&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
2006 Community Water
System Survey
Volume II:
Detailed Tables and
Survey Methodology
-------
Cover Photo: The Gaffney Board of Public Works Water Tower, Gaffney, South Carolina
The Gaffney Board of Public Works Water Tower, or "Peachoid" as it is known, stands 135 feet tall and
holds one million gallons of water. The tank was commissioned to be built in 1980. Contractors took
five months to design and mold the steel. A seven-ton, 60-feet long leaf was applied to one side. Peter
Freudenburg, an artist specializing in super-graphics and murals spent hours inspecting real peaches to
use as a model to paint the tank. Fifty gallons of paint in twenty colors were required to complete the
project. EPA wishes to thank the Board for participating in this survey, for allowing us to acknowledge
this fact and for providing us with the cover photo.
Photo by Kim Partner of the Gaffney Board of Public Works
Office of Water (4606M)
EPA815-R-09-002
May 2009
www. epa.gov/safewater
-------
2006 Community Water
System Survey
Volume II: Detailed Tables and
Survey Methodology
-------
-------
Contents
Part 1: Detailed Survey Results 1
Interpreting the Survey Results 3
Notes on Interpreting the Detailed Tables 5
Detailed Tables 9
Part 2: Methodology Report 221
1. Introduction 223
1.1 Study Background 223
1.2 Survey Overview 223
2. Sample Design and Weighting 227
2.1 Sample Design and Selection 227
2.1.1 SDWIS Sampling Frame and Coverage 227
2.1.2 Sample Design and Selection 228
2.1.3 Stratum Migration 230
2.2 Weighting and Estimation 233
2.2.1 Derivation of Base Weight and Non-response Adjustment 233
2.2.2 Variance Estimation 235
3. Survey Design and Response 239
3.1 Questionnaire Design 239
3.2 Data Verification 239
3.3 The Pilot Test 240
3.4 Site Visit Operations 240
3.5 Self-administered Survey Administration 241
3.6 Data Entry 242
3.7 Survey Response 245
4. Quality Assurance and Peer Review 247
-------
4.1 Draft Questionnaire Pre-testand Survey Pilot Test 247
4.1.1 Pre-test 247
4.1.2 Pilot Test 247
4.2 Sampling Quality Assurance 248
4.3 Data Collection Quality Assurance 248
4.4 Expert Review of Responses 250
4.5 Data Processing Quality Assurance 248
4.5.1 Data Entry 248
4.5.2 Automated Data Validation Checks 249
4.5.3 Database Quality Assurance 249
4.5.4 Tabulation Quality Assurance 250
4.6 Quality Assurance during Report Preparation 251
4.7 Peer Review 251
Appendix: Community Water System Survey Questionnaire 253
-------
List of Tables
(Tables are by primary source of water and system service population, unless otherwise noted.)
Table
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12
Table 13
Table 14
Table 15
Table 16
Table 17
Table 18
Table 19
Table 20
Table 21
Table 22
Table 23
Table 24
Table 25
Table 26
Table 27
Table 28
Table 29
Table 30
Table 31
Table 32
Table 33
Table 34
Table 35
Table 36
Table 37
Table 38
Table 39
Table 40
Table 41
Table 42
Table 43
Description
Crosswalk from SDWIS to CWS Survey 2006 Sample
Number and Percentages of Systems by Primary Water Source
Number and Percentages of Systems by SDWIS Water Source
Number of Systems by Type of Ownership
Number of Systems by Ownership and Water Source
Percentage of Systems with Access to Computers, Peripherals, and the Internet
Average Daily Flow for Public Systems by Primary Water Source
Average Daily Flow for Private Systems by Primary Water Source
Average Daily Flow For All Systems by Primary Water Source
Average Annual Flow for Public and Private Systems
Annual Water Deliveries and Unaccounted for Water by Ownership
Annual Deliveries per Customer Service Connection by Ownership
Average Number of Entry Points to the Distribution System
Number and Percentage of Systems Selling to Other Public Water Suppliers
Water Systems Not Providing Any Treatment
Ground Water Entry Points Not Receiving Treatment
Treatment Plants per System
Number of Wells Treated per Treatment Plant
Treatment Plant Flow Characteristics
Ratio of Design Capacity to Average and Peak Daily Production
Treatment Objectives by Population
Treatment Objectives by Daily Flow
Treatment Schemes by Population
Treatment Schemes by Daily Flow
Treatment Practices for Surface Water Plants by Population
Treatment Practices for Surface Water Plants by Daily Flow
Treatment Practices for Ground Water Plants by Population
Treatment Practices for Ground Water Plants by Daily Flow
Disinfection Practices and Objectives by Population
Disinfection Practices and Objectives by Daily Flow
Surface Water Residual Management Processes by Treatment Scheme
Ground Water Residual Management Processes by Treatment Scheme
Mixed Water Residual Management Processes by and Treatment Scheme
All Water Plants Residual Management Processes by Treatment Scheme
Surface Water Residual Management Processes by Daily Flow and Treatment Scheme
Ground Water Residual Management Processes by Daily Flow and Treatment Scheme
Mixed Water Residual Management Processes by Daily Flow and Treatment Scheme
All Water Plants Residual Management Processes by Daily Flow and Treatment Scheme
Plants With Specific Discharge Options by Population and Treatment Scheme
Plants With Specific Discharge Options by Daily Flow and Treatment Scheme
Raw Water Concentration of Various Contaminants in Very Large Systems
Finished Water Concentration of Various Contaminants in Very Large Systems
Percentage of Systems Using Each Treatment Scheme
111
-------
Table
Table 44
Table 45
Table 46
Table 47
Table 48
Table 49
Table 50
Table 51
Table 52
Table 53
Table 54
Table 55
Table 56
Table 57
Table 58
Table 59
Table 60
Table 61
Table 62
Table 63
Table 64
Table 65
Table 66
Table 67
Table 68
Table 69
Table 70
Table 71
Table 72
Table 73
Table 74
Table 75
Table 76
Table 77
Table 78
Table 79
Table 80
Table 81
Table 82
Table 83
Table 84
Table 85
Table 86
Table 87
Table 88
Table 89
Table 90
Description
Treated-Water Storage Information
Storage Capacity past the First Residential Customer by Type of Vessel
Practices to Maintain Water Quality in Storage Vessels
Systems that Want Additional Information about Practices
Distribution System and Transmission Line Summary
Average Size of Pipe in Distribution and Transmission Systems by Ownership
Pressure Zones and Booster Disinfection Practices
Number of Pressure Losses
System Flushing Practices
Seasonal Disinfection Residuals for Entry Points and Distribution Systems
Water Security Awareness and Security Barriers by Ownership
Water Security Awareness and Security Barriers by Adjusted Population Categories
Service Connections Profile by Ownership
Population Served by Ownership
Total Water System Revenue and Revenue Per Thousand Gallons by Source
Total Water System Revenue by Ownership
Total Water System Revenue by Source, Excluding Zero Revenue
Total Water System Revenue by Ownership, Excluding Zero Revenue
Revenue if Reporting Positive Revenue and Expenses by Ownership
Systems with Each Type of Revenue Source by Ownership
Percentage Received From Each Type of Revenue Source by Ownership
Average Revenue of Systems Serving 10,000 or fewer
Percentage of Revenue from Each Customer Category by Ownership
Total Revenue in Dollars per Thousand Gallons Delivered by Ownership
Water Sales in Dollars per Thousand Gallons Delivered by Ownership
Water Sales in Dollars per Thousand Gallons by Ownership and Customer Class
Annual Residential Revenue per Connection by Ownership
Residential Rate Structure and Billing Profile by Ownership
Non-Residential Rate Structure and Billing Profile by Ownership
Programs for Lower Cost Drinking Water for Low-income Households by Ownership
Seasonal Populations by Ownership
Total Expenses by Source
Total Expenses in Dollars per 1000 Gallons Delivered by Source
Total Expenses by Ownership
Total Expenses in Dollars per 1000 Gallons Delivered by Ownership
Expenses if Reporting Positive Revenue and Expenses by Ownership
Expense Breakdown by Major Categories by Ownership
Ratio of Total Revenue to Total Expenses by Ownership
Ratio of Total Revenue to Total Expenses by Private Systems
Average System Revenue and Expenses by Type of Revenue and Expense
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs by Source
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs by Ownership
Percentage of Systems with Major Capital Investment in the Past 5 Years by Source
Percentage of Systems with Major Capital Investment in the Past 5 Years by Ownership
Amount of Major Capital Investment in the Past 5 Years by Source
Amount of Major Capital Investment in the Past 5 Years by Ownership
Percentage of Systems Making Major Capital Investments by Source and Type
IV
-------
Table
Table 91
Table 92
Table 93
Table 94
Table 95
Table 96
Table 97
Table 98
Table 99
Table 100
Table 101
Table 102
Table 103
Table 104
Table 105
Table 106
Table 107
Description
Percentage of Systems Making Major Capital Investments by Ownership and Type
Average Amount of Major Capital Investment Allocated Years by Source and Type
Average Amount of Major Capital Investment Allocated Years by Ownership and Type
Allocation of Major Capital Investments of Average Systems by Source and Type
Allocation of Major Capital Investments of Average Systems by Ownership and Type
Allocation of Major Capital Investments Nationally by Source and Type
Allocation of Major Capital Investments Nationally by Ownership and Type
Percentage of Systems Making Major Capital Investments by Ownership and Purpose
Amount of Major Capital Investment Allocated by Ownership and Purpose
Allocation of Major Capital Investments of Average Systems by Ownership and Purpose
Allocation of Major Capital Investments Nationally by Ownership and Purpose
Percentage of Systems Acquiring Capital Funds from Each Source by Ownership
Amount of Capital Funds Acquired from Each Source in the Past 5 Years
Allocation of Sources of Funds for Major Capital Investments of the Average System
Allocation of Sources of Funds for Major Capital Investments Nationally
Average Interest Rates for Capital Funds
Asset Management Plans
-------
-------
Parti:
Detailed Survey Results
-------
-------
Interpreting the Survey Results
This volume presents extensive and detailed tabulations of the wide variety of data collected by the 2006
Community Water System (CWS) Survey. The tables in this volume summarize the survey results at
very fine levels, breaking out the data by eight different population size categories of water systems, and
then further breaking out each size category by other system characteristics, such as type of ownership or
primary water source.
The report consists of 107 summary tables, many of which include confidence intervals for each estimate
presented. In these tables, each confidence interval appears immediately below the calculation to which it
applies. Please familiarize yourself with the interpretive notes when you review the tables themselves.
The tabulations presented in this report are based on data collected from a sample of U.S. water systems
rather than a census of every water system in the United States. A confidence interval is one way to
gauge how precisely an estimate based on a sample of systems represents all water systems in the country.
Any result presented in a table must be viewed as the center of a range that would encompass the precise
number that would be found if every U.S. water system could have been included in the tabulation, and
not only those who were sampled and responded to the survey. The confidence interval expresses this
range as a" +" that is, as an amount to be added to and subtracted from the calculated data point actually
presented in the table. The size of the confidence interval is designed to include the true value in the
stated range 95 percent of the time; i.e., if we drew repeated samples and produced the confidence interval
for each sample, the interval would include the true value 95 percent of the time.
For example, Table 77 shows that the average annual expenses of publicly owned water systems serving
more than 500,000 people are $187.6 million. The table also shows the confidence interval for this
estimate to be +$41.2 million. Thus, based on the sample of water systems, we can be 95 percent certain
that the average annual per capita expense of all publicly owned systems serving populations of over
500,000 is between $146.4 million and $228.8 million.
These tables always express the confidence interval in the same units as the calculation to which it
applies. Thus, in Table 9 the confidence interval numbers for average daily water flow represent the same
units as the base calculation, namely, millions of gallons per day. In the same table, the confidence
interval numbers for the percentage of water derived from different sources are themselves expressed as
percentages. In all cases, the confidence interval may be directly added to and subtracted from the
corresponding calculation to determine the expected range.
These tables serve as a starting point for detailed analyses of the data. As shown in Volume I, and as will
be apparent in many of the tables in this volume, water systems are a diverse group. While the mean or
medians as measures of central tendency may be appropriate statistics in some cases, in others further
detail will be required. As described in the notes below, outliers were dropped from some of the analyses
to produce meaningful estimates of "typical" systems. Additional adjustments may be necessary to
support other analyses. Some analyses may require the use of percentiles or other measures of the full
distribution of the data. Other analyses may need to exclude the tails of the distribution to characterize
typical systems. EPA will continue to analyze the data and present results to support its various
regulatory and policy development and implementation analyses.
Finally, several of the tables report results for water systems' treatment plants and facilities. For this
report, a treatment plant or facility is any location where the water system takes steps to change the
quality of the water. It includes standard facilities that are clearly recognized as treatment plants, such as
conventional filtration plants. It also includes smaller facilities that may not be considered treatment
plants in other contexts; for example, a chemical feed on a well that adds chlorine to the water is
-------
considered a treatment facility in this report. There is one exception to the general rule that all points
where the system makes changes to the water is a treatment facility. Systems that purchase water may
boost disinfection or adjust pH within their distribution system; these sites are not counted as treatment
facilities.
-------
Detailed Survey Result Tables
Notes on Interpreting the Detailed Tables
1. Weighted data. The survey results presented in the following tables are all based on weighted
data. As described in Chapter 2 of the methodology report, each water system contained in the
final survey database was assigned a sample weight. These weights are necessary because the
data are from a statistically representative sample of water systems, rather than from a census of
every water system in the U.S. In effect, each sampled system represents some number of similar
systems from the entire population of U.S. water systems; the number of systems so represented
is equal to the sample weight. When added up, the weights of all systems in the final sample will
equal the total number of U.S. CWSs that meet the eligibility definition used for the survey (e.g.,
Federal and state-owned systems were not included). Thus, for the tables to represent all eligible
U.S. water systems, it is necessary to incorporate each system's sample weight as an additional
factor in each calculation involving a data item reported by that system. Another way of
expressing this is to say that, when tabulating the data, each sampled system counts not just once
as itself, but counts as many times as the numerical amount of its weight. See section 2.2 for a
detailed discussion of the derivation of the sample weights.
2. Interpretation of Table Results. Each result presented in the tables is the weighted average of
the particular data item, for the group of water systems characterized by the row and column
headings labeling the table cell where the results appears. The survey data are tabulated so as to
facilitate analysis of water systems. In general, this means that the report tabulates all summary
results by calculating a given item for each system, factoring into that result the system's
sampling weight, then presenting the mean of the weighted results for all the systems falling into
the respective table categories (as defined by the table row and column headings). This has
significant implications when the calculation of a specific item requires deriving the result from
two or more survey variables, e.g., a ratio or a percentage breakdown of component amounts
within a total amount. For example, in the case of a ratio, the reported result is the average
(mean) of the ratios for each system, rather than the ratio of average values for each of the two
variables across systems. This approach treats every system in the universe equally, implying
that characteristics of the system are the primary unit of analysis. The alternate approach would
treat the content of the component variables in each table as the unit of analysis.
By way of example, consider two systems. One system produces 1,000,000 gallons per day, and
400,000 of those come from ground sources; hence, 40% of the system's water comes from
ground sources. The other system produces 2,000,000 gallons per day and 1,600,000 of those
come from ground sources; hence, 80% of the systems water comes from ground sources. The
CWS Survey report would show a result that, on average, these two systems produce 60% of their
water from ground sources: (40%+80%)/ 2. If the alternate approach where chosen, gallons
would be the unit of analysis, and the calculation would show that 67% of the water in those
systems comes from ground sources: (400,000+1,600,000)7(1,000,000+2,000,000). (To focus
clearly on the point being illustrated, this example does not attempt to demonstrate the further
effect that the system sample weights have on the actual calculations.)
The report has adopted the former approach because this initial view of the data is intended
primarily as an analysis of system-level characteristics. There are some exceptions to this
approach. Table 17 presents data on both level of the system and a water treatment plant (many
systems have more than one treatment plant, while some facilities have none). Tables 18-42
-------
present data on the level of a treatment plant. Tables 96, 97, 101, and 105 present data on the
share of capital funds in the nation, rather than system averages.
3. Percentages summing to 100 percent. Some tables present absolute or percentage breakdowns
of the whole into its components, e.g., breakdowns of total revenue into different customer
categories, such as Table 66. Logically, in such breakdowns, the line item amounts should sum to
the total amount, and line item percentages should sum to 100 percent. However, in some
instances, the tabulated results may not sum exactly to the whole. To increase the precision of
each individual result, each component line item was calculated separately using all the data
available for the line item. Due to differential item non-response, some component variables may
actually have more or fewer observations available than other components. While including all
available data in the calculation of the component increases the precision of the tabulated result
for the component, it can cause a small reduction in consistency across components, since slightly
different systems may be represented in the different calculations. EPA and the CWS Survey
analysts decided that the increased accuracy for each item outweighs the slight reduction in
consistency.
In a few tables, a series of percentages may validly sum to greater than 100%. This occurs when
more than one item may apply to the same system. For example, treatment plants may have more
than one treatment objective, so the percentage of plants with each objective will sum to more
than 100 percent. This situation is always noted on the table.
4. Confidence Intervals. The size of the confidence interval is designed to include the true value in
the stated range 95 percent of the time. Each confidence interval presented in Part 2 is based on
the assumption that the average value reported in a given table cell is normally distributed.
Calculations based on small numbers of systems may violate this assumption. In such cases the
reported confidence intervals will not be correct. Most of these can be identified by noticing
when the plus/minus confidence interval width is larger than, or almost as large as, the calculated
average itself. To compute correct confidence intervals for such situations requires examination
of the empirical distributions for each variable in the tabulation and is beyond the scope of this
report.
The reader should take note of results where the lower end of the confidence interval is below
zero, because negative numbers are not meaningful in any of the tabulations presented in this
report. Similarly, for calculations of percentages, high ends of ranges above 100% are not
meaningful. While the reader should be on the lookout for these conditions when any number is
near zero or any percentage is near 100%, they can occur at other times, particularly when the
confidence interval is large. As stated in note 3, a series of percentages may validly sum to
greater than 100% in some tables, when more than one item may apply to the same system. This
situation is not related to the issue of confidence intervals extending an individual percentage
beyond 100%.
5. Treatment of outliers. For several of the tables, one or two observations have values well above
the mean or even the 90th percentile. These outliers would tend to distort the estimates presented
in the table and would lead to a misrepresentation of the central tendency for the characteristics in
question. In cases like this, the outliers are dropped from the analysis. A note is added at the
bottom of the table when outliers are dropped. The note also will show how the exclusion of the
outliers affects the estimate.
-------
6. Interpretation of blank cells and cells with calculated results of zero.
Empty Cells: Throughout the tables, some individual cells or blocks of continuous cells have an
asterisk, to denote the cell does not contain an estimate. Any empty cell or block of cells means
that there were no observations with data for the cell(s) in question. Generally, this occurs for
one of three reasons.
There are no systems in the cell. The most common illustration of this occurs in all tables
that break out the data by ownership type. When data are reported for ancillary systems, the
cells for the systems serving more than 3,300 people are always blank for ancillary systems,
since there are no ancillary systems in these size categories.
The item does not apply to the group of systems belonging to that cell. For example, in Table
106, the cell for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) loans for private systems
serving 100 or fewer people is empty. This is because no private systems of this size made
use of DWSRF loans.
The item applies to the group of systems belonging to the cell, but no systems provided data
for the item (sometimes referred to as "missing data" in terms of the analytical data file and
as "item non-response" in terms of the data collection process that led to the final data file).
For example, in Table 16, none of the ground water systems serving 3,301 to 10,000
customers provided data on their number of wells per entry point, so these cells are empty on
the table.
It is not always possible to distinguish between the last two reasons from the information
available in the table. Sometimes the reason is apparent for the table itself. Often, however,
further analysis of the database would be needed to determine which particular reason is the basis
for a blank cell.
Zero Results: In discussing Table 106 above, it was noted that certain cells are blank for
customer categories of private systems. However, other tables have cells which specifically
report a zero result and are zero instead of blank. This illustrates an important distinction when
interpreting the tables. Blank cells and cells reporting a zero result are not the same, and should
not be interpreted as such. A reported result of zero means that data were available to produce a
calculation, and the calculation resulted in a zero.
It should also be noted that occasionally a report of a zero result is a function of the level of
precision chosen as appropriate for presenting the data in a given table. In a few instances, items
appearing as zero results are actually very small numbers that round to zero within the precision
limits of the respective table.
7. Observations. The term "observations" refers to the actual number of sampled water systems
that provided data for a given tabulated item. Some tables present the number of observations on
which the tabulated results are based. In these as in all the tables, the results are still based on the
weighted data, not on the simple means of the un-weighted observations. The report of the
number of observations can be used as a very approximate indication of the sampling precision of
the tabulated result. Results based on a small number of observations may not be precise
estimates of the universe of water systems represented by the sampling systems. They are
included because they may be useful indicators of areas worth further investigation.
