
chlorite and chlorine dioxide when
chlorine dioxide is used as a •
disinfectant. Standard plate count
analyses should also be required by the
State as appropriate before and after
any modifications;
(5) Consider inclusion in the
plan of provisions to maintain an active
disinfectant residual throughout the
distribution system at all times during
and after the modification.
Cubpart D—Reporting, Public Notification
and Record Keeping
§ 141.31 Reporting requirements.
(a) Except where a shorter period is
specified in this part, the supplier of
water shall report to the State the
results of any test measurement or
analysis required by this'part within (A)
the first ten days following the month in.
which the result is received or (B) the
first ten days following the end of the
required monitoring period as stipulated
by the State, whichever of these is
shortest. • .
(b) The supplier of water shall report
to the State within 48 hours the failure
to comply with any primary drinking
water regulation (including failure to
comply with monitoring requirements)
set forth in this part.
(c) The supplier of water is not re-
quired to report analytical results to the
State in cases where a State laboratory
performs the analysis and reports the
results to the State office which would
normally receive such notification from
the supplier.
(d) The water supply system, within
ten days of completion of each public
notification required pursuant to
S 141.32. shall submit to the State a
representative copy of each type of
notice distributed, published, posted,
and/or made available to the persons
served by the system and/or to the
media.
(e) The water supply system shall
submit to the State within the time
stated in the request copies of any
records required to be maintained under
§ 141.33 hereof or copies of any
documents then in existence which the
State or the Administrator is entitled to
inspect pursuant to the authority of
§ 1445 of the Safe Drinking Water Act or
the equivalent provisions of State law.
§141.32 Public notification.
<&) If a community water system fails
to comply with an applicable maximum
contaminant level established in Subpart
B, falls to comply with ah applicable
testing procedure established in Subpart
C of this part, is granted a variance or
an exemption from an applicable maxi-
mum contaminant level, fails to comply
with the requirements of any schedule
prescribed pursuant to a variance or ex-
emption, or fails to perform any moni-
toring required pursuant to Section 1445
(a) of the Act, the supplier of water shall
notify persons served by the system of
the failure or grant by inclusion of a no-
tice in the first set of water bills of the
system issued after the failure or grant
and in any event by written notice within
three months. Such notice shall be re-
peated at least once every three months
so long as the system's failure continues
or the variance or exemption remains In
effect. If the system Issues water bills less
frequently than quarterly, or doe's not
Issue water bills, the notice shall be made
by or supplemented by another form of
direct mall.
(b) If a community water system BM
failed to comply with an applicable max-
imum contaminant level, the supplier of
water shall notify the public of such fail-
ure, in addition to the notification re-
quired by paragraph (a) of this section,
as follows:
(1) By publication on not less than
three consecutive days in a newspaper or
newspapers of general circulation In the
area served by the system. Such notice
shall be completed within fourteen days
after the supplier of water learns of
the failure.
(2) By furnishing a copy of the notice
to the radio and television stations serv-
ing the area served by the system. Such
notice shall be furnished within seven
days after the supplier of water learns
of the failure.
13) Except that the requirements of
this subsection (b) may be waived by
the State if it determines that the
violation has been corrected promptly
after discovery, the cause of the
violation has been eliminated, and there
is no longer, a risk to public health.
(c) If the area served by a community
water system is not served by & daily
newspaper of general circulation, notifi-
cation by newspaper required by para-
graph (b) of this section shall instead be
given by publication on three consecutive
weeks in a weekly newspaper of general
circulation serving the area. If no weekly
or dally newspaper of general circula-
tion serves the area, notice shall be given
by posting the notice in post offices With-
in the area served bv the svstem.
(d) If a non-community water system •
fails to comply with an applicable MCL ..'
established in Subpart B of this part, .. -
fails to comply with an applicable
testing procedure established in Subpart .
C of this part, is granted a variance or ,
an exemption from an-applicable MCL,
fails to comply with the requirements of
any schedule prescribed pursuant to a .
variance or exemption, or fails to
perform any monitoring requirement
pursuant to section 1445(a) of the Act,
the supplier of water shall give notices
by continuous posting of such failure or
granting of a variance or exemption to
the persons served by the system as
long as the failure or granting of a
variance or exemption continues. The
form and manner for such notices shall
be prescribed by the State and shall
ensure that the public using the system
is adequately informed of the failure or .
granting of the variance or exemption.
(e) Notices given pursuant to Oils sec-
tion shall be written In a manner reason-
ably designed to Inform fully the users
of the system. The notice .shall be con-
spicuous and shall not use unduly tech-
nical language, unduly small urint or
other methods which would frustrate the
purpose of the notice. The notice shall
disclose all material facts regarding tha
subject Including the nature of the prob-
lem and. when appropriate, a clear state-
ment that a primary drinking wpter
regulation has been violated and any pre-
ventive measures that should he taken by
the public. Where appropriate, or where
-------
designated by the State, bilingual notice
shall be given. Notices may include a bal-
anced explanation of the significance or
seriousness to the public health of the
subject of the notice, a fair explanation
of steps taken by the system to correct
any problem and the results of any addi-
tional sampling.