-------
8. Individual table notes. Additional specific notes and definitions appear on individual tables.
The specific CWS Survey questionnaire item(s) on which each table is based are cited below the
table. The citation refers to the corresponding question number(s) on the CWS Survey
questionnaire, which can be found in this report as an Appendix to the Methodology Report. The
citations are in the format "Q.#;" the question numbering is identical in both questionnaire
versions.
9. Variables for row and column headings. In addition to the data sources for the specific
tabulations, several data items are used repeatedly throughout the tables as the break-out variables
for the table row and column headings. Their sources are not cited on the individual tables.
These items and their data sources are
Population served, from question 21. If data were not reported in the survey, the population
data from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) are used.
Water source, from question 6.
Ownership, from question 3. Note: for the sake of brevity in the table headings, privately
owned community water systems are labeled as "Private Systems" and publicly owned
community water systems are labeled as "Public Systems." This use of the label "Public
Systems" should not be confused with the CFR definitional term Public Water System, which
is a broad class of water systems providing the public with piped drinking water for human
consumption. A CWS 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.
(40 CFR 141.2)
Treatment facility flow, from question 7.
For population served and water source, data from SDWIS are used if the system did not provide
the data in the survey. Approximately 20 percent of the sample was assigned population data
from SDWIS because of missing or incomplete responses to the population served questions. An
additional 4 percent were assigned source data from SDWIS.
10. Estimate of the number of systems in the nation. The report provides an estimate of the
national number of community water systems, 49,133, excluding federally owned systems, tribal
systems, and systems in the Trust Territories. This is a weighted estimate based on the sample
and responses to the survey regarding water source and the number of people served. Table 1 of
this Volume presents the count of systems by water source, system ownership, and population
served. It also shows the change in these categories since the 2000 CWS Survey. (The estimate of
the number of systems in 2000 is from Table 3 of Community Water System Survey 2000 Volume
II: Detailed Tables and Survey Methodology.)
11. Use of the terms expenses and expenditures. Systems use the terms expenses or expenditures
to refer to their spending. Private systems generally use the term "expenses" in accounting as a
term for the spending done by a system. Public systems refer to spending as "expenditures"; they
reserve the term "expense" for when a cost is incurred, and use the term "expenditure" for when
the spending takes place. Tables 62, 75-82, 91, 94, and 95 use the term expenses to report
spending by both public and private systems.
12. Major capital investments. Systems provided information about major capital investments.
This includes spending on land, plant, and equipment that is not part of routine maintenance.
-------
Detailed Tables
-------
10
-------
Table 1
Change in Estimated Number of Community Water Systems between 2000 and 2006
Ownership Type
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Public Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
Private Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
All Ground Water Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Public Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
Private Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
All Surface Water Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
System Service
100
or Less
489
1,069
118.6
1 1 ,267
9,246
-17.9
1 1 ,756
10,315
-12.3
245
62
-74.7
588
277
-52.9
833
339
-59.3
101 -
500
3,556
4,501
26.6
9,590
7,857
-18.1
13,146
12,358
-6.0
683
245
-64.1
453
365
-19.4
1,136
610
-46.3
501 -
3,300
6,694
6,450
-3.6
2,276
2,269
-0.3
8,970
8,719
-2.8
1,139
895
-21.4
73
173
137.0
1,212
1,068
-11.9
3,301 -
10,000
2,560
1,999
-21.9
511
630
23.3
3,071
2,629
-14.4
935
779
-16.7
73
86
17.8
1,008
864
-14.3
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
1,080
1,614
49.4
259
115
-55.6
1,339
1,730
29.2
894
809
-9.5
95
117
23.2
989
925
-6.5
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
124
195
57.3
12
23
91.7
136
217
59.6
182
206
13.2
28
25
-10.7
210
231
10.0
143
108
-24.5
17
8
-52.9
160
116
-27.5
162
222
37.0
16
44
175.0
178
266
49.4
Over
500,000
9
8
-11.1
1
5
400.0
10
13
30.0
49
55
12.2
4
8
100.0
53
63
18.9
All Sizes
14,655
15,944
8.8
23,933
20,153
-15.8
38,588
36,097
-6.5
4,289
3,272
-23.7
1,330
1,093
-17.8
5,619
4,366
-22.3
(Continued)
11
-------
Table 1 (Cont.)
Change in Estimated Number of Community Water Systems between 2000 and 2006
Ownership Type
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Public Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
Private Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
All Purchased Water Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
All Systems
Public Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
Private Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
All Systems
Systems in 2000
Systems in 2006
Percentage change
System Service
100
or Less
*
373
*
69
390
465.2
69
764
1 ,007.2
734
1,505
105.0
1 1 ,924
9,913
-16.9
12,658
11,418
-9.8
101 -
500
1,513
1,102
-27.2
666
1,155
73.4
2,179
2,257
3.6
5,752
5,848
1.7
10,709
9,376
-12.4
16,461
15,224
-7.5
501 -
3,300
3,449
2,430
-29.5
386
1,205
212.2
3,835
3,634
-5.2
1 1 ,282
9,775
-13.4
2,735
3,647
33.3
14,017
13,421
-4.3
3,301 -
10,000
819
839
2.4
154
232
50.6
973
1,071
10.1
4,314
3,617
-16.2
738
948
28.5
5,052
4,564
-9.7
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
568
634
11.6
117
43
-63.2
685
677
-1.2
2,542
3,057
20.3
471
275
-41.6
3,013
3,332
10.6
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
109
137
25.7
16
10
-37.5
125
148
18.4
415
538
29.6
56
57
1.8
471
596
26.5
89
91
2.2
3
5
66.7
92
96
4.3
394
421
6.9
36
57
58.3
430
478
11.2
Over
500,000
19
24
26.3
2
*
*
21
24
14.3
77
86
11.7
7
13
85.7
84
100
19.0
All Sizes
6,566
5,630
-14.3
1,413
3,041
115.2
7,979
8,670
8.7
25,510
24,847
-2.6
26,676
24,287
-9.0
52,186
49,133
-5.9
Data:
2000 Survey: Q.3, Q.7
2006 Survey: Q.3, Q.6
* No purchased water systems of this size in sample.
The counts of systems are weighted estimates based on the sample. Totals may not add due to
rounding.
12
-------
Table 2
Number and Percentage of Systems
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Ground Water Systems
100% Ground Water
Number
Percentage of systems with this source designation
by service population
Primarily Ground Water
Number
Percentage of systems with this source designation
by service population
Surface Water Systems
100% Surface Water
Number
Percentage of systems with this source designation
by service population
Primarily Surface Water
Number
Percentage of systems with this source designation
by service population
Purchased Water Systems
1 00% Purchased Water
Number
Percentage of systems with this source designation
by service population
Primarily Purchased Water
Number
Percentage of systems with this source designation
by service population
All
Number
Percentage of systems with this source designation
by service population
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
10,308
90
7
0
319
3
20
0
760
7
3
o
11,418
100
Data: Q.6
Notes: Systems incl
101 -
500
12,155
80
203
1
566
4
44
0
2,131
14
126
1
15,224
100
uded in one
501 -
3,300
8,409
63
310
2
756
6
311
2
3,326
25
308
2
13,421
100
of the Prim
3,301 -
10,000
2,072
45
558
12
646
14
218
5
967
21
103
2
4,564
100
10,001 -
50,000
1,384
42
346
10
601
18
324
10
473
14
204
g
3,332
100
arily Ground Water, P
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
164
27
54
9
146
25
84
14
102
17
46
8
596
100
500,000
70
15
47
10
170
35
96
20
47
10
49
10
478
100
rimarily Surface Water,
Over
500,000
10
10
3
3
32
32
31
31
16
16
8
8
100
100
or Primari
All Sizes
34,570
70
1,527
3
3,237
7
1,129
2
7,823
16
848
2
49,133
100
y
Purchased Water categories have their largest source in that category; however, they
have more than one type of source.
13
-------
Table 3
Number and Percentage of Systems
By SDWIS Source Classification
SDWIS Water Source Classification
Surface Water Systems
Number
Percentage
Purchased Surface Water Systems
Number
Percentage
Ground Water Under the Direct Influence of
Surface Water (GWUDI) Systems
Number
Percentage
Purchased GWUDI Systems
Number
Percentage
100% Ground Water Systems
Number
Percentage
Purchased Ground Water Systems
Number
Percentage
All Systems
Number
Percentage
System Service
100
or Less
139
1
643
6
200
2
*
*
10,308
90
128
1
11,418
100
Data: Q.6
101 -
500
379
2
1,776
12
231
2
*
*
12,358
81
481
3
15,224
100
501 -
3,300
908
7
2,639
20
221
2
*
*
8,719
65
934
7
13,421
100
3,301 -
10,000
985
22
1,426
31
48
1
2
0
2,103
46
*
*
4,564
100
Notes: Reflects SDWIS classification of water systems,
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
1,118
34
681
20
55
2
*
*
1,447
43
31
1
3,332
100
i.e., the
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
251
42
143
24
5
1
*
*
192
32
5
1
596
100
500,000
299
63
89
19
6
1
2
0
78
16
4
1
478
100
Over
500,000
68
68
17
17
*
*
*
*
13
13
2
2
100
100
All Sizes
4,148
8
7,413
15
766
2
4
0
35,217
72
1,585
3
49,133
100
hierarchy starting with surface water. If
the system receives any of its water from a surface source, it is considered a surface water
system. The SDWIS hierarchy is: surface water, purchased surface water, ground water under the
direct influence (GWUDI) of surface water, purchased GWUDI, ground water, and purchased ground
water.
14
-------
Table 4
Number of Systems
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Publicly Owned Systems
Owned and operated by a government or public agency
Owned by a government or public agency and operated by a private contractor
All Public
Privately Owned Systems
Operated for profit primarily as a water business
Not operated for profit
Operated a necessary part of another business (i.e., ancillary systems)
All Private
All Systems
All
System Service Population
100
or Less
1,505
1,505
1,019
3,529
5,365
9,913
11,418
Data: Q.3
101 -
500
5,344
504
5,848
2,161
3,365
3,851
9,376
15,224
501 - 3,301 -
3,300 10,000
9,514
261
9,775
1,661
1,647
338
3,647
13,421
Notes: Publicly owned systems include municipal systems, systems run as public enterprise funds, state-run systems
3,474
143
3,617
299
649
*
948
4,564
Category
10,001 - 50,001 - 100,001- Over
50,000 100,000 500,000 500,000
2,950
106
3,057
168
107
*
275
3,332
, and special districts.
519
19
538
34
24
*
57
596
It excludes
409
12
421
53
4
*
57
478
85
2
86
12
2
*
13
100
All Sizes
23,799
1,047
24,847
5,406
9,327
9,554
24,287
49,133
federal systems. Examples of privately owned systems not operated for profit are homeowners' associations and non-profit cooperatives. Privately
owned systems that are a necessary part of another business are referred to as ancillary systems because the water business is not the primary
business. The majority of ancillary systems are mobile home parks that provide water as one of a number of services for residents of the park.
15
-------
Table 5
Number of Systems
By Ownership and Primary Water Source
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
All Public
Private Systems
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
All Private
All Systems
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
All
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1,069
62
373
1,505
9,246
277
390
9,913
10,315
339
764
11,418
Data: Q.3, Q.6
Notes:
101 -
500
4,501
245
1,102
5,848
7,857
365
1,155
9,376
12,358
610
2,257
15,224
501 -
3,300
6,450
895
2,430
9,775
2,269
173
1,205
3,647
8,719
1,068
3,634
13,421
3,301 -
10,000
1,999
779
839
3,617
630
86
232
948
2,629
864
1,071
4,564
10,001 -
50,000
1,614
809
634
3,057
115
117
43
275
1,730
925
677
3,332
50,001 -
100,000
195
206
137
538
23
25
10
57
217
231
148
596
100,001-
500,000
108
222
91
421
8
44
5
57
116
266
96
478
Over
500,000
8
55
24
86
5
8
*
13
13
63
24
100
All Sizes
15,944
3,272
5,630
24,847
20,153
1,093
3,041
24,287
36,097
4,366
8,670
49,133
16
-------
Table 6
Percentage of Systems with Access to Computers, Peripherals, and the Internet
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Ground Water Systems
Percentage of systems with access to computers for sending and receiving
information
Of the systems with computers, the percentage that have:
Microsoft Excel
Microsoft Access
CD drive
DVD player
Of the systems with a computer, the percentage with each type of internet access:
High speed Internet (e.g., cable, DSL, wireless, T1)
Dial-up modem
No access
Observations
Surface Water Systems
Percentage of systems with access to computers for sending and receiving
information
Of the systems with computers, the percentage that have:
Microsoft Excel
Microsoft Access
CD drive
DVD player
Of the systems with a computer, the percentage with each type of internet access:
High speed Internet (e.g., cable, DSL, wireless, T1)
Dial-up modem
No access
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
74.2
94.8
53.1
98.3
69.7
89.1
10.9
0.0
88
49.2
95.9
47.4
90.8
57.2
58.7
41.3
0.0
49
101 -
500
79.3
92.6
53.9
96.3
55.5
78.4
20.4
1.2
105
85.2
98.5
44.2
98.6
76.9
77.4
21.2
1.4
67
501 -
3,300
91.8
100.0
62.0
98.5
73.3
86.0
14.0
0.0
111
95.8
97.2
70.1
98.4
65.7
85.6
14.4
0.0
78
3,301 -
10,000
90.4
91.6
63.0
87.5
65.9
89.8
9.7
0.5
42
87.2
90.9
53.1
93.9
62.1
88.9
11.1
0.0
48
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
93.7
92.5
72.2
92.5
70.6
96.0
4.0
0.0
56
98.4
97.4
68.1
98.7
77.9
88.3
10.4
1.3
68
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
100.0
100.0
85.1
100.0
81.5
100.0
0.0
0.0
32
100.0
100.0
83.7
97.8
72.5
95.2
4.8
0.0
44
100.0
96.4
82.0
96.4
89.1
98.1
1.9
0.0
49
99.1
94.1
80.2
92.6
75.1
97.7
2.3
0.0
101
Over
500,000
100.0
100.0
59.8
100.0
59.8
100.0
0.0
0.0
6
100.0
100.0
92.3
100.0
76.9
100.0
0.0
0.0
36
All Sizes
82.3
95.1
58.0
96.5
65.9
85.3
14.3
0.4
489
89.6
96.1
63.7
96.9
70.1
86.2
13.3
0.5
491
(Continued)
17
-------
Table 6 (Cont.)
Percentage of Systems with Access to Computers, Peripherals, and the Internet
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Purchased Water Systems
Percentage of systems with access to computers for sending and receiving
information
Of the systems with computers, the percentage that have:
Microsoft Excel
Microsoft Access
CD drive
DVD player
Of the systems with a computer, the percentage with each type of internet access:
High speed Internet (e.g., cable, DSL, wireless, T1)
Dial-up modem
No access
Observations
All Systems
Percentage of systems with access to computers for sending and receiving
information
Of the systems with computers, the percentage that have:
Microsoft Excel
Microsoft Access
CD drive
DVD player
Of the systems with a computer, the percentage with each type of internet access:
High speed Internet (e.g., cable, DSL, wireless, T1)
Dial-up modem
No access
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
100.0
100.0
49.3
100.0
84.6
67.9
32.1
0.0
8
75.2
95.3
52.7
98.3
70.8
86.6
13.4
0.0
145
Data: Q.4
Notes:
101 -
500
88.9
87.8
68.4
100.0
66.4
75.7
24.3
0.0
23
80.9
92.1
55.8
97.0
58.2
77.9
21.0
1.0
195
501 -
3,300
93.6
96.2
54.1
100.0
64.2
82.6
9.4
8.0
48
92.6
98.7
60.5
98.9
70.2
85.0
12.8
2.2
237
3,301 -
10,000
89.9
95.2
52.5
80.8
66.9
79.9
20.1
0.0
19
89.7
92.3
58.8
87.2
65.4
87.4
12.3
0.3
109
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
97.3
100.0
85.8
90.6
76.4
100.0
0.0
0.0
17
95.6
95.4
73.9
93.8
73.9
94.6
5.0
0.4
141
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
100.0
96.5
83.4
96.5
76.4
100.0
0.0
0.0
23
100.0
99.1
84.1
98.3
76.7
98.1
1.9
0.0
99
500,000
100.0
97.8
91.5
98.0
80.9
100.0
0.0
0.0
37
99.5
95.4
82.9
94.6
79.6
98.3
1.7
0.0
187
Over
500,000
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
87.1
100.0
0.0
0.0
10
100.0
100.0
90.0
100.0
77.2
100.0
0.0
0.0
52
All Sizes
92.9
94.7
60.7
96.8
68.5
81.1
15.5
3.4
185
84.7
95.1
59.1
96.6
66.8
84.6
14.4
1.0
1,165
18
-------
Table 7
Average Daily Flow (MGD) for Public Water Systems
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
100% Ground Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Primarily Ground Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Percentage drawn from each source for
Primarily Ground Systems:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
100% Surface Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Primarily Surface Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Percentage drawn from each source for
Primarily Surface Systems:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.049
+|- 0.050
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
11
0.018
+|- 0.072
0.019
+|- 0.000
14.6
+|- 0.0
85.4
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
13
101 -
500
0.037
+|- 0.009
0.029
+|- 0.000
99.5
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.5
+|- 0.0
38
0.064
+|- 0.041
0.027
+|- 0.075
8.3
+I-7.7
83.4
+|- 7.2
8.3
+|- 73.6
32
501 -
3,300
0.170
+|- 0.039
0.292
+I-0.783
69.0
+|- 4.9
8.3
+|- 73.5
22.6
+|- 78.3
82
0.215
+|- 0.048
0.304
+|- 0.272
19.8
+|- 6.3
79.6
+|- 6.0
0.7
+|- 0.9
62
3,301 -
10,000
0.684
+|- 0.758
1.349
+|- 0.883
81.7
+|- 70.3
5.0
+|- 5.3
13.4
+|- 70.0
46
1.024
+I-0.785
0.998
+|- 0.324
8.4
+|- 7.6
90.3
+|- 7.5
1.4
+|- 7.5
55
10,001 -
50,000
2.663
+|- 0.722
5.664
+|- 4.609
77.4
+|- 9. 7
16.2
+I-77.5
6.4
+|- 4.2
58
3.003
+|- 0.498
3.540
+|- 0.886
13.0
+I-5.8
81.9
+|- 6.5
5.1
+|- 4. 7
72
50,001 -
100,000
8.316
+|- 2.477
9.106
+|- 2.867
85.9
+|- 7.7
3.6
+|- 4.0
10.5
+|- 8.2
35
9.116
+I-7.795
15.009
+|- 4.647
11.1
+|- 6.4
79.2
+|- 8.3
9.8
+|- 7.6
48
100,001-
500,000
17.384
+I-3.789
39.614
+|- 7 7.027
68.9
+|- 3.9
11.1
+|- 4. 7
20.0
+|- 4.5
51
25.883
+I-3.829
33.735
+|- 4.493
10.6
+|- 2.6
81.6
+|- 4. 7
7.8
+|- 3.4
106
Over
500,000
201 .336
+|- 73.824
165.945
+|- 29.336
99.9
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.1
+|- 0.0
5
178.086
+|- 48.940
196.422
+I-44.797
6.7
+|- 3.2
79.9
+|- 5.4
13.4
+|- 6.0
33
All Sizes
0.607
+I-0.774
4.736
+|- 2. 759
78.6
+|- 6.0
9.0
+|- 5.4
12.4
+|- 6.2
326
5.527
+|- 0.936
10.708
+|- 3.279
13.8
+|- 3.4
82.3
+|- 3.2
3.9
+|- 7.7
421
(Continued)
19
-------
Table 7 (Cont.)
Average Daily Flow (MGD) for Public Water Systems
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
100% Purchased Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Primarily Purchased Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Percentage drawn from each source for
Primarily Purchased Systems:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
Average Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage drawn from each source:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.018
+|- 0.020
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3
0.040
+|- 0.035
14.6
+|- 0.0
85.4
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
27
Data: Q.6
101 -
500
0.032
+|- 0.073
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
13
0.037
+|- 0.008
79.5
+|- 35.2
18.3
+|- 32.2
2.2
+|- 4.2
83
501 -
3,300
0.272
+\-0.317
0.208
+|- 0.220
16.6
+|- 23.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
83.4
+|- 23.2
33
0.203
+|- 0.077
36.0
+|- 16.3
36.7
+I-212
27.3
+I-215
177
3,301 -
10,000
0.575
+|- 0.195
0.539
+|- 0.362
18.2
+|- 22.9
0.3
+I-0.7
81.5
+|- 22.9
22
0.786
+\-0.131
51.5
+|- 17.1
25.9
+|- 13.6
22.6
+|- 14.9
123
10,001 -
50,000
2.968
+|- 1.198
4.952
+|- 2. 127
3.4
+|- 3.6
14.7
+|- 15.2
81.9
+|- 14.0
23
3.315
+|- 0.647
37.8
+|- 12.9
37.4
+|- 10.6
24.8
+|- 12.6
153
50,001 -
100,000
13.652
+|- 7.681
13.380
+|- 4.254
11.4
+|- 6.5
5.5
+|- 5.3
83.1
+I-8.-7
28
10.831
+|- 1832
32.2
+|- 10.5
37.5
+|- 11.0
30.3
+|- 10.6
111
100,001-
500,000
24.374
+|- 4.047
37.885
+|- 6.358
19.4
+I-4.7
10.3
+|- 4.6
70.3
+I-4.8
44
28.672
+|- 2.325
28.2
+|- 4.3
42.4
+|- 5.9
29.3
+I-4.8
201
Over
500,000
110.083
+I-55.798
142.877
+|- 41.514
5.6
+I-3.7
21.0
+|- 72.5
73.4
+|- 10.6
13
168.113
+|- 26.576
14.6
+|- 6.5
59.7
+|- 8.2
25.7
+I-8.7
51
All Sizes
1.278
+|- 0.437
8.374
+|- 3.994
12.0
+|- 8.4
6.8
+|- 6.2
81.2
+|- 9.3
179
1.911
+I-0.774
40.7
+|- 8.2
34.6
+|- 7.8
24.7
+|- 8. 1
926
Notes: Flow is the amount of water drawn from each source. It includes water delivered to customers and
system losses.
20
-------
Table 8
Average Daily Flow (MGD) for Private Water Systems
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
100% Ground Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Primarily Ground Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Percentage drawn from each source for
Primarily Ground Systems:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
100% Surface Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Primarily Surface Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Percentage drawn from each source for
Primarily Surface Systems:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.007
+|- 0.002
0.011
+|- 0.000
99.7
+|- 0.0
0.3
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
68
0.021
+|- 0.070
0.003
+|- 0.002
11.1
+|- 18.2
83.8
+|- 15.3
5.0
+|- 7.4
31
101 -
500
0.021
+|- 0.005
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
61
0.030
+|- 0.070
3.424
+\-4.164
43.0
+|- 70.4
57.0
+|- 70.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
29
501 -
3,300
0.093
+|- 0.026
0.147
+|- 0.000
66.5
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
33.5
+|- 0.0
27
0.301
+|- 0. 793
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
11
3,301 -
10,000
0.855
+|- 0.373
0.641
+|- 0.224
87.4
+|- 6.0
0.5
+I-7.7
12.1
+|- 6.2
12
0.569
+|- 0.247
1.115
+|- 0.000
32.6
+|- 0.0
67.4
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
6
10,001 -
50,000
1.580
+|- 0.422
3.146
+|- 7.588
60.3
+|- 2.4
24.5
+I-27.5
15.2
+I-27.7
7
4.005
+|- 7.937
3.538
+|- 7.982
13.8
+|- 74.3
84.2
+I-73.7
2.0
+|- 2.6
11
50,001 -
100,000
14.463
+|- 74.896
5.648
+|- 5.444
54.0
+|- 0.5
12.8
+|- 20.9
33.2
+|- 20.3
4
7.674
+I-3.775
7.687
+|- 2.687
16.6
+I-27.7
79.9
+|- 76.7
3.5
+|- 4.8
6
100,001-
500,000
27.71 1
+|- 72.607
37.250
+|- 9.999
69.0
+|- 2.6
30.6
+|- 2.3
0.3
+|- 0.3
4
23.717
+|- 5.327
18.200
+|- 5.567
1.0
+|- 7.0
93.4
+I-4.8
5.6
+|- 5.3
15
Over
500,000
17.038
+|- 0.000
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
110.103
+|- 0.000
93.348
+|- 57.678
2.9
+|- 2.8
91.4
+|- 9.3
5.7
+|- 6.5
5
All Sizes
0.066
+|- 0.020
1.247
+|- 0.875
79.6
+I-8.7
2.6
+|- 3.4
17.8
+|- 9.4
184
1.043
+|- 0.542
9.554
+|- 3.947
18.0
+|- 9.0
79.6
+|- 8.3
2.5
+|- 7.7
114
(Continued)
21
-------
Table 8 (Cont.)
Average Daily Flow (MGD) for Private Water Systems
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
100% Purchased Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Primarily Purchased Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Percentage drawn from each source for
Primarily Purchased Systems:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
Average Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage drawn from each source:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.008
+|- 0.008
0.007
+|- 0.000
0.0
+|- 0.0
17.9
+|- 0.0
82.1
+|- 0.0
5
0.007
+|- 0.002
39.7
+|- 46.0
44.3
+I-38.7
15.9
+|- 25.2
104
Data: Q.6
101 -
500
0.024
+|- 0.077
0.022
+|- 0.000
10.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
90.0
+|- 0.0
9
0.031
+|- 0.078
15.0
+|- 70.3
8.6
+|- 77.5
76.5
+|- 27.6
99
501 -
3,300
0.125
+|- 0.044
0.699
+|- 0.749
3.6
+|- 7.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
96.4
+|- 7.0
14
0.139
+|- 0.054
24.8
+|- 34.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
75.2
+|- 34.5
52
3,301 -
10,000
0.426
+|- 0.730
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
4
0.676
+I-0.783
84.0
+|- 8.6
4.7
+|- 8.2
11.3
+|- 6.0
22
10,001 -
50,000
0.790
+|- 0.000
1.830
+|- 0.000
0.0
+|- 0.0
47.2
+|- 0.0
52.8
+|- 0.0
2
2.536
+|- 0.749
21.8
+I-76.7
66.7
+|- 77.3
11.5
+|- 72.8
20
50,001 -
100,000
12.245
+|- 0.330
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2
9.638
+I-3.708
31.2
+|- 79.2
53.6
+I-32.7
15.1
+|- 77.0
12
100,001-
500,000
6.655
+|- 0.000
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
20.846
+|- 4.667
13.0
+I-77.6
82.3
+|- 70.3
4.7
+|- 4.6
20
Over
500,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0
65.673
+|- 42.005
2.9
+|- 2.8
91.4
+|- 9.3
5.7
+|- 6.5
6
All Sizes
0.163
+|- 0.087
0.447
+|- 0.567
6.1
+I-3.8
2.1
+|- 4. 7
91.7
+I-4.7
37
0.198
+|- 0.029
38.5
+|- 78.8
17.0
+I-70.7
44.5
+|- 22.9
335
Notes: Flow is the amount of water drawn from each source. It includes water delivered to customers and
system losses.
22
-------
Table 9
Average Daily Flow (MGD) for Public and Private Water Systems
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
100% Ground Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Primarily Ground Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Percentage drawn from each source for
Primarily Ground Systems:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
100% Surface Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Primarily Surface Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Percentage drawn from each source for
Primarily Surface Systems:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.012
+|- 0.006
0.011
+|- 0.000
99.7
+|- 0.0
0.3
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
79
0.021
+|- 0.009
0.009
+|- 0.008
12.4
+\-11.7
84.4
+I-9.8
3.2
+|- 5.4
44
101 -
500
0.027
+|- 0.005
0.029
+|- 0.000
99.5
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.5
+|- 0.0
99
0.044
+|- 0.027
1.741
+|- 2.614
25.8
+|- 16.8
70.1
+|- 13.5
4.1
+|- 7.6
61
501 -
3,300
0.151
+|- 0.030
0.256
+|- 0. 150
68.4
+I-3.8
6.2
+I-70.7
25.3
+|- 14.5
109
0.232
+|- 0.054
0.304
+|- 0.212
19.8
+|- 6.3
79.6
+|- 6.0
0.7
+|- 0.9
73
3,301 -
10,000
0.710
+\-0.145
1.090
+|- 0.607
83.8
+|- 6.9
3.4
+|- 3.3
12.9
+I-6.7
58
0.980
+|- 0.769
1.007
+|- 0.299
10.2
+|- 7.8
88.5
+|- 7.6
1.3
+|- 1.4
61
10,001 -
50,000
2.586
+|- 0.675
5.525
+|- 4.347
76.4
+|- 8.6
16.7
+I-77.0
6.9
+|- 4. 7
65
3.101
+|- 0.497
3.539
+|- 0.803
13.2
+|- 5.4
82.4
+I-5.8
4.5
+|- 3.3
83
50,001 -
100,000
8.715
+|- 2.572
8.650
100,001-
500,000
18.031
+|- 3.669
39.418
+I-2.749 +I-70.734
81.7
+|- 8.5
4.8
+|- 4.2
13.5
+I-9.7
39
8.982
+I-7.734
14.051
+I-4.767
11.8
+|- 6.2
79.3
+|- 7.5
8.9
+I-6.7
54
68.9
+|- 3.6
12.8
+|- 4.0
18.3
+|- 4.4
55
25.721
+|- 3.548
30.431
+|- 4.087
8.7
+|- 2.3
83.9
+|- 3.4
7.4
+|- 2.9
121
Over
500,000
104.015
+|- 92.488
165.945
+|- 29.326
99.9
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.1
+|- 0.0
6
174.508
+|- 46.473
174.722
+|- 38.059
5.9
+|- 2.6
82.3
+|- 4.8
11.8
+|- 4.9
38
All Sizes
0.313
+|- 0.050
3.960
+|- 7.656
78.8
+|- 5.0
7.6
+|- 4.4
13.6
+|- 5.4
510
4.301
+|- 0.809
10.549
+I-2.855
14.4
+|- 3.2
81.9
+|- 3.0
3.7
+|- 7.5
535
(Continued)
23
-------
Table 9 (Cont.)
Average Daily Flow (MGD) for Public and Private Water Systems
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
100% Purchased Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Primarily Purchased Water
Average Daily Flow
Confidence interval
Percentage drawn from each source for
Primarily Purchased Systems:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
Average Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage drawn from each source:
% Ground Water
Confidence Interval
% Surface Water
Confidence Interval
% Purchased Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.013
+|- 0.072
0.007
+|- 0.000
0.0
+|- 0.0
17.9
+|- 0.0
82.1
+|- 0.0
8
0.012
+|- 0.006
34.3
+|- 38.3
53.2
+|- 35.4
12.5
+|- 20.2
131
Data: Q.6
101 -
500
0.028
+\- 0.011
0.022
+|- 0.000
10.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
90.0
+|- 0.0
22
0.033
+\- 0.011
40.9
+|- 47.6
12.5
+|- 17.0
46.6
+|- 52.2
182
501 -
3,300
0.225
+|- 0.274
0.452
+|- 0.457
10.2
+|- 73.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
89.8
+|- 73.3
47
0.186
+|- 0.058
33.2
+|- 75.3
27.4
+|- 76.9
39.5
+I-20.8
229
3,301 -
10,000
0.545
+|- 0.759
0.539
+|- 0.362
18.2
+|- 22.9
0.3
+I-0.7
81.5
+|- 22.8
26
0.767
+I-0.773
59.9
+|- 73.4
20.4
+|- 70.2
19.7
+|- 77.4
145
10,001 -
50,000
2.823
+|- 7.747
4.772
+|- 2.047
3.2
+|- 3.4
16.6
+|- 74.9
80.2
+|- 73.6
25
3.250
+|- 0.598
36.2
+I-77.8
40.5
+I-70.7
23.4
+|- 77.4
173
50,001 -
100,000
13.509
+|- 6.896
13.380
+|- 4.248
11.4
+|- 6.5
5.5
+|- 5.3
83.1
+I-8.7
30
10.725
+|- 7.694
32.1
+|- 9.6
39.1
+|- 70.3
28.8
+I-9.7
123
100,001-
500,000
22.430
+I-4.746
37.885
+|- 6.356
19.4
+I-4.7
10.3
+|- 4.6
70.3
+I-4.8
45
27.907
+I-2.768
26.4
+|- 4.2
47.1
+I-5.7
26.5
+|- 4.3
221
Over
500,000
110.083
+I-55.780
142.877
+|- 47.523
5.6
+I-3.7
21.0
+|- 72.5
73.4
+|- 70.6
13
154.287
+|- 26.076
12.8
+|- 5.5
64.6
+|- 7.4
22.6
+I-7.7
57
All Sizes
0.898
+|- 0.282
5.625
+I-2.783
10.0
+I-5.8
5.2
+|- 4.5
84.9
+|- 6.9
216
1.106
+|- 0.090
40.2
+I-7.7
30.6
+I-6.8
29.2
+|- 8.9
1,261
Notes: Flow is the amount of water drawn from each source. It includes water delivered to customers and
system losses.
24
-------
Table 10
Average Annual Flow for Public and Private Systems (Millions of Gallons per Year)
From Each Source Type
Source
Ground Water Sources
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with ground water sources
Surface Water Sources
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with surface water sources
GWUDI Sources
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with GWUDI sources
Unknown Surface Water Sources
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with unknown surface water
sources
Purchased Finished Ground Water
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with purchased finished
ground water
Purchased Partial/Untreated Ground Water
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with purchased
partial/untreated ground water
Purchased Finished Surface Water
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with purchased finished
surface water
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
4.3
+|- 2.2
80.0
7.2
+|- 4.0
1.1
7.0
+|- 4.5
1.8
*
*
0.0
2.1
+|- 0.0
1.1
*
*
0.0
5.3
+I-5.-7
5.6
101 -
500
11.1
+|- 2.9
77.4
20.5
+|- 10.2
2.2
67.6
+|- 722.3
1.5
*
*
0.0
3.6
+|- 3.2
3.7
*
*
0.0
11.9
+|- 4.4
10.8
501 -
3,300
53.1
+|- 10.1
68.1
85.4
+|- 23.8
6.3
78.6
+|- 57.9
1.9
*
*
0.0
40.9
+|- 79.7
9.9
*
*
0.0
100.9
+|- 98.6
19.1
3,301 -
10,000
260.8
+|- 59.8
57.8
316.3
+|- 59.0
18.7
159.6
+|- 54.5
1.3
*
*
0.0
44.3
+|- 33.4
1.0
*
*
0.0
133.3
+|- 46.6
29.4
10,001 -
50,000
917.8
+|- 232.5
60.0
1 ,097.7
+|- 269.8
31.9
511.2
+|- 459.2
2.4
*
*
0.0
242.5
+I-343.7
3.9
365.0
+|- 0.0
0.2
917.4
+I-330.-7
23.3
50,001 -
100,000
2,382.9
+|- 507.5
49.8
3,290.2
+\- 517.2
41.3
1 ,026.8
+\-711.7
4.0
1 ,398.0
+|- 0.0
0.9
796.8
+|- -7,0019
5.9
5.0
+|- 0.0
0.4
3,374.9
+|- -7,533.6
30.1
100,001-
500,000
5,274.0
+|- 893.5
44.7
8,467.9
+|- 807.4
58.4
5,667.9
+|- -7,867.0
4.8
3,498.0
+|- 0.0
0.4
2,158.4
+|- -7, -7 43.9
5.5
3,657.3
+|- 2,358.5
2.2
5,324.2
+|- 863.0
29.7
Over
500,000
19,276.3
+|- 7,402.3
36.0
54,027.7
+1-9,662. -7
67.6
2,175.8
+|- 0.0
1.6
*
*
0.0
320.2
+|- 3012
6.4
8,529.8
+|- 2,678.5
3.1
23,575.3
+1-7,375. -7
25.9
All Sizes
161.5
+I-217
71.7
2,167.6
+|- 246.0
7.8
279.7
+|- -748.0
1.8
1,973.1
+|- 930.9
0.0
78.6
+|- 43.3
4.6
3,188.0
+|- 1928.6
0.0
427.9
+|- -7713
14.9
(Continued)
25
-------
Table 10(Cont.)
Average Annual Flow for Public and Private Systems (Millions of Gallons per Year)
From Each Source Type
Ownership Type
Purchased Partial/Untreated Surface Water
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with purchased
partial/untreated surface water
Purchased Finished GWUDI Water
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with purchased finished GUDI
water
Purchased Partial/Untreated GWUDI Water
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with purchased
partial/untreated GWUDI water
Unknown Purchased Water
Average Annual Flow
Confidence Interval
Percentage systems with unknown purchased
water
Observations
100
or Less
5.9
+|- 5.6
0.1
*
*
0.0
*
*
0.0
*
*
0.0
158
Data: Q.6
101 -
500
6.9
+|- 0.0
0.1
*
*
0.0
*
*
0.0
4.1
+|- 0.0
0.0
217
501 -
3,300
218.0
+|- 0.0
0.1
*
*
0.0
*
*
0.0
*
*
0.0
294
System Service
Population Category
3,301 - 10,001 -
10,000
503.9
+|- 200.4 +|-
1.1
60.3
+I-66.7
1.8
*
*
0.0
88.8
+|- 77.7 +|- 1
2.1
205
Notes: Flow is the amount of water drawn from each source.
50,000
197.5
268.6
1.7
*
*
0.0
*
*
0.0
843.2
780.8
3.2
260
50,001 -
100,000
5,572.4
+\- 1,101.1 +
3.9
*
*
0.0
*
*
0.0
1.7
+|- 0.0
0.8
184
100,001-
500,000
7,376.2
- 2,395.9
5.7
2.4
+|- 0.0
0.4
200.0
+|- 0.0
0.4
384.5
+|- 312.4
0.8
380
Over
500,000
40,833.3
+|- 16,413.0
11.4
*
*
0.0
*
*
0.0
21 ,534.2
+\- 1,333.1
8.4
98.000
All Sizes
4,155.8
+1-2,237.6
0.4
58.9
+|- 64.4
0.2
200.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
1 ,226.4
+|- -7,206.3
0.5
1796
It includes water delivered to customers and
system losses.
26
-------
Table 11
Annual Water Deliveries and Unaccounted for Water (Millions of Gallons per Year)
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Sold to Other Water Suppliers
Finished Water
Confidence Interval
Partially or Untreated Water
Confidence Interval
Residential Customers
Confidence Interval
Non-residential Customers
Finished Water
Confidence Interval
Partially or Untreated Water
Confidence Interval
Unaccounted for Water
Confidence Interval
Unaccounted for Water as Percentage of Total
Confidence Interval
Observations
Private Systems
Sold to Other Water Suppliers
Finished Water
Confidence Interval
Partially or Untreated Water
Confidence Interval
Residential Customers
Confidence Interval
Non-residential Customers
Finished Water
Confidence Interval
Partially or Untreated Water
Confidence Interval
Unaccounted for Water
Confidence Interval
Unaccounted for Water as Percentage of Total
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
7.0
+|- 5.4
1.0
+|- 1.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.7
+|- 1.8
12.1
+|- 9.5
24
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.3
+|- 0.4
2.6
+I-0.7
0.5
+|- 0.9
1.3
+|- 2.6
0.2
+|- 0.2
6.7
+|- 5.8
95
101-
500
5.1
+|- 0.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
11.1
+|- 19
1.5
+|- 1.2
*
*
3.0
+|- 2.9
16.2
5
79
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
7.7
+|- 1.7
0.4
+I-0.7
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.8
+|- 0.3
10.7
+|- 3.0
96
501-
3,300
6.6
+|- 6.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
54.6
+|- 20.0
20.7
+|- 72.5
5.7
+I-717
9.4
+I-2.7
16.6
+I-3.7
173
1.8
+|- 2.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
43.3
+|- 79.7
15.5
+|- 72.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
4.6
+|- 7.6
11.3
+|- 3.6
52
3,301 -
10,000
44.9
+|- 27.9
9.1
+|- 74.0
148.1
+|- 23.9
76.0
+|- 23.4
19.4
+I-23.7
37.2
+|- 70.3
12.8
+|- 2.8
77
16.4
+|- 26.6
0.0
+|- 0.0
169.3
+|- 46.0
36.0
+|- 29.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
23.0
+|- 70.3
11.4
+|- 5.5
76
10,001 -
50,000
77.8
+|- 30.2
0.6
+I-7.7
647.4
+|- 737.7
378.8
+|- 736.9
1.5
+|- 2.2
113.2
+|- 24.6
10.1
+|- 7.9
777
160.9
+|- 720.7
17.6
+I-37.7
345.7
+|- 92.3
39.9
+I-47.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
102.3
+|- 57.6
15.5
+I-5.7
77
50,001 -
100,000
500.6
+|- 798.9
0.4
+|- 0.6
2,034.4
+I-323.7
976.0
+|- 292.3
16.4
+|- 77.5
302.8
+I-96.7
8.5
+|- 7.7
87
1 ,646.6
+|- 7,307.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
1 ,730.6
+|- 582.0
1 ,567.2
+|- 775.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
1,214.4
+|- 7,475.8
17.2
+|- 75.2
8
100,001-
500,000
1 ,669.3
+|- 393.5
86.5
+|- 86.0
4,980.0
+I-499.7
2,969.2
+|- 347.0
304.0
+|- 766.2
763.5
+|- 740.4
7.9
+|- 0.9
767
1 ,006.3
+|- 804.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
5,039.3
+|- 7,456.0
3,651.4
+|- 927.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
3,496.7
+|- 7,760.6
24.5
+|- 6.3
76
Over 500,000
13,028.9
+1-3,852.7
2,949.2
+1-3,079.7
22,759.5
+|- 4,200.6
12,846.4
+|- 2,245.3
482.5
+|- 377.9
8,057.9
+|- 7,829.8
13.2
+|- 2.4
48
2,298.3
+|- 7,079.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
23,665.0
+|- 9,047.6
13,186.0
+1-6,343.7
1 ,746.3
+|- 2,598.6
7,893.7
+1-2,790.6
15.8
+|- 7.4
4
All Sizes
350.4
+I-64.7
59.7
+|- 55.3
291.2
+|- 38.4
278.8
+|- 42.2
36.3
+|- 75.9
87.7
+|- 74.3
14.7
+I-2.7
760
60.5
+I-35.7
0.4
+I-0.7
38.2
+|- 77.4
90.6
+I-47.7
7.7
+|- 9.0
39.4
+I-26.7
10.1
+|- 2.2
298
(Continued)
27
-------
Table 11 (Cont.)