(f) Notice to the public required by
this section may be given by the State on
behalf of the supplier of water.
(g) In any instance in which notifica-
tion by mall is required by paragraph (a)
of this section but notification by news-
paper or to radio or television stations
Is not required by paragraph (b) of this
section, the State may order the supplier
of water to provide notification by news-
paper and to radio and television stations
when circumstances make more immedi-
ate or broader notice appropriate to
protect the public health.
§ 141.33 Record maintenance.
Any owner or operator of a puollc
Water system subject to the provisions of
this part shall retain on its premises or
at a convenient location near its prem-
ises the following records:
(a) Records of bac teriological analyses
made pursuant to this part shall be kept
for not less than 5 years. Records of
chemical analyses made pursuant to this
part shall be kept for not less than 10
years. Actual laboratory reports may be
kept, or data may be transferred to tab-
ular summaries, provided that the fol-
lowing information Is included:
(1) The date, place, and time of sam-
pling, and the name of the person who
collected the sample;
(2) Identification of the sample as to
whether it was a routine distribution
system sample, check sample, raw or
process water sample or other special
purpose sample;
(3) Date of analysis;
(4) Laboratory and person responsible
for performing analysis;
(5) The analytical technique/method
used; and
(6) The results of the analysis.
(b) Records of action taken by the
system to correct violations of primary
drinking water regulations shall be kept
for a period not less than 3 years after
the last action taken with respect to the
particular violation involved.
(c) Copies of any written reports,
summaries or communications relating
to sanitary surveys of the system con-
ducted by the system itself, by a private
consultant, or by any local, State or Fed-
eral agency, shall be kept for a period
not less than 10 years after completion
of the sanitary survey involved.
(d) Records concerning a variance or
exemption granted to the system shall
be kept for & period ending not less than
5 years following the expiration of such
variance or exemption.
Subpart E—Special Monitoring
Regulations for Organic Chemicals '
and Otherwise Unregulated
Contaminants • ' ' •
§ 141.40 Special monitoring for organic
•.••- chemicals. • • • . . . . , •-
(a) The Administrator may designate,
by publication in the FEDERAL REGISTER,
public water systems which are required
to take water samples, provide informa-
tion, and in appropriate cases analyze
water samples for the purpose of provid-
ing information on contamination of
drinking water sources and of treated
water by organic chemicals.
(b) The Administrator shall provide to
each public system designated pursuant
to paragraph (a) of this section a written
schedule for the sampling of source water
or treated water by the system, with
written instructions for the sampling
methods and for handling of samples.
The schedule may designate the loca-
tions or types of locations to be sampled.
• (c) In cases where the public water
system has a laboratory capable of ana-
lyzing samples for constituents specified
by the Administrator, the Administrator
may require analyses to be made by the
public water system for submission to
EPA. If the Administrator requires the
analyses to be made by the public water
system, he shall provide the system with
written Instructions as to the analytical
procedures to be followed, or with refer-
ences to technical documents describing
the analytical procedures.
(d) Public water systems designated
by the Administrator pursuant to para-
graph (a) of this section shall provide
to the Administrator, upon request. In-
formation to be used in the evaluation of,
analytical results, Including records of
previous monitoring and analyses, Infor-
mation on possible sources of contamina-
tion and treatment techniques used by
the system.
§ 141.41 Special monitoring for sodium.
(a) Suppliers of water for community
public water systems shall collect and
analyze one sample per plant at the
entry point of the distribution system for
the determination of sodium
concentration levels; samples must be
collected and analyzed annually for
systems utilizing surface water sources
in whole or in part, and at least every
three years for systems utilizing solely
ground water sources. The minimum
number of samples required to be taken
by the system shall be based on the
number of treatment plants used by the
system, except that multiple wells
drawing raw water from a single aquifer
may, with the State approval, be • ' .
considered one treatment plant for
determining the minimum number of
samples. The supplier of water may be
required by the State to collect and
analyze water samples for sodium more
frequently in locations where the
sodium content is variable.
(b) The supplier of water shall report
to EPA and/or the State the results of
the analyses for sodium within the first
10 days of the month following the
month in which the sample results were
received or within the first 10 days
following the end of the required
monitoring period as stipulated by the .
State, whichever of these is first. If more
than annual sampling is required the
supplier shall report the average sodium
concentration within 10 days of the
month following the month in which the
analytical results of the last sample used
for the annual average was received.
.The supplier of water shall not be
required to report the results to EPA
where the State has adopted this
regulation and results are reported to
the State.-The supplier shall report the
results to EPA where the State has not
adopted this regulation.
(c) The supplier of water shall notify
appropriate local and State public
health officials of the sodium levels by
written notice by direct mail within
three months. A copy of each notice
required to be provided by this
paragraph shall be sent to EPA and/or.
the State within 10 days of its issuance.