Annual Water Deliveries and Unaccounted for Water (Millions of Gallons per Year)
By Ownership
Ownership Type
All Systems
Sold to Other Water Suppliers
Finished Water
Confidence Interval
Partially or Untreated Water
Confidence Interval
Residential Customers
Confidence Interval
Non-residential Customers
Finished Water
Confidence Interval
Partially or Untreated Water
Confidence Interval
Unaccounted for Water
Confidence Interval
Unaccounted for Water as Percentage of Total
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.2
+|- 0.4
3.1
+I-7.7
0.7
+|- 0.8
1.0
+|- 2.0
0.6
+|- 0.6
8.2
+|- 5.0
119
Data: Q.21.A
Notes: Unaccounted
101-
500
0.8
+|- 7.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
9.1
+|- 1.4
1.1
+|- 0.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
2.0
+|- 1.6
13.6
+|- 3.2
175
501-
3,300
6.0
+|- 5.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
51.5
+|- 75.4
19.7
+|- 70.5
4.7
+I-9.7
8.3
+I-2.7
15.4
+|- 3.0
225
for water includes system
3,301 -
10,000
38.8
+|- 22.8
7.2
+|- 77.2
152.8
+I-27.4
66.2
+|- 79.6
13.5
+|- 75.8
33.4
+|- 8.0
12.5
+|- 2.5
93
10,001 -
50,000
83.1
+|- 29.5
1.3
+|- 7.8
627.2
+|- 724.3
359.0
+|- 730.2
1.5
+I-2.7
112.6
+|- 23.4
10.4
+|- 7.9
128
50,001 -
100,000
586.8
+|- 227.6
0.3
+|- 0.6
2,016.9
+I-303.8
1,010.9
+|- 284.5
14.8
+|- 75.9
358.1
+|- 740.4
9.0
+|- 2.0
89
100,001-
500,000
1,576.1
+I-360.7
81.5
+|- 87.5
4,988.1
+I-475.7
3,070.2
+|- 337.0
285.3
+I-756.7
1,157.5
+|- 427.3
10.4
+I-2.7
177
Over 500,000
12,311.0
+1-3,600.7
2,593.9
+1-2,779.3
22,817.7
+|- 3,975.3
12,869.2
+1-2,738.7
664.0
+|- 447.0
8,046.9
+1-7,776.9
13.4
+|- 2.3
52
All Sizes
264.8
+|- 43.3
35.8
+|- 32.5
166.9
+|- 75.4
232.0
+|- 29.2
24.5
+|- 9.4
71.6
+|- 77.4
13.1
+|- 7.6
1,058
losses, water for fire suppression, and water used in the
treatment process.
Average deliveries only includes estimates for systems reporting each type.
28
-------
Table 12
Annual Deliveries per Customer Service Connection
By Ownership
(Thousands of Gallons)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean Residential Deliveries
Confidence Interval
Median Residential Deliveries
Non-Residential Deliveries
Mean Finished Water Deliveries
Confidence Interval
Median Finished Water Deliveries
Mean Partially or Untreated Water Deliveries
Confidence Interval
Median Partially or Untreated Water Deliveries
Observations
Private Systems
Mean Residential Deliveries
Confidence Interval
Median Residential Deliveries
Non-Residential Deliveries
Mean Finished Water Deliveries
Confidence Interval
Median Finished Water Deliveries
Mean Partially or Untreated Water Deliveries
Confidence Interval
Median Partially or Untreated Water Deliveries
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
109
+\-61
112
1,499
+1-3,058
142
*
*
*
27
96
+I-22
67
1,339
+|- 426
1,560
429
+|-0
429
81
101 -
500
107
+I-22
80
156
+I-97
98
*
*
*
84
86
+|- 14
70
95
+|- 100
62
*
*
*
111
501 -
3,300
94
+\-11
77
325
+|- 103
185
317
+|-0
317
157
104
+|- 18
87
3,053
+1-4,595
367
*
*
*
56
3,301 -
10,000
86
+\-11
75
694
+|- 294
329
14,131
+|- 11,841
9,000
64
91
+I-25
81
4,330
+|- 7,352
116
*
*
*
27
10,001 -
50,000
89
+|-8
77
639
+|- 156
444
9,867
+|- 76,549
4,114
98
83
+I-28
67
511
+|- 119
460
*
*
*
20
50,001 -
100,000
115
+I-77
102
727
+|- 152
657
15,261
+|- 79,498 +|-
9,557
65
78
+I-37
62
545
+|- 220
606
*
*
*
13
100,001-
500,000
123
+|-8
112
869
+I-85
645
324,478
736,099
65,833
136
71
+I-27
57
868
+|- 426
462
*
*
*
21
Over
500,000
135
+|- 18
116
1,276
+|- 429
870
93,992
+1-92,803
32,182
40
98
+|-5
95
629
+I-74
623
21,028
+|-0
21,028
4
All Sizes
98
+|-9
79
455
+I-82
223
57,284
+1-23,644
4,114
671
93
+I-77
73
2,457
+|- 2,587
228
685
+|- 607
429
333
(Continued)
29
-------
Table 12 (Cont.)
Annual Deliveries per Customer Service Connection
By Ownership
(Thousands of Gallons)
Ownership Type
All Systems
Mean Residential Deliveries
Confidence Interval
Median Residential Deliveries
Non-Residential Deliveries
Mean Finished Water Deliveries
Confidence Interval
Median Finished Water Deliveries
Mean Partially or Untreated Water Deliveries
Confidence Interval
Median Partially or Untreated Water Deliveries
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
98
+I-23
71
1,410
+|- 7,343
183
429
+|-0
429
108
Data: Q.21A
101 -
500
94
+|- 12
74
145
+I-80
84
317
+|-0
*
195
501 -
3,300
97
+|-9
82
825
+|- 801
197
14,131
+|- 11,841
317
213
3,301 -
10,000
87
+|- 10
81
1,588
+|- 1,858
311
9,867
+|- 16,549
9,000
91
10,001 -
50,000
88
+|-8
77
636
+|- 152
444
15,261
+|- 19,498
4,114
118
50,001 -
100,000
112
+|- 16
102
712
+|- 143
620
324,478
+|- 736,099
9,557
78
Notes: Average deliveries per connection are for systems that have deliveries and
100,001-
500,000
115
+|-9
105
869
+|- 102
631
79,103
+|- 72, 199
65,833
157
connections
Over
500,000
129
+|- 16
110
1,173
+|- 386
811
*
29,200
44
All Sizes
96
+|-7
77
797
+|- 438
223
40,337
+|- 29, 739
1,213
1,004
for that delivery type; it excludes systems that do not have positive deliveries per connection.
Average deliveries per connection exclude the upper and lower 5 percent of the observations.
30
-------
Table 13
Number of Entry Points to the Distribution System
Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Entry Points from Ground Water Sources
Confidence interval
Entry Points from Surface Water Sources
Confidence interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Entry Points from Ground Water Sources
Confidence interval
Entry Points from Surface Water Sources
Confidence interval
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Entry Points from Ground Water Sources
Confidence interval
Entry Points from Surface Water Sources
Confidence interval
Observations
All Systems
Entry Points from Ground Water Sources
Confidence interval
Entry Points from Surface Water Sources
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.1
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
83
0.1
+|- 0. 1
1.0
+|- 0.0
47
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.1
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
131
Data: Q.6, Q. 7
Notes: For primarily
101 -
500
1.2
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
99
0.1
+|- 0. 1
1.1
+|- 0. 1
66
2.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.2
+|- 0. 1
0.1
+|- 0.0
166
501 -
3,300
1.7
+|- 0.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
110
0.2
+|- 0.2
1.0
+|- 0.0
78
1.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
4
1.5
+|- 0.2
0.1
+|- 0.0
192
3,301 -
10,000
2.1
+|- 0.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
57
0.1
+|- 0.2
1.0
+|- 0. 1
64
0.9
+|- 0.2
0.1
+|- 0.2
4
1.6
+|- 0.3
0.3
+|- 0. 1
125
10,001 -
50,000
3.4
+I-0.7
0.1
+|- 0. 1
60
0.3
+|- 0.2
1.1
+|- 0. 1
83
2.6
+I-17
0.2
+|- 0.2
7
2.3
+|- 0.4
0.4
+|- 0. 1
150
50,001 -
100,000
9.7
+I-8.7
0.1
+|- 0. 1
38
0.3
+|- 0.3
1.4
+|- 0.2
54
2.3
+I-17
0.6
+|- 0.4
9
4.5
+|- 4.4
0.7
+|- 0.2
101
purchased water systems, the estimate of ground water
100,001-
500,000
11.6
+|- 3.0
0.3
+|- 0. 1
54
0.8
+|- 0.3
1.4
+|- 0. 1
122
2.8
+I-0.8
0.7
+|- 0.3
23
3.9
+|- 0.9
1.0
+|- 0. 1
199
and surface
Over
500,000
39.3
+|- 38.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
6
1.4
+|- 0.9
3.0
+|- 0.3
39
15.7
+|- -73.3
1.0
+|- 0.3
5
8.6
+|- 4.4
2.4
+|- 0.4
50
water ent
All Sizes
1.6
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
507
0.2
+|- 0. 1
1.1
+|- 0.0
553
1.8
+|- 0.5
0.1
+|- 0. 1
54
1.4
+|- 0. 1
0.1
+|- 0.0
1,114
y
points are for non-purchased water entry points only.
The average number of entry points for ground water systems is driven up by one system with over
200 entry points. The average is reduced to 14.5 entry points when this system is excluded.
31
-------
Table 14
Number and Percentage of Systems Selling to Other Public Water Suppliers
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Finished Water
% of Systems Selling Finished Water
Partially Treated or Untreated Water
% of Systems Selling Treated or Untreated Water
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Finished Water
% of Systems Selling Finished Water
Partially Treated or Untreated Water
% of Systems Selling Treated or Untreated Water
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Finished Water
% of Systems Selling Finished Water
Partially Treated or Untreated Water
% of Systems Selling Treated or Untreated Water
Observations
All Systems
Finished Water
% of Systems Selling Finished Water
Partially Treated or Untreated Water
% of Systems Selling Treated or Untreated Water
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
*
0.0
242
2.3
88
*
0.0
*
0.0
49
*
0.0
*
0.0
8
*
0.0
242
2.1
145
Data: Q.21.A
Notes:
101 -
500
129
1.0
*
0.0
105
*
0.0
*
0.0
67
*
0.0
*
0.0
23
129
0.8
*
0.0
195
501 -
3,300
436
5.0
*
0.0
111
181
16.9
*
0.0
78
12
0.3
*
0.0
48
628
4.7
*
0.0
237
3,301 -
10,000
343
13.0
48
1.8
62
195
22.6
12
1.4
65
174.2
16.3
*
0.0
27
713
15.6
60
1.3
154
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
401
23.2
31
1.8
66
308
33.2
20
2.2
85
111.2
16.4
*
0.0
25
820
24.6
52
1.6
176
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
70
32.3
5
2.1
40
140
60.7
5
2.0
54
35
24.0
*
0.0
30
246
41.2
9
1.5
124
29
25.0
4
3.6
56
176
66.3
25
9.5
124
35
36.9
2
2.0
45
241
50.3
32
6.6
225
Over
500,000
10
76.1
*
0.0
6
56
89.7
13
20.5
39
9
39.4
3
12.9
13
76
75.9
16
16.1
58
All Sizes
1,418
3.9
330
0.9
534
1,056
24.2
75
1.7
561
378
4.4
5
0.1
219
2,851
5.8
410
0.8
1,314
32
-------
Table 15
Water Systems Not Providing Any Treatment
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
% of Systems
Confidence Interval
# of Entry Points
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
% of Systems
Confidence Interval
# of Entry Points
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
% of Systems
Confidence Interval
# of Entry Points
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
% of Systems
Confidence Interval
# of Entry Points
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
28.1
+|- 10.4
1.1
+|- 0. 1
22
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
1
27.5
+|- 10.2
1.1
+|- 0. 1
22
Data: Q.6
Notes: Number of e
101 -
500
24.3
+|- 10.2
1.3
+|- 0.2
23
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
1
22.8
+|- 9.6
1.3
+|- 0.2
23
ntry points
501 -
3,300
10.3
+|- 8.3
2.0
+|- 0.6
11
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0
25.2
+|- 43.0
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
9.6
+|- 7.3
1.9
+|- 0.6
12
and observa
3,301 -
10,000
4.0
+|- 5.4
3.5
+|- 4.3
2
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
4
2.8
+|- 3.9
3.5
+|- 4.3
2
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
60
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0
22.2
+|- 36.9
4.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.2
+|- 2.3
4.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
2.5
+|- 4.4
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0
23.7
+I-25.8
3.1
+|- 13
2
3.1
+|- 3. 1
2.3
+|- 19
3
500,000
5.7
+|- 4.5
7.3
+|- 7.4
3
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0
4.5
+|- 6.3
7.0
+|- 0.0
1
2.0
+|- 1.4
7.3
+|- 5.5
4
Over
500,000
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
6
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
5
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
50
All Sizes
19.1
+|- 5. 1
0.2
+|- 0. 1
62
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0
15.5
+|- -79.6
0.2
+|- 0.2
5
17.0
+|- 4.5
1.6
+|- 0. 1
67
ions are for systems that do not treat.
Categories where all systems treat are denoted as zero.
Excludes systems that purchase 100% of their water.
33
-------
Table 16
Ground Water Entry Points Not Receiving Treatment
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
# of Ground Water Entry Points Untreated per System
Confidence Interval
# of Wells per Untreated Entry Point
Confidence Interval
% Ground Water Entry Points Untreated per System
Confidence Interval
% that are Seasonal/Emergency
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
# of Ground Water Entry Points Untreated per System
Confidence Interval
# of Wells per Untreated Entry Point
Confidence Interval
% Ground Water Entry Points Untreated per System
Confidence Interval
% that are Seasonal/Emergency
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.3
+|- 0. 1
1.2
+|- 0.2
28.8
+|- 10.5
3.7
+|- 7.6
83
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.2
+|- 0.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
6.4
+|- 8.8
47
101 -
500
0.3
+|- 0. 1
1.3
+|- 0.3
24.3
+|- 10.2
3.8
+|- 8. 1
99
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
66
501 -
3,300
0.2
+|- 0.2
1.1
+|- 0.3
10.7
+|- 8.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
110
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
2.0
+|- 4.2
*
*
78
3,301 -
10,000
0.2
+|- 0.2
*
*
5.1
+|- 5.9
*
*
57
0.1
+|- 0. 1
*
*
17.0
+|- 35.4
*
*
64
10,001 -
50,000
0.1
+|- 0.2
3.8
+|- 0.0
3.4
+|- 6. 1
100.0
+|- 0.0
60
0.0
+|- 0.0
2.5
+|- 18
4.6
+|- 5.9
1.6
+I-2.8
83
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
2.9
+I-4.7
2.6
+|- 15
9.9
+|- -72.2
47.9
+|- 36.5
38
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
54
1.2
+|- 0.9
*
*
10.1
+|- 5.6
*
*
54
0.1
+|- 0. 1
*
*
9.1
+|- 8.6
*
*
122
Over
500,000
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
6
0.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
1.3
+|- 15
*
*
39
All Sizes
0.3
+|- 0. 1
1.2
+|- 0. 1
19.7
+|- 5.2
5.0
+I-4.7
507
0.0
+|- 0.0
3.7
+|- 19
5.2
+|- 5.2
88.9
+|- 8.0
553
(Continued)
34
-------
Table16(Cont.)
Ground Water Entry Points Not Receiving Treatment
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
# of Ground Water Entry Points Untreated per System
Confidence Interval
# of Wells per Untreated Entry Point
Confidence Interval
% Ground Water Entry Points Untreated per System
Confidence Interval
% that are Seasonal/Emergency
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
# of Ground Water Entry Points Untreated per System
Confidence Interval
# of Wells per Untreated Entry Point
Confidence Interval
% Ground Water Entry Points Untreated per System
Confidence Interval
% that are Seasonal/Emergency
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.0
+|- 0.0
*
*
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.3
+|- 0. 1
1.2
+|- 0.2
28.8
+|- 10.4
3.7
+|- 7.6
131
Data: Q.6
Notes: Number of e
101 -
500
1.0
+|- 0.0
1.0
+|- 0.0
50.0
+|- 0.0
100.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.3
+|- 0. 1
1.2
+|- 0.2
24.5
+|- 10.2
6.2
+|- 8.5
166
501 -
3,300
0.3
+|- 0.4
1.0
+|- 0.0
25.2
+\-43.1
25.9
+|- 15.5
4
0.2
+|- 0.2
1.2
+|- 0.3
11.0
+|- 8.0
7.4
+I--718
192
3,301 -
10,000
0.0
+|- 0.0
20.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
4
0.1
+|- 0.2
1.1
+|- 0.3
5.3
+|- 5.6
0.0
+|- 0.0
125
ntry points that are not treated per s
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
0.9
+|- 1.5
3.7
+|- 19
26.7
+|- 43.4
88.9
+|- 8.0
7
0.1
+|- 0. 1
1.0
+|- 0.0
5.1
+|- 6.2
25.9
+|- 75.5
150
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
0.7
+|- 0.9
*
*
30.5
+|- 32.0
*
*
9
1.3
+|- 2.2
7.0
+|- 8. 1
11.4
+|- 10.3
80.0
+I-49.8
101
500,000
0.8
+|- 0.6
*
*
16.0
+\-11.0
*
*
23
0.4
+|- 0.3
2.7
+|- 1.3
11.1
+|- 4.4
18.6
+|- 72.9
199
ystem include both treated and
Over
500,000
0.8
+I-0.8
*
*
2.0
+|- 2.0
*
*
5
0.1
+I-0.7
*
*
0.8
+I-0.8
*
*
50
untreated e
All Sizes
0.5
+|- 0.4
1.4
+|- 0.6
26.1
+I-218
44.4
+\-55.1
54
0.3
+I-0.7
1.3
+|- 0. 1
19.6
+|- 5. 1
6.2
+|- 4.9
1,114
ntry
points, i.e, systems that treat all of their entry points are included in the analysis as zeros.
35
-------
Table 17
Number of Water Treatment Plants per System
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Ground Water Systems
100% Ground Water Systems
Number of Water Treatment Plants/System
Confidence Interval
Number of Wells/Plant
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Number of Water Treatment Plants/System
Confidence Interval
Number of Wells/Plant
Confidence Interval
Percentage of Plants Treating Surface Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
Surface Water Systems
100% Surface Water Systems
Number of Water Treatment Plants/System
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Number of Water Treatment Plants/System
Confidence Interval
Number of Wells/Plant
Confidence Interval
Percentage of Plants Treating Surface Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.1
+|- 0. 1
1.6
+|- 0.4
60
1.0
+|- 0.0
4.0
+|- 0.0
100.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
42
1.6
+|- 0.6
0.5
+|- 0.2
60.7
+|- 23.9
5
101 -
500
1.2
+|- 0. 1
1.8
+|- 0.3
75
1.0
+|- 0.0
1.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.1
+|- 0. 1
62
2.3
+|- 2.0
0.9
+|- 0.3
44.3
+I-38.7
4
501 -
3,300
1.7
+|- 0.2
1.8
+|- 0.4
95
1.5
+|- 0.5
2.8
+|- 2.0
16.7
+|- 25.8
4
1.1
+|- 0. 1
61
1.7
+|- 0.2
0.9
+|- 0.4
57.4
+|- 8.2
17
3,301 -
10,000
2.1
+|- 0.5
2.4
+|- 0.9
41
1.7
+|- 0.4
5.7
+|- 4. 1
11.7
+\-11.1
17
1.1
+|- 0. 1
49
1.1
+|- 0. 1
0.3
+|- 0.2
74.1
+I-313
15
10,001 -
50,000
3.4
+I-0.8
2.3
+|- 0.6
47
2.7
+|- 12
2.1
+|- 0.9
14.7
+|- 14.0
16
1.1
+|- 0. 1
57
1.9
+|- 0.5
1.7
+|- 0.9
59.1
+|- 12.8
28
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
7.6
+|- 5.3
1.8
+|- 2.4
26
5.7
+|- 2.2
1.9
+|- 0.9
4.2
+|- 3.4
11
1.5
+|- 0.3
35
2.1
+I-0.8
1.6
+|- 10
60.4
+1-22.8
19
9.3
+|- 2.6
8.8
+|- 6. 1
30
13.7
+|- 6.2
3.1
+|- 13
5.1
+I-2.7
22
1.3
+|- 0. 1
76
3.5
+I-0.8
1.6
+I-0.8
44.0
+|- 9.0
46
Over
500,000
11.1
+I--717
5.3
+|- 3.2
4
129.0
+I-80.7
2.7
+|- 0.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
2
3.2
+|- 0.4
20
5.8
+|- 19
1.2
+|- 0.4
48.2
+|- 15.8
19
All Sizes
1.5
+|- 0. 1
2.0
+|- 0.2
378
2.7
+|- 0.6
3.3
+|- 12
10.1
+I-5.7
74
1.1
+|- 0.0
402
1.9
+|- 0.2
1.3
+|- 0.4
56.7
+|- 6.0
153
(Continued)
36
-------
Table17(Cont.)
Number of Water Treatment Plants per System
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Purchased Water Systems
100% Purchased Water Systems
Number of Water Treatment Plants/System
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Number of Water Treatment Plants/System
Confidence Interval
Number of Wells/Plant
Confidence Interval
Percentage of Plants Treating Surface Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
Number of Water Treatment Plants/System
Confidence Interval
Number of Wells/Plant
Confidence Interval
Percentage of Plants Treating Surface Water
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
1.0
1.1
+|- 0. 1
1.6
+|- 0.3
3.0
+I-0.8
111
Data: Q.6, Q.7
101 -
500
1.4
+|- 0.5
4
1.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.2
+|- 0. 1
1.6
+|- 0.2
5.5
+|- 2.4
147
501 -
3,300
1.4
+|- 0.2
12
1.3
+|- 0.5
7.7
+|- 13.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
3
1.6
+|- 0.2
1.7
+|- 0.5
7.4
+|- 2.2
192
3,301 -
10,000
1.0
+|- 0.0
6
1.3
+|- 0.5
0.9
+I-0.7
9.1
+|- 18. 7
4
1.7
+|- 0.3
2.5
+|- 1.0
16.5
+|- 3.9
132
10,001 -
50,000
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
2.2
+|- 0.9
0.8
+|- 0.3
6.3
+|- 9.6
8
2.5
+|- 0.4
2.0
+|- 0.4
17.2
+|- 3.9
158
50,001 -
100,000
2.4
+|- 0.9
3
2.9
+|- 1.3
1.2
+|- 0.6
22.9
+|- 18.0
8
4.1
+|- 2. 1
1.5
H-1.1
18.8
+|- 12.4
102
100,001-
500,000
1.3
+|- 0.4
7
3.1
+|- 0.8
4.4
+|- 3.5
24.1
+\-11.6
22
4.4
+|- 0.9
4.2
+|- 2.0
23.1
+I-4.7
203
Over
500,000
1.5
+|- 0.4
2
15.9
+|- 72.2
1.0
+|- 0.0
6.3
+|- 6.4
5
10.6
+|- 4.5
2.2
+|- 0.4
21.5
+|- 9.2
52
All Sizes
1.3
+|- 0.2
38
1.8
+|- 0.5
3.0
+|- 2.8
7.9
+|- 4.9
52
1.5
+|- 0. 1
1.9
+|- 0.2
9.9
+I-17
1,097
Notes: Includes systems with at least one treatment plant only.
See "Plant"
definition in
introduction
Number of Wells/Plant refers to the average number of ground water wells treated at each
water treatment plant. For primarily surface water systems, a treatment plant may only treat ground
water, but the majority of the water in the system comes from a surface water source.
37
-------
Please note that the unit of analysis changes for the following tables.
Tables 18-42 report data for treatment plants rather than water systems.
38
-------
Table 18
Number of Wells Treated per Treatment Plant
By Water Source
Water Source
Ground Water Plants
Number of Wells/Plant
Confidence Interval
Observations
Mixed Plants
Number of Wells/Plant
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Plants
Number of Wells/Plant
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.7
+|- 0.4
65
2.6
+|- 1.8
3
1.7
+|- 0.4
68
Data: Q.6, Q.7
101 -
500
1.8
+|- 0.2
93
1.8
+|- 0.3
7
1.8
+|- 0.2
100
501 -
3,300
1.8
+|- 0.4
170
7.8
+|- 8.4
9
1.9
+|- 0.6
179
3,301 -
10,000
3.2
+|- 1.3
104
1.9
+|- 0.9
7
3.1
+|- 1.3
111
10,001 -
50,000
2.3
+|- 0.5
210
3.2
+|- 1.5
11
2.3
+|- 0.5
221
50,001 -
100,000
3.4
+|- 1.3
133
7.6
+|- 4.3
4
3.6
+|- 1.2
137
Notes: This table reports the number of wells treated per ground water plant.
100,001-
500,000
5.4
+I-2.7
604
9.7
+|- 7.5
12
5.5
+|- 2.6
616
Plants with
Over
500,000
2.8
+|- 0.6
439
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
2.8
+|- 0.6
440
sources
All Sizes
2.1
+|- 0.2
1,818
4.5
+|- 3.4
54
2.2
+|- 0.3
1,872
other than wells are excluded. Ground water plants are defined as treating wells only.
For this analysis mixed plants treat at least one well and one non-ground water source.
39
-------
Table 19
Treatment Plant Flow Characteristics
By Water Source
(Thousands of Gallons/Day)
Water Source
Ground Water Plants
Average Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Peak Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Design Capacity
Confidence Interval
Surface Water Plants
Average Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Peak Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Design Capacity
Confidence Interval
Mixed Plants
Average Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Peak Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Design Capacity
Confidence Interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
19
+|- 74
36
+I-20
121
+I-55
9
23
61
+I-28
30
40
37
36
106
104
101 -
500
23
48
+|- 72
186
+I-54
52
+I-25
122
+I-69
249
+|- 730
29
335
364
+|- 727
501 -
3,300
89
+I-20
196
+I-48
536
+|- 757
226
+I-63
476
+|- 742
835
+|- 237
208
+I-46
332
+I-88
455
+|- 207
3,301 -
10,000
397
770
+|- 204
1,278
+|- 407
819
1,364
+I-278
2,196
+|- 355
2,086
+|- 7,582
3,967
+|- 3,346
8,405
+1-7,788
10,001 -
50,000
862
+|- 276
1,728
+|- 480
2,309
+|- 674
2,763
+|- 733
4,955
+|- 7,644
6,718
+|- 2,074
2,961
+1-7,708
4,151
+|- 7,586
5,748
+1-2,797
50,001 -
100,000
2,686
+|- 7,234
4,367
+|- 7,827
5,789
+|- 2,465
7,105
+|- 7,200
1 1 ,739
+|- 2,090
16,503
+|- 3,007
5,141
+|- 3,464
7,598
+|- 5,400
12,054
+|- 4,002
100,001-
500,000
2,502
+|- 637
4,793
+|- 7,772
5,907
+|- 7,467
16,297
+|- 7,647
27,271
+1-2,996
37,032
+1-4,747
20,651
+1-5,458
34,470
+|- 70,080
46,633
+|- 73,460
Over
500,000
3,260
+|- 2,565
5,330
+|- 3,425
6,633
+1-3,702
62,444
+|- 70,508
96,947
+|- 75,924
127,739
+|- 22,577
47,328
+|- 36,992
58,628
+|- 42,574
81 ,635
+1-58,774
All Sizes
370
+I-54
695
+I-93
1,061
+|- 736
5,507
+|- 652
8,999
+|- 7,055
12,226
+|- 7,443
1,994
+|- 7,042
3,250
+|- 7,662
4,974
+1-2,883
(Continued)
40
-------
Table19(Cont.)
(Table 13 in the 2000 Report, Table 16 from draft 1)
Treatment Plant Flow Characteristics
By Water Source
(Thousands of Gallons/Day)
Water Source
All Plants
Average Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Peak Daily Flow
Confidence Interval
Design Capacity
Confidence Interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
19
+|- 14
35
+I-20
119
+I-53
Data: Q.6, Q.7
101 -
500
24
+|-5
56
+|- 16
191
+I-52
Notes: Excludes plants that treat
501 - 3,301 -
3,300 10,000
104
+|- 20 H
223
+|- 48 H
559
+|- 738 H
only treated
523
H|- -729
966
H|- 237
1,647
H|- 497
10,001 -
50,000
1,290
+|- 295
2,425
+|- 545
3,265
+|- 746
50,001 -
100,000
3,979
+1-7,743
6,519
+1-7,780
8,997
+|- 2,458
100,001-
500,000
6,892
+|- -7,226
1 1 ,948
+1-2,046
15,805
+|- 2, 795
Over
500,000
19,623
+|- -77,009
30,600
+|- -76,693
40,009
+|- 27,639
All Sizes
986
+|- 703
1,689
+|- 770
2,407
+|- 247
purchased water.
Table presents average flows for plants in the sample. It includes only plants that reported
complete data for average daily production, peak daily production, and design capacity.
41
-------
Table 20
Ratio of Design Capacity to Average and Peak Daily Production
By Water Source
Water Source
Ground Water Plants
Ratio: Design Capacity to Average Daily Production
Confidence interval
Ratio: Design Capacity to Peak Daily Production
Confidence interval
Observations
Surface Water Plants
Ratio: Design Capacity to Average Daily Production
Confidence interval
Ratio: Design Capacity to Peak Daily Production
Confidence interval
Observations
Mixed Plants
Ratio: Design Capacity to Average Daily Production
Confidence interval
Ratio: Design Capacity to Peak Daily Production
Confidence interval
Observations
All Plants
Ratio: Design Capacity to Average Daily Production
Confidence interval
Ratio: Design Capacity to Peak Daily Production
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
16.77
+|- 9.49
7.49
+|- 3.41
43
8.42
+|- 3.56
3.60
+|- 157
34
4.71
+I-2.87
2.57
+|- 100
+|- 3.00
16.46
+|- 9. 16
7.34
+|- 3.28
80
Data: Q.6, Q.7
101 -
500
10.57
+|- 3.05
5.05
+|- 135
72
7.18
+|- 4.01
2.58
+|- 100
46
12.55
+\-4.17
1.11
+|- 0.07
5
10.47
+I-2.87
4.88
+|- 128
123
Notes: Table presents average
501 -
3,300
7.91
+|- 190
3.79
+|- 105
137
4.26
+|- 0.54
2.19
+|- 0.53
65
2.10
+|- 0.64
1.40
+|- 0.54
10
7.46
+|- 170
3.60
+|- 0.93
212
3,301 -
10,000
5.55
+|- 2.08
1.81
+|- 0.37
84
2.96
+|- 0.47
1.75
+|- 0. 19
70
3.40
+|- 0.91
1.92
+|- 0.31
6
4.97
+|- 162
1.82
+|- 0.25
160
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
3.60
+|- 0.69
1.48
+|- 0.20
175
3.50
+|- 169
1.93
+|- 0.99
88
1.99
+|- 0.43
1.38
+|- 0.22
9
3.54
+|- 0.63
1.56
+|- 0.25
272
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
2.85
+|- 0.38
2.09
+|- 0.90
169
2.62
+|- 0.53
1.47
+\-0.11
79
4.20
+|- 3.04
3.68
+|- 3.30
4
3.04
+|- 0.46
1.95
+|- 0.65
252
ratios for plants in the sample. It includes only
500,000
3.83
+I-0.80
1.28
+|- 0.09
430
2.90
+|- 0.56
1.40
+|- 0.05
191
2.40
+|- 0.36
1.51
+|- 0.26
15
3.51
+|- 0.56
1.32
+|- 0.06
636
plants that
Over
500,000
6.51
+|- 142
2.51
+|- 0.51
281
2.14
+|- 0. 10
1.32
+|- 0.04
108
3.21
+|- 133
1.44
+|- 0.05
2
5.24
+|- 163
2.16
+|- 0.53
391
reported
All Sizes
8.78
+|- 170
4.00
+|- 0.69
1,391
3.85
+|- 0.55
1.95
+|- 0.28
681
4.64
+|- 3.63
1.51
+|- 0.31
54
8.13
+|- 146
3.71
+|- 0.59
2,126
complete data for average daily production, peak daily production, and design capacity.
Excludes plants that treat only purchased treated water.
42
-------
Table 21
Treatment Objectives
Percentage of Plants Having Each Treatment Objective
By Water Source
Water Source
Ground Water Plants
Algae control
Corrosion control
Primary disinfection
Secondary disinfection
Disinfectant byproduct control
Dechlori nation
Oxidation
Iron removal
Manganese removal
Taste/odor control
TOC removal
Particulate/turbidity removal
Softening (hardness removal)
Recarbonation
Organic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., VOCs, pesticides)
Inorganic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., arsenic)
Radionuclides contaminant removal
Security
Mussel control
Fluoridation
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
11.5
86.6
12.9
0.0
0.0
1.5
23.3
6.5
3.0
0.0
10.2
10.2
0.0
0.0
6.7
1.7
0.0
0.0
1.7
1.7
62
101 -
500
0.0
14.0
90.6
13.6
0.0
0.0
13.9
20.8
13.9
3.4
0.0
3.6
4.5
0.0
0.0
11.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
1.1
89
501 -
3,300
2.4
14.5
90.8
14.3
1.0
0.0
6.3
28.5
10.3
7.7
0.6
4.8
3.6
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.6
0.0
0.0
14.5
0.0
161
3,301 -
10,000
0.0
20.2
91.1
5.1
12.2
1.0
10.5
19.0
14.9
12.3
2.0
8.9
8.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
30.7
6.1
108
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
0.3
32.7
91.4
5.6
7.1
0.6
6.7
18.2
14.0
14.7
1.0
3.7
1.4
0.0
5.8
0.1
4.1
2.3
0.0
11.3
1.0
230
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
1.4
18.1
97.2
7.1
7.1
0.6
4.6
51.5
51.7
8.1
1.4
7.7
5.7
1.0
4.9
1.4
1.4
0.0
0.0
29.3
0.3
197
4.6
31.7
89.9
6.6
6.8
0.0
4.2
9.2
5.2
8.2
1.8
6.8
4.4
1.2
9.4
2.5
0.4
0.0
0.0
29.6
4.6
658
Over
500,000
0.0
54.0
93.2
11.2
6.5
0.0
11.0
18.6
7.8
10.5
0.2
4.6
1.9
0.9
11.6
2.5
0.2
0.0
0.0
12.8
0.9
444
All Sizes
0.9
17.9
90.4
11.4
3.0
0.2
7.7
23.6
12.6
7.3
0.6
5.9
5.2
0.5
1.7
4.4
1.0
0.4
0.0
12.8
1.5
1,949
(Continued)
43
-------
Table 21 (Cont.)
Treatment Objectives
Percentage of Plants Having Each Treatment Objective
By Water Source
Water Source
Surface Water Plants
Algae control
Corrosion control
Primary disinfection
Secondary disinfection
Disinfectant byproduct control
Dechlori nation
Oxidation
Iron removal
Manganese removal
Taste/odor control
TOC removal
Particulate/turbidity removal
Softening (hardness removal)
Recarbonation
Organic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., VOCs, pesticides)
Inorganic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., arsenic)
Radionuclides contaminant removal
Security
Mussel control
Fluoridation
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
11.2
100.0
15.5
0.0
0.0
3.1
3.1
0.0
3.1
8.7
77.5
1.6
0.0
0.0
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.5
43
101 -
500
2.4
14.3
97.2
37.4
1.2
0.0
7.3
5.9
3.9
7.6
11.0
65.4
3.6
0.0
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.2
2.4
1.2
62
501 -
3,300
5.2
27.5
98.9
48.1
4.8
0.0
7.5
11.1
2.6
8.5
8.6
97.1
3.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
15.5
0.0
70
3,301 -
10,000
19.5
43.0
93.0
39.0
29.3
0.0
23.7
22.3
25.1
26.5
36.2
91.8
9.8
2.8
9.8
8.4
0.0
0.0
4.2
40.3
2.8
68
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
16.6
59.3
90.8
45.2
30.0
0.0
21.8
25.6
38.1
45.2
35.2
88.4
8.1
2.3
10.7
6.1
1.3
1.2
3.6
54.6
6.2
89
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
17.4
46.5
91.0
51.1
41.6
3.9
33.9
42.4
42.4
45.5
43.8
86.2
3.9
2.6
7.9
3.9
0.0
0.0
6.6
63.0
5.2
80
15.7
72.9
94.9
61.7
39.3
0.5
36.5
24.8
34.3
43.9
45.4
93.8
7.0
3.7
15.0
7.5
4.7
2.0
8.1
64.6
5.4
197
Over
500,000
20.2
73.1
89.1
63.9
36.1
0.0
37.8
15.9
20.1
47.1
50.4
85.7
11.8
5.9
7.6
2.5
0.8
0.0
5.0
72.3
1.7
111
All Sizes
12.1
41.9
94.6
45.0
21.0
0.3
19.0
18.9
20.8
26.7
27.2
87.8
6.3
1.8
6.5
4.0
0.7
0.4
3.3
36.1
3.0
720
(Continued)
44
-------
Table 21 (Cont.)
Treatment Objectives
Percentage of Plants Having Each Treatment Objective
By Water Source
Water Source
Mixed Plants
Algae control
Corrosion control
Primary disinfection
Secondary disinfection
Disinfectant byproduct control
Dechlori nation
Oxidation
Iron removal
Manganese removal
Taste/odor control
TOC removal
Particulate/turbidity removal
Softening (hardness removal)
Recarbonation
Organic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., VOCs, pesticides)
Inorganic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., arsenic)
Radionuclides contaminant removal
Security
Mussel control
Fluoridation
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
23.5
75.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
101 -
500
0.0
8.4
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.4
12.6
8.4
0.0
0.0
12.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7
501 -
3,300
4.1
25.7
100.0
35.8
0.0
0.0
13.6
5.5
5.5
0.0
5.5
21.8
21.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
13.6
0.0
10
3,301 -
10,000
7.5
51.6
100.0
36.6
22.5
0.0
15.0
7.5
7.5
26.7
36.6
51.6
7.5
7.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
36.6
51.6
0.0
6
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
0.0
42.7
85.8
71.5
24.1
0.0
28.5
17.0
17.0
24.1
21.4
66.8
33.2
14.2
7.1
7.1
0.0
7.1
7.1
28.5
0.0
13
50,001 -
100,000
0.0
48.4
100.0
24.2
24.2
0.0
72.6
48.4
48.4
72.6
72.6
72.6
0.0
24.2
100.0
24.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
48.4
24.2
4
100,001-
500,000
7.1
45.6
73.4
80.5
47.3
0.0
13.6
20.1
20.1
33.1
33.1
65.7
20.1
20.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.5
67.4
13.6
15
Over
500,000
0.0
48.7
100.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
51.3
51.3
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
51.3
51.3
51.3
0.0
0.0
48.7
0.0
2
All Sizes
3.1
31.3
96.3
36.2
11.4
0.0
16.9
11.0
10.0
12.4
16.4
38.0
15.9
5.4
3.7
2.1
0.2
1.4
8.5
23.5
1.0
60
(Continued)
45
-------
Table 21 (Cont.)