The supplier of water is not required to
notify appropriate local and State public
health officials of the sodium levels.
where the State provides such notices in
lieu of the supplier.
(d) Analyses for sodium shall be
performed by the flame photometric
method in accordance with the
procedures described in "Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater," 14th Edition, pp. 250-
253; or by Method 273.1, Atomic
Absorption—Direct Aspiration or
Method 273.2, Atomic Absorption—
Graphite Furnace, in "Methods for -
Chemical Analysis of Water and
Waste," EMSL, Cincinnati, EPA, 1979: or
by Method Dl42ft-64(a) in Annual Book
of ASTM Standards, part 31, Water.
§ 141.42 Special monitoring for corrosivity
characteristics.
(a) Suppliers of water for community
public water systems shall collect
samples from a representative entry
point to the water distribution system '
for the purpose of analysis to determine
the corrosivity characteristics of the
water. •
(1) The supplier shall collect two
samples per plant for analysis for each
plant using surface water sources
wholly or in part or more if required by
the State; one during mid-winter and
one during mid-summer. The supplier of
the water shall collect one sample per
plant for analysis for each plant using -
ground water sources or more if
, required by the State. The minimum
number of samples required to be taken
by the system shall be based on the
number of treatment plants used by the
system, except that multiple wells
drawing raw water from a single aquifer
may, with the State approval, be
considered one treatment plant for •
determining the minimum number of •
samples.
(2) Determination of the corrosivity
characteristics of the water shall include
measurement of pH, calcium hardness,
alkalinity, temperature, total dissolved-
solids (total filterable residue), and
calculation of the Langelier Index in
accordance with paragraph (c) below.
The determination of corrosivity
characteristics shall only include one
round of sampling (two samples per
plant for surface water and one sample
per plant for ground water sources).
However, States may require more
-------
frequent monitoring as appropriate. In
addition. States have the discretion to
require monitoring for additional
parameters which may indicate
corrosivity characteristics, such as
sulfates and chlorides. In certain cases,
the Aggressive Index, as described in
paragraph (c), can be used instead of the
Langelier Index; the supplier shall
request in writing to the State and the
State will make this determination.
(b) The supplier of water shall report
to EPA and/or the State the results of
the analyses for the corrosivity
characteristics within the first 10 days of
the month following the month in which
the sample results were received. If
more frequent sampling is required by
the State, the supplier can accumulate
the data and shall report each value
within 10 days of the month following
the month in which the analytical results
of the last sample was received. The
supplier of water shall not be required
to report the results to EPA where the
State has adopted this regulation and
results are reported to the State.
(c) Analyses conducted to determine
the corrosivity of the water shall be
made in accordance to the following
methods:
(1) Langelier Index—"Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater," 14th Edition. Method
203, pp. 61-63.
(2) Aggressive Index—"AWWA
Standard for Asbestos-Cement Pipe, 4
in. through 24 in. for Water and Other
Uquids," AWWA C400-77. Revision of
C400-75. AWWA, Denver. Colorado.
(3) Total Filtrable Residue—"Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater." 14th Edition. Method
208B, pp. 92-fl3; or "Methods for -.-....
Chemical Analysis of Water and
Wastes." Method 160.1.
(4) Temperature—"Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and .
Wastewater," 14th Edition. Method 212,
pp. 125-126.
(5) Calcium hardness—EDTA
Titrimetric Method "Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater," 14th Edition. Method
309B. pp. 202-206; or "Annual Book of
ASTM Standards," Method D1126-67
(8).
(6) Alkalinity—Methyl Orange and
paint pH 4.5. "Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and • '
Wastewater," 14th Edition. Method 403,
pp. 278-281; or "Annual Book of ASTM
Standards," Method D1067-70B; or
"Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Water and Wastes." Method 310.1. -
(7) pH—"Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and
Wastewater," 14th Edition, Method 424,
pp. 460-465; or "Methods for Chemical
Analysis of Water and Wastes," Method
150.1; or "Annual Book of ASTM
Standards," Method D129378 A or B.
(8) Chloride—Potentiometric Method.
"Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater." 14th
Edition, p. 306.
(9) Sulfate—Turbidimetric Method.
"Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Water and Wastes." pp. 277-278. EPA,
Office of Technology Transfer,
Washington, D.C. 20460,1974, or
"Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater," 13th
Edition, pp. 334-335,14th Edition, pp. '
498-498. :
(d) Community water supply systems
•hall identify whether the following
construction materials are present in
their distribution system and report to
the State:
• Lead from piping, solder, caulking,
interior lining of distribution mains,
alloys and home plumbing.
• Copper from piping and alloys,
service lines, and home plumbing.
• Galvanized piping, service lines,
and home plumbing.
• Ferrous piping materials such as
cast iron and steel.
• Asbestos cement pipe.
In addition. States may require
identification and reporting of other
materials of construction present in
distribution systems that may contribute
contaminants to the drinking water,
such as:
• Vinyl lined asbestos cement pipe. - -
• Coal tar lined pipes and tanks.
------- |