Treatment Objectives
Percentage of Plants Having Each Treatment Objective
By Water Source
Water Source
All Plants
Algae control
Corrosion control
Primary disinfection
Secondary disinfection
Disinfectant byproduct control
Dechlori nation
Oxidation
Iron removal
Manganese removal
Taste/odor control
TOC removal
Particulate/turbidity removal
Softening (hardness removal)
Recarbonation
Organic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., VOCs, pesticides)
Inorganic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., arsenic)
Radionuclides contaminant removal
Security
Mussel control
Fluoridation
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
11.5
87.0
13.0
0.0
0.0
1.6
22.6
6.3
3.0
0.3
12.2
9.9
0.0
0.0
6.5
1.7
0.0
0.0
1.7
1.7
108
Data: Q.8
101 -
500
0.1
13.9
91.1
14.7
0.1
0.0
13.4
19.9
13.2
3.6
0.6
7.1
4.4
0.0
0.1
10.7
0.0
0
0.1
7.6
1.1
158
501 -
3,300
2.6
15.7
91.6
17.2
1.2
0.0
6.5
26.7
9.6
7.6
1.3
12.0
4.0
0.5
0.3
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.1
14.6
0.0
241
3,301 -
10,000
3.2
24.6
91.7
11.3
15.2
0.8
12.7
19.2
16.3
14.9
8.3
22.9
8.6
2.3
3.2
3.0
0.0
0.8
1.7
32.8
5.5
182
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
2.8
37.1
91.2
13.4
11.1
0.5
9.6
19.3
17.8
19.7
6.9
18.6
3.2
0.7
6.6
1.2
3.6
2.3
0.7
18.5
1.8
332
50,001 -
100,000
4.4
23.7
96.1
15.5
13.7
1.2
10.8
49.8
49.9
15.7
10.0
23.0
5.3
1.5
6.4
2.1
1.1
0.0
1.2
39.4
1.5
281
100,001-
500,000
7.2
41.3
90.8
20.4
14.9
0.1
11.7
12.9
12.1
16.8
12.3
27.7
5.2
2.1
10.5
3.6
1.4
0.5
2.0
38.2
4.9
870
Over
500,000
4.4
58.1
92.4
22.6
13.3
0.0
17.0
18.1
10.4
18.4
11.5
22.5
4.0
2.0
10.8
2.7
0.5
0.0
1.1
25.8
1.1
557
All Sizes
2.0
20.5
90.9
15.0
4.8
0.2
8.9
22.9
13.4
9.2
3.4
14.2
5.5
0.7
2.2
4.3
1.0
0.4
0.5
15.3
1.6
2,729
Notes: Excludes plants that treat purchased water.
46
-------
Table 22
Treatment Objectives
Percentage of Plants Having Each Treatment Objective
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Water Source
Ground Water Plants
Algae control
Corrosion control
Primary disinfection
Secondary disinfection
Disinfectant byproduct control
Dechlori nation
Oxidation
Iron removal
Manganese removal
Taste/odor control
TOC removal
Particulate/turbidity removal
Softening (hardness removal)
Recarbonation
Organic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., VOCs, pesticides)
Inorganic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., arsenic)
Radionuclides contaminant removal
Security
Mussel control
Fluoridation
Other
Observations
Plant Average
0-
0.01
0.0
12.4
89.1
13.0
0.3
0.0
7.1
26.7
13.7
2.4
0.0
7.5
7.4
0.0
0.0
8.3
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.4
1.3
121
0.01 -
0.1
1.4
11.9
90.8
12.9
1.6
0.0
8.9
21.4
9.7
5.1
0.0
3.7
3.0
0.0
0.4
4.4
0.0
0.3
0.0
13.8
0.7
339
0.1 -
1.0
1.0
26.2
91.1
8.4
5.0
0.7
7.4
26.3
17.2
11.2
1.6
5.8
5.2
1.5
3.4
1.5
1.7
1.1
0.0
19.4
2.5
796
Daily Production
1.0-
10.0
1.5
31.4
93.1
6.9
11.0
0.3
8.9
15.9
12.3
18.6
2.3
9.2
3.7
0.3
7.5
1.7
3.6
0.0
0.0
21.3
3.1
631
(MGD)
10.0-
100.0
4.7
26.6
94.5
19.2
8.6
0.0
16.7
62.1
58.2
24.1
5.7
42.6
24.0
8.5
12.5
4.7
3.9
0.0
0.0
47.6
6.4
60
Over
100
0.0
50.0
100.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
50.0
0.0
50.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
2
All Sizes
1.0
17.5
90.7
11.3
3.0
0.2
8.1
23.9
13.2
7.3
0.6
5.9
4.9
0.5
1.7
4.3
1.1
0.4
0.0
12.7
1.6
1,949
(Continued)
47
-------
Table 22 (Cont.)
Treatment Objectives
Percentage of Plants Having Each Treatment Objective
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Water Source
Surface Water Plants
Algae control
Corrosion control
Primary disinfection
Secondary disinfection
Disinfectant byproduct control
Dechlori nation
Oxidation
Iron removal
Manganese removal
Taste/odor control
TOC removal
Particulate/turbidity removal
Softening (hardness removal)
Recarbonation
Organic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., VOCs, pesticides)
Inorganic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., arsenic)
Radionuclides contaminant removal
Security
Mussel control
Fluoridation
Other
Observations
Plant Average
0-
0.01
0.0
22.1
100.0
28.4
1.4
0.0
1.3
5.8
16.1
5.2
11.0
77.3
1.3
0.0
1.2
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4
1.2
50
0.01 -
0.1
3.6
26.7
98.0
48.1
2.8
0.0
5.9
16.4
3.7
9.9
9.3
81.5
4.5
0.0
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
1.1
0.9
77
0.1 -
1.0
12.1
32.4
96.7
41.7
17.1
0.0
15.6
10.3
14.4
16.7
21.4
89.6
4.1
0.0
4.1
3.3
0.0
0.8
3.3
30.8
2.4
113
Daily Production
1.0-
10.0
17.8
56.6
89.9
45.6
32.3
1.0
28.2
31.4
36.8
44.5
38.3
92.2
9.7
3.7
11.3
6.7
1.7
0.3
4.5
58.7
4.3
230
(MGD)
10.0-
100.0
16.8
67.6
97.5
57.6
40.8
0.0
35.5
20.5
28.1
45.1
54.7
95.1
9.0
5.0
13.0
4.7
1.9
0.8
6.9
64.4
5.9
231
Over
100
5.3
68.4
89.5
73.7
52.6
0.0
15.8
10.5
15.8
52.6
26.3
78.9
15.8
10.5
10.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.3
89.5
5.3
19
All
Sizes
12.2
42.6
94.9
45.2
21.3
0.3
19.2
19.2
21.4
27.1
27.6
88.8
6.5
1.8
6.7
3.8
0.8
0.4
3.4
36.7
3.1
720
(Continued)
48
-------
Table 22 (Cont.)
Treatment Objectives
Percentage of Plants Having Each Treatment Objective
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Water Source
Mixed Plants
Algae control
Corrosion control
Primary disinfection
Secondary disinfection
Disinfectant byproduct control
Dechlorination
Oxidation
Iron removal
Manganese removal
Taste/odor control
TOC removal
Particulate/turbidity removal
Softening (hardness removal)
Recarbonation
Organic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., VOCs, pesticides)
Inorganic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., arsenic)
Radionuclides contaminant removal
Security
Mussel control
Fluoridation
Other
Observations
Plant Average
0-
0.01
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
0.01 -
0.1
0.0
7.4
100.0
6.1
0.0
0.0
7.4
11.1
7.4
0.0
0.0
20.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9
0.1 -
1.0
5.8
23.8
97.2
32.5
5.8
0.0
15.4
6.7
6.7
7.5
7.5
19.0
25.5
2.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
15.4
0.0
15
Daily Production
1.0-
10.0
0.0
67.2
93.3
69.5
30.3
0.0
27.3
18.0
18.0
30.6
47.3
89.7
11.4
13.6
12.6
5.7
0.0
5.7
34.7
57.8
3.2
21
(MGD)
10.0 - Over
100.0 100
7.6
58.1
79.1
73.3
41.3
0.0
36.7
27.3
21.5
44.8
43.6
78.5
21.5
21.5
22.1
22.1
5.8
0.0
7.0
66.3
7.0
13
All
Sizes
3.1
31.3
96.3
36.2
11.4
0.0
16.9
11.0
10.0
12.4
16.4
38.0
15.9
5.4
3.7
2.1
0.2
1.4
8.5
23.5
1.0
60
(Continued)
49
-------
Table 22 (Cont.)
Treatment Objectives
Percentage of Plants Having Each Treatment Objective
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Water Source
All Plants
Algae control
Corrosion control
Primary disinfection
Secondary disinfection
Disinfectant byproduct control
Dechlori nation
Oxidation
Iron removal
Manganese removal
Taste/odor control
TOC removal
Particulate/turbidity removal
Softening (hardness removal)
Recarbonation
Organic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., VOCs, pesticides)
Inorganic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., arsenic)
Radionuclides contaminant removal
Security
Mussel control
Fluoridation
Other
Observations
Plant Average
0-
0.01
0.0
12.6
89.4
13.4
0.3
0.0
6.9
26.1
13.7
2.5
0.3
9.3
7.2
0.0
0.0
8.1
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.3
173
Data: Q.8
Notes: Excludes plants
0.01 -
0.1
1.5
12.5
91.3
14.5
1.7
0.0
8.7
21.1
9.4
5.3
0.4
7.6
3.1
0.0
0.4
4.1
0.0
0.3
0.0
13.0
0.7
425
that treat pur
0.1 -
1.0
2.3
26.8
91.9
12.7
6.3
0.6
8.5
23.9
16.5
11.6
3.9
15.3
5.7
1.4
3.4
1.7
1.5
1.0
0.4
20.5
2.4
924
chased we
Daily Production
1.0-
10.0
6.6
40.8
92.1
21.7
18.5
0.5
15.8
20.9
20.2
27.3
15.5
38.7
5.9
2.0
8.9
3.4
2.9
0.3
2.9
34.7
3.5
882
ter.
(MGD)
10.0-
100.0
12.6
54.2
95.9
46.0
30.6
0.0
29.6
33.9
37.4
38.4
38.7
77.8
14.2
6.7
13.2
5.4
2.7
0.5
4.7
60.8
6.1
304
Over
100
4.8
66.7
90.4
67.0
52.4
0.0
14.4
14.1
18.9
47.8
28.5
80.9
23.4
18.7
14.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.8
85.9
4.8
21
All
Sizes
2.1
20.2
91.2
15.0
4.9
0.2
9.3
23.2
14.0
9.3
3.6
14.5
5.2
0.7
2.3
4.2
1.0
0.4
0.5
15.3
1.7
2,729
50
-------
Table 23
Treatment Schemes
Percentage of Plants Using Each Treatment Scheme
By Water Source
Water Source
Ground Water Plants
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Other chemical addition
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
Surface Water Plants
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Other chemical addition
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
Mixed Plants
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Ion exchange, Activated Alumina, Aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
All Plants
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Other chemical addition
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
53.9
11.1
16.6
16.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
62
17.6
0.0
0.0
61.6
7.4
11.7
1.7
0.0
43
24.7
0.0
0.0
51.8
0.0
0.0
23.5
0.0
3
52.8
10.8
16.1
17.9
0.2
0.3
0.1
1.9
108
Data: Q.8A
101 -
500
49.6
15.6
9.5
16.7
0.0
1.2
1.2
6.3
89
32.0
1.3
0.0
26.0
11.5
22.4
6.9
0.0
62
83.1
0.0
0.0
4.2
4.2
4.2
0.0
4.2
7
49.2
14.6
8.8
17.0
0.7
2.3
1.5
5.9
158
501 -
3,300
51.8
25.4
7.6
10.7
0.6
1.3
0.6
1.9
161
2.3
4.7
0.0
33.8
15.9
33.6
9.7
0.0
70
56.6
5.5
16.1
4.1
0.0
17.7
0.0
0.0
10
48.1
23.4
7.2
12.3
1.8
4.1
1.3
1.7
241
3,301 -
10,000
47.8
26.9
7.3
12.8
1.0
4.2
0.0
0.0
108
0.0
8.3
1.4
9.9
19.7
56.4
4.2
0.0
68
29.1
0.0
19.2
0.0
0.0
51.6
0.0
0.0
6
39.9
23.3
6.7
11.9
3.9
13.6
0.7
0.0
182
10,001 -
50,000
40.7
24.6
16.6
12.7
2.5
0.1
0.1
2.7
230
0.0
8.1
1.2
5.8
16.6
68.4
0.0
0.0
89
14.2
26.1
0.0
0.0
21.4
31.2
7.1
0.0
13
33.5
22.0
13.7
11.3
5.2
11.9
0.3
2.2
332
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
18.5
61.8
4.8
11.6
0.8
1.3
0.3
0.7
197
8.4
1.3
0.0
1.3
20.4
62.6
4.5
1.5
80
0.0
0.0
27.4
0.0
24.2
48.4
0.0
0.0
4
16.4
49.9
4.2
9.6
4.7
13.3
1.1
0.8
281
500,000
42.2
37.4
4.3
7.3
0.8
1.8
0.6
5.6
658
2.4
6.7
0.4
3.8
12.4
73.9
0.5
0.0
197
6.5
34.3
0.0
20.1
0.0
39.1
0.0
0.0
15
32.6
30.4
3.4
6.7
3.4
18.7
0.5
4.3
870
Over
500,000
26.8
52.5
8.5
8.3
0.0
1.4
0.2
2.3
444
0.9
11.7
0.0
0.0
9.9
74.8
2.7
0.0
111
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
51.3
48.7
0.0
2
21.4
43.9
6.7
6.5
2.0
16.7
0.9
1.8
557
All Sizes
47.9
23.0
10.4
13.4
0.7
1.2
0.5
2.9
1,949
6.1
5.7
0.6
17.0
15.7
50.5
4.4
0.1
720
44.9
8.1
9.8
3.8
5.5
25.3
1.9
0.8
60
43.8
21.1
9.4
13.6
2.2
6.5
0.9
2.6
2,729
Notes: Excludes plants that treat purchased water. See treatment scheme description in Volume 1.
51
-------
Table 24
Treatment Schemes
Percentage of Plants Using Each Treatment Scheme
By Water Source
Water Source
Ground Water Plants
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Other chemical addition
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
Surface Water Plants
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Other chemical addition
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
Mixed Plants
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Ion exchange, Activated Alumina, Aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
All Plants
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Other chemical addition
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
48.2
14.0
15.9
18.1
0.0
0.0
1.2
2.6
121
22.7
0.0
0.0
45.0
19.0
12.0
1.3
0.0
50
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
47.6
13.6
15.5
18.8
0.5
0.3
1.2
2.5
173
Data: Q.8
0.01 -
0.1
57.3
19.9
5.6
12.1
0.0
1.2
0.0
3.9
339
18.5
0.9
0.0
33.3
10.6
26.6
10.0
0.0
77
75.4
0.0
0.0
13.5
3.7
3.7
0.0
3.7
9
55.7
18.8
5.3
13.2
0.5
2.4
0.5
3.7
425
0.1 -
1.0
36.9
35.4
10.5
10.9
1.5
2.3
0.7
1.9
796
2.0
11.4
0.8
20.0
17.5
43.2
4.9
0.3
113
50.9
11.3
18.8
0.0
0.0
18.2
0.8
0.0
15
33.5
32.0
9.7
11.6
3.1
7.2
1.1
1.7
924
Notes: Excludes plants that treat purchased water
1.0-
10.0
41.2
23.2
17.8
10.7
3.2
0.9
0.5
2.5
631
1.9
3.3
0.9
5.3
17.8
68.4
2.4
0.0
230
5.7
7.8
2.5
0.9
19.4
57.2
6.5
0.0
21
27.3
16.3
11.8
8.6
8.5
24.5
1.4
1.6
882
10.0-
100.0
4.3
6.5
7.2
62.0
3.0
Over
100
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.4 100.0
0.0
5.5
60
0.9
6.6
0.0
2.0
10.1
79.3
1.1
0.0
231
7.0
21.5
0.0
14.6
0.0
56.9
0.0
0.0
13
2.2
7.1
2.3
21.5
7.5
56.9
0.7
1.7
304
See treatment scheme description
0.0
0.0
2
5.3
21.1
0.0
0.0
15.8
57.9
0.0
0.0
19
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
4.8
19.1
0.0
0.0
14.4
61.7
0.0
0.0
21
All Sizes
47.9
23.0
10.4
13.4
0.7
1.2
0.5
2.9
1,949
6.1
5.7
0.6
17.0
15.7
50.5
4.4
0.1
720
44.9
8.1
9.8
3.8
5.5
25.3
1.9
0.8
60
43.8
21.1
9.4
13.6
2.2
6.5
0.9
2.6
2,729
in Volume I.
52
-------
Table 25
Treatment Practices for Surface Water Plants
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
Surface Water Treatment Practice
Disinfection
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines only
Chloramines with a free chlorine
period (based on need in the
distribution system and not
routinely done)
Chloramines with seasonal
(routine) free chlorine use
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Filtration Processes
Coagulant addition/rapid mix
Polymer addition
Flocculation
Settling/sedimentation
Lime/soda ash softening
Recarbonation
Filtration
Micro strainer
Slow sand filter
Bag or cartridge
Diatomaceous earth
Pressure filtration
Green sand
Rapid sand filter
Deep bed mono-media
Duai/multi media
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
98.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.1
0.0
17.6
16.8
7.3
20.8
0.0
0.0
12.5
6.2
33.8
1.6
19.5
0.0
3.1
0.0
15.3
101 -
500
79.0
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.0
1.4
1.7
19.4
33.3
22.4
20.8
24.5
2.5
0.0
2.8
5.0
6.0
0.6
18.2
0.0
7.3
1.2
19.8
501 -
3,300
97.4
0.0
2.2
1.1
0.0
1.5
2.2
1.5
44.2
31.1
36.4
33.3
3.4
0.0
1.1
17.6
0.0
6.7
12.5
1.1
12.3
0.0
31.8
3,301 -
10,000
80.8
11.0
13.7
1.4
8.2
1.4
1.4
4.1
71.3
54.9
60.3
61.7
19.2
2.7
2.7
9.6
0.0
0.0
2.7
0.0
24.6
2.7
57.6
10,001 -
50,000
80.5
8.7
14.8
5.8
1.2
1.2
1.3
2.3
78.1
46.4
68.7
70.7
16.9
3.5
1.2
6.9
0.0
2.3
1.2
0.0
30.7
1.6
51.5
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
75.1
18.5
17.1
3.9
9.2
11.8
2.6
0.6
81.5
35.8
70.4
64.5
5.2
2.6
0.0
1.9
0.0
1.3
1.3
0.0
22.1
0.0
61.6
78.9
14.0
32.4
9.3
0.9
15.8
4.7
0.0
88.4
56.7
75.8
77.2
11.8
4.2
2.8
2.8
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.9
15.5
5.6
67.3
Over
500,000
78.0
2.5
35.6
1.7
4.2
14.4
1.7
0.0
83.9
56.8
74.6
73.8
21.2
6.8
0.8
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.8
6.8
7.6
65.3
All Sizes
84.4
6.6
11.9
2.9
2.7
3.8
2.1
4.1
62.0
40.6
51.9
52.6
10.5
2.1
2.2
8.6
2.4
2.3
6.9
0.4
18.3
1.8
45.1
(Continued)
53
-------
Table 25 (Cont.)
Treatment Practices for Surface Water Plants
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
Surface Water Treatment Practice
Membranes
Reverse osmosis
Microfiltration
Ultrafiltration
Nanofiltration
Other
Aeration
Potassium permanganate
Corrosion control
Ion exchange
Activated alumina
Iron-based adsorptive media
Sequestration
Fluoride addition
Dissolved air flotation
Granular activated carbon
Centrally managed POU/POE
Clearwell and/or contact vessel
(e.g., basin, pipeline)
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.5
8.7
5.3
0.0
0.0
1.6
8.1
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.2
0.0
45.3
10.8
43
Data: Q.8
101 -
500
1.7
7.9
1.2
0.0
0.0
9.2
11.8
2.4
0.0
0.0
1.3
2.4
0.0
3.1
0.0
41.6
7.3
62
501 -
3,300
0.0
11.6
0.0
0.0
1.1
7.8
26.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
15.5
1.5
3.0
0.0
40.6
14.5
70
3,301 - 10,001 - 50,001 - 100,001- Over
10,000 50,000 100,000 500,000 500,000 All Sizes
1.4
5.5
0.0
0.0
6.9
24.7
34.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.1
39.8
0.0
11.0
0.0
52.2
9.6
68
1.2
0.0
1.2
0.0
9.7
32.9
46.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.8
58.1
0.0
14.2
0.0
53.0
18.3
89
0.0
4.5
0.0
0.0
6.6
26.8
42.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.7
63.5
0.0
14.4
0.0
49.5
22.3
80
0.9
0.9
2.8
0.0
4.6
26.3
63.6
0.5
0.9
0.0
3.8
66.0
1.4
15.2
0.5
59.9
36.3
197
0.0
0.8
1.7
0.0
3.4
21.2
62.7
0.0
0.8
0.0
5.9
73.7
0.8
17.8
0.0
42.3
25.2
111
0.9
5.5
1.0
0.0
4.6
19.8
35.2
0.4
0.1
0.0
3.4
37.0
0.5
9.6
0.0
48.1
16.2
720
Notes: Represents treatment practices for plants treating water that comes entirely or partly from surface
sources.
Percentages may not add to 100 percent because systems may perform more than one treatment.
54
-------
Table 26
Treatment Practices for Surface Water Plants
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
By Plant Average Daily Production
Surface Water Treatment Practice
Disinfection
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines only
Chloramines with a free chlorine
period (based on need in the
distribution system and not
routinely done)
Chloramines with seasonal
(routine) free chlorine use
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Filtration Processes
Coagulant addition/rapid mix
Polymer addition
Flocculation
Settling/sedimentation
Lime/soda ash softening
Recarbonation
Filtration
Micro strainer
Slow sand filter
Bag or cartridge
Diatomaceous earth
Pressure filtration
Green sand
Rapid sand filter
Deep bed mono-media
Dual/multi media
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
87.2
0.0
11.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.5
0.0
31.0
18.7
19.9
20.1
11.6
0.0
13.3
7.7
26.4
1.3
15.9
0.0
18.2
0.0
5.6
0.01 -
0.1
83.4
0.0
2.3
0.0
0.0
1.9
1.4
13.9
35.9
24.1
26.3
29.1
3.4
0.0
1.0
4.4
4.2
3.5
26.3
0.0
4.4
0.9
28.0
0.1 -
1.0
90.3
4.4
8.6
1.6
3.3
1.1
0.8
3.6
56.8
42.2
49.2
47.3
8.2
0.0
1.6
15.4
0.0
4.1
2.5
0.0
21.8
1.0
40.9
1.0-
10.0
81.2
11.2
15.1
5.4
4.6
3.2
2.9
1.5
80.6
46.8
68.7
69.7
15.2
4.5
1.8
7.6
0.1
1.1
1.1
0.0
24.6
2.1
59.2
10.0-
100.0
79.6
12.4
30.5
5.3
1.7
17.0
2.7
0.4
93.2
58.8
80.2
82.3
14.8
5.7
1.9
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
15.0
6.0
71.8
Over
100
57.9
0.0
36.8
0.0
5.3
31.6
0.0
0.0
78.9
63.2
73.7
63.2
15.8
10.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.5
10.5
52.6
All Sizes
84.6
6.4
12.2
2.9
2.8
3.8
2.1
4.2
63.3
40.9
53.1
53.5
10.6
2.1
2.3
8.8
2.4
2.4
6.9
0.1
18.6
1.9
45.8
(Continued)
55
-------
Table 26 (Cont.)
Treatment Practices for Surface Water Plants
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
By Plant Average Daily Production
Surface Water Treatment Practice
Membranes
Reverse osmosis
Microfiltration
Ultrafiltration
Nanofiltration
Other
Aeration
Potassium permanganate
Corrosion control
Ion exchange
Activated alumina
Iron-based adsorptive media
Sequestration
Fluoride addition
Dissolved air flotation
Granular activated carbon
Centrally managed POU/POE
Clearwell and/or contact vessel
(e.g., basin, pipeline)
Other
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
2.4
7.1
4.3
0.0
0.0
1.3
8.0
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.0
7.1
0.0
55.8
7.5
50
Data: Q.8
0.01 -
0.1
0.9
11.0
0.9
0.0
0.2
11.6
24.7
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.9
1.1
1.9
2.1
0.0
31.4
11.5
77
0.1 -
1.0
0.8
6.5
0.0
0.0
4.9
18.2
28.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
31.6
0.0
6.3
0.0
49.9
12.8
113
1.0-
10.0
0.9
2.6
1.0
0.0
8.5
30.1
46.9
0.0
0.1
0.0
6.1
60.4
0.3
15.8
0.1
56.0
19.0
230
10.0-
100.0
0.4
0.3
2.3
0.0
3.1
22.7
59.2
0.4
0.4
0.0
5.3
65.9
0.7
16.9
0.0
53.2
32.4
231
Over
100 All Sizes
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.3
5.3
68.4
0.0
5.3
0.0
5.3
89.5
0.0
15.8
0.0
26.3
26.3
19
0.9
5.4
1.0
0.0
4.8
20.3
36.0
0.4
0.1
0.0
3.3
37.7
0.5
9.9
0.0
49.1
16.4
720
Notes: Represents treatment practices for plants treating water that comes entirely or partly
from surface sources.
Percentages may not add to 100 percent because systems may perform more than one
treatment.
56
-------
Table 27
Treatment Practices for Ground Water Plants
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
Ground Water Treatment Practice
Disinfection
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines only
Chloramines with a free chlorine
period (based on need in the
distribution system and not
routinely done)
Chloramines with seasonal
(routine) free chlorine use
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Filtration Processes
Coagulant addition/rapid mix
Polymer addition
Flocculation
Settling/sedimentation
Lime/soda ash softening
Recarbonation
Filtration
Micro strainer
Slow sand filter
Bag or cartridge
Diatomaceous earth
Pressure filtration
Green sand
Rapid sand filter
Deep bed mono-media
Duai/multi media
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
84.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.6
0.0
1.7
6.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
101 -
500
94.3
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.4
0.1
1.1
2.3
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.5
9.2
2.3
0.0
2.5
501 -
3,300
92.2
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
2.4
0.0
1.2
1.8
1.0
0.6
0.6
0.0
0.6
0.6
1.2
5.9
1.2
0.6
1.8
3,301 -
10,000
91.8
1.0
2.3
1.7
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
3.1
3.0
4.1
7.2
1.0
1.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
4.0
5.8
1.0
0.0
5.8
10,001 -
50,000
92.9
0.0
0.4
0.8
0.0
0.6
0.7
2.4
5.5
2.4
0.7
0.7
8.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
7.0
2.9
3.7
0.0
4.2
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
96.3
0.3
2.1
0.0
2.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
2.9
2.9
2.3
2.3
7.4
0.6
0.3
0.3
1.0
0.0
1.7
7.2
1.3
0.0
2.4
91.3
0.0
5.9
1.4
1.5
0.3
0.4
0.0
1.6
1.0
1.9
2.1
2.7
1.7
0.3
0.9
1.2
0.0
2.9
0.9
0.9
0.4
3.4
Over
500,000
100.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.2
1.0
1.4
1.7
1.7
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.2
5.4
1.1
0.0
3.5
All Sizes
91.7
0.4
0.9
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.6
2.4
0.8
1.3
2.1
1.8
0.4
0.5
0.1
1.8
0.2
3.1
6.2
1.5
0.2
2.4
(Continued)
57
-------
Table 27 (Cont.)
Treatment Practices for Ground Water Plants
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
Ground Water Treatment Practice
Membranes
Reverse osmosis
Microfiltration
Ultrafiltration
Nanofiltration
Other
Aeration
Potassium permanganate
Corrosion control
Ion exchange
Activated alumina
Iron-based adsorptive media
Sequestration
Fluoride addition
Dissolved air flotation
Granular activated carbon
Centrally managed POU/POE
Clearwell and/or contact vessel
(e.g., basin, pipeline)
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.7
3.1
11.5
18.6
0.0
3.4
8.6
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
31.4
3.3
62
Data: Q.8
101 -
500
2.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.7
2.5
11.5
7.9
0.0
1.2
3.6
8.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
24.6
7.1
89
501 -
3,300
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.6
6.6
13.0
3.6
0.0
0.6
13.7
14.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
17.6
2.4
161
3,301 - 10,001 - 50,001 - 100,001- Over
10,000 50,000 100,000 500,000 500,000 All Sizes
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
15.4
5.4
13.0
3.1
0.0
0.0
6.2
32.4
0.0
1.0
0.0
9.1
8.5
108
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
22.3
4.9
22.8
1.8
0.0
0.0
8.3
14.6
0.2
0.9
0.0
2.1
6.1
230
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.7
15.1
7.6
58.5
0.3
0.0
0.0
5.4
61.7
0.0
1.5
0.0
3.5
1.6
197
1.8
0.0
0.1
0.8
8.4
1.8
27.9
2.0
0.0
1.7
5.3
29.9
0.1
4.7
1.3
5.2
11.7
658
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.8
0.0
53.4
0.7
0.0
1.7
12.2
12.9
0.0
11.4
0.0
3.9
1.1
444 1
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.8
4.5
16.2
6.7
0.0
1.1
8.5
14.8
0.0
0.9
0.0
17.8
5.0
,949
Notes: Represents treatment practices for plants treating water that comes entirely or partly from ground
sources.
Percentages may not add to 100 percent because systems may perform more than one treatment.
58
-------
Table 28
Treatment Practices for Ground Water Plants
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
By Plant Average Daily Production
Ground Water Treatment Practice
Disinfection
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines only
Chloramines with a free chlorine
period (based on need in the
distribution system and not
routinely done)
Chloramines with seasonal
(routine) free chlorine use
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Filtration Processes
Coagulant addition/rapid mix
Polymer addition
Flocculation
Settling/sedimentation
Lime/soda ash softening
Recarbonation
Filtration
Micro strainer
Slow sand filter
Bag or cartridge
Diatomaceous earth
Pressure filtration
Green sand
Rapid sand filter
Deep bed mono-media
Dual/multi media
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
90.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.1
0.0
2.6
10.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.01 -
0.1
93.6
0.7
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.5
1.6
0.1
1.6
2.3
0.4
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.5
0.5
2.8
4.8
2.3
0.5
2.4
0.1 -
1.0
93.4
0.4
1.7
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.5
4.3
1.7
1.7
3.1
5.0
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.0
4.2
4.9
1.0
0.0
3.8
1.0-
10.0
90.9
0.2
3.0
1.8
0.9
1.4
0.1
2.0
3.6
2.8
2.2
3.7
2.5
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.0
3.3
2.5
3.5
0.0
5.6
10.0-
100.0
91.7
0.0
3.5
0.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.3
11.9
13.6
15.4
18.8
7.3
0.0
0.9
7.9
0.0
0.0
39.5
8.2
0.0
20.9
Over
100
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
All Sizes
92.5
0.4
0.9
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.5
2.5
0.8
1.4
2.2
1.9
0.4
0.5
0.2
1.6
0.2
3.2
6.2
1.5
0.2
2.6
(Continued)
59
-------
Table 28 (Cont.)
Treatment Practices for Ground Water Plants
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
By Plant Average Daily Production
Ground Water Treatment Practice
Membranes
Reverse osmosis
Microfiltration
Ultrafiltration
Nanofiltration
Other
Aeration
Potassium permanganate
Corrosion control
Ion exchange
Activated alumina
Iron-based adsorptive media
Sequestration
Fluoride addition
Dissolved air flotation
Granular activated carbon
Centrally managed POU/POE
Clearwell and/or contact vessel
(e.g., basin, pipeline)
Other
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.8
3.5
11.0
15.8
0.0
2.6
8.7
0.5
0.0
1.2
0.0
28.7
4.9
121
Data: Q.8
0.01 -
0.1
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.4
3.7
10.5
3.8
0.0
1.2
6.6
13.9
0.0
0.1
0.0
17.2
3.8
339
0.1 -
1.0
1.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
17.6
5.3
24.1
2.9
0.0
0.2
10.9
25.0
0.0
1.0
0.1
9.8
6.9
796
1.0-
10.0
0.9
0.0
0.1
0.3
19.6
5.1
24.0
3.7
0.0
0.4
8.0
22.9
0.4
3.9
0.1
6.6
7.1
631
10.0-
100.0
4.4
0.0
0.0
3.9
68.5
43.2
60.0
4.8
0.0
0.0
7.4
68.3
0.0
5.2
0.0
25.0
7.2
60
Over
All
100 Sizes
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
2 1
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.0
4.4
15.7
6.4
0.0
1.2
8.4
14.8
0.0
0.9
0.0
17.1
5.2
949
Notes: Represents treatment practices for plants treating water that comes entirely or partly
from ground sources.
Percentages may not add to 100 percent because systems may perform more than
one treatment.
60
-------
Table 29
Disinfection Practices and Objectives
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
Primary
disinfection
method
Secondary
disinfection
method
Ground Water Plants
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
11.2
*
*
71.9
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.7
*
*
*
*
*
1.7
*
*
*
*
13.4
101 -
500
10.2
*
3.4
77.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
9.4
501 -
3,300
10.1
*
3.6
74.9
*
*
*
*
*
0.6
*
0.6
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
9.2
3,301 -
10,000
2.0
1.0
1.0
82.0
*
*
*
1.0
*
*
*
2.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.3
*
*
1.0
7.9
10,001 -
50,000
3.4
*
*
82.8
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.7
*
*
1.8
*
*
*
2.4
2.2
*
*
6.4
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
3.6
*
*
89.8
*
*
*
*
0.3
0.7
*
2.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.3
0.3
*
1.8
*
*
1.0
1.2
0.6
1.3
79.0
*
*
*
*
0.2
*
*
6.8
0.1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.3
*
0.4
2.8
0.1
*
7.1
Over
500,000
1.9
1.0
2.2
87.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.4
6.1
*
*
0.7
All Sizes
8.0
0.1
2.0
77.4
*
*
*
0.1
0.0
0.2
*
0.8
0.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.4
*
*
0.5
*
0.0
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.1
9.0
(Continued)
61
-------
Table 29 (Cont.)
Disinfection Practices and Objectives
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
Primary
disinfection
method
Secondary
disinfection
method
Surface Water Plants
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
14.0
*
*
82.9
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.6
*
*
*
1.6
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
14.4
*
*
60.4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.2
*
*
*
*
*
19.4
*
*
*
1.2
0.5
1.2
*
*
1.6
501 -
3,300
43.3
*
1.1
47.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.5
*
*
*
2.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.5
*
*
*
2.2
*
*
*
1.1
3,301 -
10,000
5.5
4.1
12.4
42.3
1.4
1.4
*
1.4
1.4
*
*
5.4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.4
1.4
1.4
2.7
4.1
6.9
4.1
*
*
2.7
10,001 -
50,000
24.0
1.2
5.9
40.9
1.6
0.2
*
*
*
4.2
1.2
5.8
*
1.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.2
1.2
*
2.3
2.3
1.2
*
5.8
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
9.2
9.2
2.6
37.1
2.8
1.3
*
1.3
*
2.6
*
6.6
*
2.6
7.9
*
1.3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3.9
2.6
5.1
*
2.6
1.3
13.0
14.3
5.2
30.9
0.5
2.3
2.8
0.9
*
2.5
2.8
2.8
2.8
4.2
1.4
0.5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.5
2.8
1.9
2.8
0.9
2.8
0.9
0.4
Over
500,000
26.9
12.6
5.0
16.8
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.7
10.1
2.5
5.9
1.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2.5
0.8
2.5
3.4
0.8
*
6.7
All Sizes
21.3
3.4
4.7
44.9
0.8
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.3
1.3
0.6
3.4
0.7
1.1
0.8
0.0
0.8
*
*
*
0.1
*
2.7
0.6
0.6
1.1
1.4
2.9
2.0
0.5
0.3
2.6
(Continued)
62
-------
Table 29 (Cont.)
Disinfection Practices and Objectives
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
Primary
disinfection
method
Mixed Plants
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Other
None
Secondary
disinfection
method
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
*
*
*
100.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
101 - 501 -
500 3,300
35.8
* *
* *
100.0 64.2
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
* *
* *
* *
*
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
* *
* *
* *
3,301 -
10,000
7.0
*
27.1
58.9
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
7.0
*
*
*
*
*
10,001 -
50,000
33.2
*
14.2
21.4
*
*
*
*
*
*
7.1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2.7
7.1
14.2
*
*
*
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
24.2
*
*
75.8
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
34.3
6.5
6.5
*
*
*
*
*
6.5
*
6.5
*
6.5
6.5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
13.0
7.1
*
6.5
Over
500,000
*
*
*
48.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
51.3
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
20.3
1.2
8.4
60.9
*
*
*
*
*
0.2
1.3
0.2
*
0.2
0.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.9
1.5
3.1
0.2
*
0.2
(Continued)
63
-------
Table 29 (Cont.)
Disinfection Practices and Objectives
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
Primary
disinfection
method
All Plants
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Other
None
Data:
Notes:
Secondary
disinfection
method
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
System Service
100
or Less
11.3
*
*
72.3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.7
*
*
*
0.0
*
1.7
*
*
*
*
13.0
Q.8
101 -
500
10.3
*
3.1
76.5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.1
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
*
*
*
0.1
0.0
0.1
*
*
8.8
501 -
3,300
13.1
*
3.3
72.6
*
*
*
*
*
0.5
*
0.5
0.1
*
*
*
0.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.1
*
*
*
0.2
*
*
*
8.4
Population Category
3,301 - 10,001 -
10,000
2.7
1.5
3.6
75.1
0.2
0.2
*
1.0
0.2
*
*
3.1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
* *
*
*
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.9
2.1
0.6
*
0.8
6.8
50,000
7.3
0.2
1.3
74.7
0.2
0.0
*
*
*
0.7
0.4
1.2
*
0.2
*
*
*
*
*
0.5
*
*
1.4
0.2
0.2
0.1
2.5
2.5
0.2
*
6.1
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
4.8
1.7
0.5
79.9
0.5
0.2
*
0.2
0.3
1.0
*
2.9
*
0.5
1.5
*
0.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.3
1.0
0.5
2.4
*
0.5
1.0
500,000
3.9
4.3
2.2
66.8
0.1
0.5
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.7
0.6
5.9
0.7
1.1
0.4
0.1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.1
0.9
0.4
1.0
2.6
0.9
0.2
5.6
Over
500,000
7.3
3.5
2.8
72.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.4
2.2
0.5
1.3
0.4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.5
0.2
1.1
5.5
0.2
*
2.0
All Sizes
9.5
0.5
2.4
74.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.3
0.1
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
*
*
*
0.3
*
0.3
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.7
0.7
0.1
0.1
8.2
Percentages may not add to 100 percent because systems may perform more than one treatment.
64
-------
Table 30
Disinfection Practice and Objectives
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
By Plant Average Daily Production
Primary
disinfection
method
Secondary
disinfection
method
Ground Water Plants
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Plant Average
0-
0.01
10.6
*
1.2
76.1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.3
*
*
*
*
10.9
0.01 -
0.1
8.7
*
3.7
77.4
*
*
*
*
*
0.5
*
0.1
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.1
*
*
*
0.5
*
*
*
*
0.1
*
*
9.1
0.1 -
1.0
5.8
0.4
0.4
80.5
*
*
*
0.4
*
*
*
2.0
0.0
*
*
*
*
*
0.2
*
*
*
0.5
*
*
*
0.9
1.3
*
0.4
7.2
Daily Production (MGD)
1.0-
10.0
4.1
0.2
0.3
81.3
*
*
*
*
0.2
0.3
*
2.9
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
*
0.2
*
2.6
1.5
0.1
*
5.3
10.0-
100.0
1.8
3.0
8.4
71.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
6.6
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.9
2.2
*
3.0
*
*
2.5
Over
100 All Sizes
8.0
0.1
1.9
78.2
*
* *
* *
0.1
0.0
0.2
* *
0.8
0.0
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
0.1
.
* *
* *
0.4
.
0.0
0.3
100.0 0.4
0.5
0.0
0.1
8.7
(Continued)
65
-------
Table 30 (Cont.)
Disinfection Practice and Objectives
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
By Plant Average Daily Production
Primary
disinfection
method
Secondary
disinfection
method
Surface Water Plants
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
0-
0.01
12.9
*
*
69.1
*
*
*
*
*
11.6
*
*
*
*
*
*
2.7
*
*
1.3
*
*
*
*
1.3
*
*
1.2
*
*
*
*
Plant
0.01 -
0.1
27.7
*
1.4
49.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.4
1.9
*
*
*
1.4
*
*
*
*
*
13.9
*
*
*
0.9
*
0.9
*
*
1.2
Average Daily Production (MGD)
0.1 -
1.0
22.1
2.0
5.8
49.0
0.8
0.8
*
0.8
0.8
*
*
1.7
*
0.8
0.3
*
0.8
*
*
*
*
*
0.8
1.9
0.8
1.7
1.7
4.1
2.5
*
*
0.8
1.0-
10.0
18.3
5.4
7.0
40.6
1.4
0.7
0.1
0.1
*
1.7
1.3
5.6
0.1
0.3
1.5
*
0.3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.9
0.8
1.0
2.8
2.7
1.4
0.7
5.3
10.0-
100.0
21.3
10.5
4.1
27.5
1.5
*
2.0
1.3
*
1.2
1.1
7.9
2.3
5.9
1.9
0.4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3.4
1.2
4.0
0.4
0.4
0.4
1.3
Over
100
26.3
5.3
*
15.8
*
*
*
*
*
*
5.3
5.3
10.5
15.8
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
5.3
*
*
5.3
*
5.3
All Sizes
21.3
3.5
4.8
45.0
0.9
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.3
1.4
0.6
3.5
0.7
1.1
0.8
0.0
0.8
*
*
0.1
*
*
2.8
0.6
0.6
1.1
1.2
2.7
1.9
0.5
0.3
2.4
(Continued)
66
-------
Table 30 (Cont.)
Disinfection Practice and Objectives
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
By Plant Average Daily Production
Primary
disinfection
method
Mixed Plants
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Other
None
Secondary
disinfection
method
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Plant
0 - 0.01 -
0.01 0.1
6.1
* *
* *
100.0 93.9
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
* *
* *
* *
.
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
* *
* *
* *
.
* *
* *
* *
Average Daily Production (MGD)
0.1 -
1.0
28.9
*
*
65.6
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2.8
*
2.7
*
*
*
1.0-
10.0
17.4
1.0
35.5
24.8
*
*
*
*
*
0.9
5.7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2.2
5.7
5.7
1.0
*
*
10.0-
100.0
16.3
29.1
*
7.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
7.0
*
7.0
7.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
5.8
13.9
*
*
7.0
Over
100
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
20.3
1.2
8.4
60.9
*
*
*
*
*
0.2
1.3
0.2
*
0.2
0.2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.9
1.5
3.1
0.2
*
0.2
(Continued)
67
-------
Table 30 (Cont.)
Disinfection Practice and Objectives
Percentage of Plants Performing Each Treatment
By Plant Average Daily Production
Primary
disinfection
method
All Plants
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Other
None
Data:
Notes:
Secondary
disinfection
method
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
Chlorine
Chloramines
Other
None
0-
0.01
10.6
*
1.1
75.9
*
*
*
*
*
0.3
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.1
*
*
*
0.0
*
*
*
0.0
*
1.2
0.0
*
*
*
10.6
Q.8
Percentages may not add to 1 00
Plant
0.01 -
0.1
9.6
*
3.5
76.3
*
*
*
*
*
0.4
*
0.1
0.1
*
*
*
0.1
*
*
*
0.1
*
0.7
0.4
*
*
0.0
*
0.1
*
*
8.6
Average Daily Production (MGD)
0.1 -
1.0
8.3
0.6
1.0
76.6
0.1
0.1
*
0.4
0.1
*
*
1.9
0.0
0.1
0.0
*
0.1
*
*
*
0.1
*
0.1
0.7
0.1
0.2
0.3
1.2
1.5
*
0.3
6.3
1.0-
10.0
9.1
1.9
3.9
66.1
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.8
0.6
3.6
0.0
0.1
0.5
*
0.1
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.4
2.8
2.1
0.5
0.2
5.0
10.0-
100.0
15.0
8.8
5.3
40.8
0.9
*
1.3
0.9
*
0.8
0.7
7.5
1.5
4.1
1.5
0.3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2.5
1.5
2.8
1.7
0.3
0.3
1.9
Over
100
23.9
4.8
*
14.4
*
*
*
*
*
*
4.8
4.8
9.6
14.4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
4.8
9.1
*
4.8
*
4.8
All Sizes
9.5
0.5
2.3
74.7
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.3
0.1
1.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
*
*
*
0.1
*
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.7
0.7
0.1
0.1
7.9
percent because systems may perform more than one treatment.
68
-------
Table 31
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Surface Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
Surface Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection, Other Chemical Addition
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.7
0.0
0.0
7.7
13
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
501 -
3,300
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
0.0
25.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
25.0
0.0
25.0
25.0
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3,301 -
10,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
33.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
0.0
4
100.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
6
0.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
100,001-
500,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5
21.3
35.5
35.5
14.2
0.0
0.0
20.0
6.7
0.0
13.3
40.0
15
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
Over
500,000
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
14.3
21.4
21.4
7.1
0.0
7.1
7.1
14.3
0.0
7.1
7.1
14
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.3
0.0
0.0
2.4
41
3.4
21.0
5.5
12.9
0.0
2.4
14.3
9.5
0.0
14.3
23.8
42
46.0
0.0
46.0
46.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
(Continued)
69
-------
Table 31 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Surface Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
Surface Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
25.1
10.6
19.9
0.0
0.0
3.7
3.7
7.4
7.4
0.0
27
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
0.0
14.5
14.5
14.5
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
5
101 -
500
0.0
34.4
28.7
38.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
27.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
22
0.0
36.6
17.8
57.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
22.2
11.1
0.0
9
0.0
70.9
17.0
45.5
0.0
0.0
11.8
23.5
0.0
35.3
0.0
17
501 -
3,300
3.2
34.2
30.4
37.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
22.2
5.6
27.8
5.6
18
0.0
39.0
7.3
53.7
0.0
0.0
15.4
15.4
0.0
46.2
38.5
13
0.0
61.1
25.5
67.8
0.0
3.7
11.1
25.9
0.0
33.3
29.6
27
3,301 -
10,000
14.3
42.9
0.0
42.9
0.0
0.0
14.3
57.1
0.0
14.3
57.1
7
7.2
49.9
7.2
57.3
0.0
0.0
28.6
42.9
14.3
14.3
35.7
14
7.3
48.9
29.3
56.2
0.0
0.0
22.0
36.6
0.0
14.6
39.0
41
10,001 -
50,000
0.0
40.0
40.0
20.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
40.0
0.0
20.0
20.0
5
0.0
85.9
20.8
55.5
0.0
0.0
30.8
38.5
7.7
23.1
38.5
13
13.8
64.0
40.2
43.0
0.0
7.9
19.0
38.1
1.6
22.2
30.2
63
50,001 -
100,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
1
0.0
77.1
19.3
25.7
0.0
0.0
37.5
31.3
0.0
37.5
68.8
16
20.3
56.1
34.8
45.2
0.0
4.3
27.7
38.3
0.0
23.4
46.8
47
100,001-
500,000
50.0
50.0
37.5
12.5
0.0
0.0
37.5
50.0
0.0
25.0
62.5
8
23.0
61.7
26.8
38.3
0.0
3.8
38.5
23.1
0.0
30.8
69.2
26
29.9
59.9
30.5
31.3
0.0
2.1
45.1
23.9
0.0
23.9
57.0
142
Over
500,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
18.2
54.5
9.1
9.1
0.0
0.0
36.4
18.2
0.0
0.0
81.8
11
36.1
41.0
15.7
24.1
0.0
3.6
41.0
26.5
0.0
33.7
68.7
83
All Sizes
3.9
34.2
24.4
33.4
1.4
0.0
6.8
23.9
3.4
13.6
12.5
88
3.7
57.0
15.9
49.4
0.0
1.0
28.6
24.8
4.8
24.8
50.5
105
13.4
57.6
30.9
47.0
0.0
3.3
32.5
29.2
0.5
25.6
48.0
425
(Continued)
70
-------
Table 31 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Surface Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
Surface Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other Treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
Data: Q.9
101 -
500
0.0
19.4
0.0
37.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
40.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
5
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
501 -
3,300
0.0
21.5
0.0
46.4
0.0
0.0
11.1
33.3
11.1
66.7
0.0
9
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
3,301 -
10,000
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
66.7
66.7
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
10,001 -
50,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization
50,001 -
100,000
0.0
41.7
41.7
41.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
presented by
100,001-
500,000
0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
Over
500,000 All
33.9
33.9
33.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.7
66.7
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5
Sizes
0.8
25.2
4.7
34.3
0.0
0.0
3.8
26.9
3.8
38.5
30.8
26
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6
Table 23 and Table 24.
71
-------
Table 32
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Ground Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
Ground Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection, Other Chemical Addition
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
41
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.5
12.5
8
10.4
0.0
40.7
20.8
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
20.0
20.0
0.0
10
101 -
500
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.4
0.0
0.0
45
7.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.3
16
12.3
0.0
23.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.5
25.0
0.0
8
501 -
3,300
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
88
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.3
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
48
0.0
18.2
0.0
18.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.3
0.0
12
3,301 -
10,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
24.5
7.7
0.0
0.0
6.4
0.0
8.5
0.0
47
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.1
4.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.8
0.0
0.0
26
0.0
0.0
0.0
28.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.3
0.0
7
10,001 -
50,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.5
0.0
6.4
0.0
47
0.4
0.4
0.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.6
1.6
6.3
0.0
63
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.4
10.2
0.0
6.7
0.0
0.0
16.7
0.0
30
50,001 -
100,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
56
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.0
2.6
0.0
78
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
6.7
6.7
15
100,001-
500,000
5.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
0.8
0.4
241
0.4
0.4
8.6
12.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.1
0.4
4.7
0.0
236
0.0
0.0
4.0
11.7
0.0
3.8
3.8
30.8
0.0
3.8
7.7
26
Over
500,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
119
0.9
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
225
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
38
All Sizes
0.1
0.0
0.0
2.9
0.7
0.0
0.1
1.5
0.7
1.3
0.1
684
1.3
0.1
0.4
2.3
1.0
0.0
0.1
2.9
0.4
2.6
0.3
700
5.4
3.7
16.0
12.2
2.1
0.7
4.8
5.5
2.1
8.9
2.1
146
(Continued)
72
-------
Table 32 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Ground Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
Ground Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
10.5
28.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
30.0
20.0
0.0
10
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
0.0
0.0
7.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.3
18.8
50.0
0.0
16
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
1
501 -
3,300
0.0
30.8
13.0
36.7
0.0
0.0
5.3
15.8
0.0
52.6
0.0
19
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
1
0.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
3,301 -
10,000
8.0
23.9
8.0
31.9
8.0
0.0
7.7
30.8
15.4
30.8
7.7
13
100.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
1
0.0
25.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
75.0
25.0
4
10,001 -
50,000
6.2
8.5
1.6
8.5
0.7
0.0
20.6
14.7
0.0
67.6
17.6
34
0.0
66.7
18.2
9.1
0.0
0.0
33.3
16.7
0.0
50.0
16.7
6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
3.0
14.0
11.6
63.3
6.0
4.3
0.0
21.7
8.7
34.8
60.9
23
42.1
57.9
57.9
84.1
0.0
0.0
66.7
33.3
0.0
0.0
33.3
3
48.5
48.5
48.5
74.2
0.0
0.0
25.0
25.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
4
100,001-
500,000
10.4
32.0
21.6
34.0
13.2
4.3
10.6
21.3
2.1
42.6
27.7
47
36.7
46.4
36.7
64.8
0.0
0.0
33.3
50.0
33.3
50.0
50.0
6
35.2
56.7
51.4
56.7
0.0
0.0
58.3
16.7
0.0
0.0
50.0
12
Over
500,000
0.0
46.0
0.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
13.5
0.0
32.4
21.6
37
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
100.0
52.4
84.4
0.0
0.0
50.0
25.0
0.0
25.0
100.0
4
All Sizes
1.8
11.5
8.8
20.3
1.3
1.5
7.5
16.6
5.5
43.7
21.1
199
20.5
52.6
12.5
55.5
0.0
0.0
35.3
29.4
17.6
41.2
35.3
17
4.5
31.3
21.0
63.6
0.0
0.0
35.7
17.9
0.0
17.9
46.4
28
(Continued)
73
-------
Table 32 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Ground Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
Ground Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other Treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
Data: Q.9
101 -
500
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
5
501 -
3,300
0.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
3,301 - 10,001 -
10,000 50,000
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
ป ป
ป ป
* *
* *
* *
* *
50.0
50.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
50.0
2
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization
50,001 -
100,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
presented by
100,001-
500,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
24.5
24.5
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
25.0
0.0
4
3.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.5
0.0
25.9
14.8
0.0
25.9
3.7
27
Over
500,000 All
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10
Sizes
0.0
37.0
37.0
37.9
0.9
0.0
0.0
37.5
12.5
12.5
0.0
8
1.6
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.2
4.0
14.0
10.0
0.0
18.0
4.0
50
Table 23 and Table 24.
74
-------
Table 33
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Mixed Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
Mixed Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection, Other Chemical Addition
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
501 -
3,300
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
3,301 -
10,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
27.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
50,001 -
100,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
100,001-
500,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
19.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
20.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
5
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
Over
500,000 All Sizes
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11
17.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
25.0
0.0
12.5
12.5
8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
(Continued)
75
-------
Table 33 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Mixed Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
Mixed Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
0.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
1
501 -
3,300
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
53.8
30.8
46.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
25.0
25.0
4
3,301 -
10,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
100.0
29.0
14.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
75.0
0.0
25.0
50.0
4
10,001 -
50,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
100.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
2
22.8
68.4
68.4
22.8
0.0
0.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
40.0
80.0
5
50,001 -
100,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
50.0
50.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
100.0
2
100,001-
500,000
32.4
67.6
67.6
64.7
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
33.3
66.7
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
16.7
100.0
33.3
50.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
16.7
100.0
6
Over
500,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
All Sizes
5.9
34.7
49.5
71.2
0.0
0.0
16.7
16.7
0.0
16.7
33.3
6
12.8
87.2
66.6
33.3
0.0
0.0
25.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
4
8.4
78.6
38.7
24.8
0.0
4.3
21.7
26.1
0.0
30.4
69.6
23
(Continued)
76
-------
Table 33 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Mixed Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
Mixed Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other Treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
Data: Q.9
101 -
500
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
501 -
3,300
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
3,301 - 10,001 -
10,000 50,000
0.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
ป ป
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization
50,001 -
100,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
presented by
100,001- Over
500,000 500,000 All
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
ป ป
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
Table 23 and Table 24.
Sizes
0.0
70.9
70.9
70.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.7
33.3
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
77
-------
Table 34
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of All Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
All Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management Practice
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection, Other Chemical Addition
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
54
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.5
12.5
8
10.4
0.0
40.7
20.8
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
20.0
20.0
0.0
10
101 -
500
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.6
3.3
0.0
1.6
61
7.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.8
17
12.3
0.0
23.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.5
25.0
0.0
8
501 -
3,300
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
94
0.0
0.3
0.0
1.9
1.3
0.0
1.9
1.9
0.0
1.9
1.9
53
0.0
17.3
0.0
17.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.7
0.0
13
3,301 -
10,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
23.9
7.5
0.0
0.0
6.3
0.0
8.3
0.0
48
0.0
2.2
0.0
8.5
4.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.4
3.4
0.0
29
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.1
0.0
9
10,001 -
50,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.2
0.0
6.1
0.0
49
1.2
0.4
0.0
2.7
0.0
0.0
1.4
2.9
1.4
7.2
1.4
69
1.3
0.0
1.3
4.6
10.1
0.0
6.5
3.2
0.0
16.1
0.0
31
50,001 -
100,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
62
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.6
0.0
2.5
0.0
0.0
2.5
1.3
79
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.8
0.0
0.0
6.3
6.3
16
100,001-
500,000
4.8
0.4
0.8
1.2
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
0.8
0.4
247
1.5
2.6
9.9
12.0
0.0
0.0
1.6
8.2
0.4
5.5
2.3
256
0.0
0.0
3.9
11.4
0.0
3.7
3.7
29.6
0.0
3.7
7.4
27
Over
500,000
0.0
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
121
1.7
2.1
1.3
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.8
0.0
0.4
0.4
239
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
38
All Sizes
0.1
0.0
0.0
2.8
0.7
0.0
0.1
1.8
0.7
1.2
0.3
736
1.4
0.6
0.5
2.6
1.0
0.1
1.2
3.5
0.4
3.3
1.7
750
5.5
3.6
15.9
12.2
2.0
0.7
4.6
5.9
2.0
8.6
2.0
152
(Continued)
78
-------
Table 34 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of All Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
All Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management Practice
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
2.4
10.4
27.1
0.0
0.0
5.3
2.6
13.2
10.5
0.0
38
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
0.0
14.5
14.5
14.5
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
5
101 -
500
0.0
3.0
8.7
3.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.5
7.7
20.5
0.0
39
0.0
42.2
16.2
52.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
10
0.0
38.8
8.6
69.5
0.0
0.0
10.5
21.1
0.0
42.1
0.0
19
501 -
3,300
0.7
31.3
17.4
37.3
0.0
0.0
2.6
18.4
2.6
39.5
2.6
38
0.0
26.6
5.0
68.5
0.0
0.0
14.3
14.3
0.0
50.0
35.7
14
0.0
57.3
32.8
60.8
0.0
3.0
9.1
30.3
0.0
30.3
27.3
33
3,301 -
10,000
8.8
26.3
7.0
33.3
7.0
0.0
10.0
40.0
10.0
25.0
25.0
20
27.4
60.8
5.6
66.6
0.0
0.0
26.7
40.0
20.0
13.3
40.0
15
4.7
48.6
22.1
50.1
0.0
0.0
18.4
36.7
0.0
20.4
38.8
49
10,001 -
50,000
5.7
10.9
4.5
9.4
2.1
0.0
17.9
17.9
0.0
61.5
17.9
39
0.0
79.2
25.5
36.5
0.0
0.0
28.6
28.6
4.8
28.6
38.1
21
15.0
64.5
42.6
41.9
0.0
7.2
20.3
36.2
1.4
23.2
34.8
69
50,001 -
100,000
2.9
13.7
11.3
61.7
5.8
4.2
4.2
20.8
8.3
37.5
58.3
24
11.1
70.4
23.7
32.5
0.0
0.0
45.0
35.0
0.0
30.0
60.0
20
23.9
55.2
36.6
45.9
0.0
5.7
26.4
35.8
0.0
22.6
47.2
53
100,001-
500,000
16.8
36.2
26.1
32.7
10.7
3.4
15.5
24.1
1.7
39.7
34.5
58
25.5
58.8
28.7
43.2
0.0
3.1
37.5
28.1
6.3
34.4
65.6
32
29.8
61.1
32.1
33.8
0.0
1.9
46.3
22.5
0.0
21.9
58.1
160
Over
500,000
0.0
46.0
0.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
13.5
0.0
32.4
21.6
37
18.2
54.5
9.1
9.1
0.0
0.0
36.4
18.2
0.0
0.0
81.8
11
33.3
44.5
18.0
27.9
0.0
3.4
40.9
26.1
0.0
33.0
70.5
88
All Sizes
2.1
14.3
10.8
22.1
1.3
1.0
7.5
18.8
4.8
34.1
18.8
293
8.5
56.8
16.7
50.5
0.0
0.8
29.4
26.2
6.3
26.2
48.4
126
11.5
54.6
29.8
48.3
0.0
3.2
32.1
28.4
0.4
25.4
48.9
476
(Continued)
79
-------
Table 34 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of All Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source
All Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management Practice
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other Treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
Data: Q.9
101 -
500
0.0
4.9
0.0
9.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
16.7
0.0
16.7
6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.7
0.0
6
501 -
3,300
0.0
53.5
40.8
68.2
0.0
0.0
10.0
30.0
10.0
60.0
0.0
10
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
3,301 -
10,000
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
66.7
66.7
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
10,001 -
50,000
0.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
50.0
50.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
50.0
2
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization
50,001 -
100,000
0.0
31.3
31.3
31.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
40.0
0.0
0.0
40.0
5
66.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
100,001-
500,000
0.0
19.6
19.6
19.6
19.6
0.0
0.0
40.0
0.0
20.0
20.0
5
3.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.5
0.0
25.9
14.8
0.0
25.9
3.7
27
Over
500,000 All
20.6
20.6
20.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
60.0
40.0
5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
15
Sizes
0.4
32.5
22.5
37.4
0.4
0.0
2.7
27.0
5.4
35.1
24.3
37
1.6
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.2
3.5
12.3
8.8
0.0
15.8
3.5
57
presented by Table 23 and Table 24.
80
-------
Table 35
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Surface Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Surface Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection, Other Chemical Addition
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0 - 0.01 -
0.01 0.1
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 16.7
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 16.7
11 6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
0.1 -
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
0.0
14.5
0.0
14.4
0.0
0.0
12.5
12.5
0.0
12.5
12.5
8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
1.0-
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
g
0.0
28.4
3.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.1
0.0
0.0
18.2
9.1
11
88.0
0.0
88.0
88.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
10.0-
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
29.5
50.6
41.0
32.7
0.0
0.0
18.8
18.8
0.0
18.8
43.8
16
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
Over
100
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
25.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
25.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.7
0.0
0.0
3.2
31
3.4
21.2
5.5
13.0
0.0
2.5
15.0
10.0
0.0
15.0
25.0
40
46.0
0.0
46.0
46.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
(Continued)
81
-------
Table 35 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Surface Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Surface Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
0.0
17.3
14.5
14.5
0.0
0.0
3.8
11.5
0.0
7.7
0.0
26
0.0
60.9
6.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
25.0
4
0.0
39.0
16.6
33.0
0.0
0.0
12.5
12.5
12.5
37.5
12.5
8
0.01 -
0.1
0.7
59.0
18.0
64.0
0.0
0.0
3.7
18.5
3.7
7.4
3.7
27
0.0
39.6
27.7
53.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
10.0
10
0.0
68.1
29.1
48.5
0.0
0.0
16.7
29.2
0.0
25.0
8.3
24
0.1 -
1.0
0.0
20.6
34.5
12.4
0.0
0.0
5.6
33.3
5.6
22.2
22.2
18
0.0
45.5
9.4
56.0
0.0
0.0
13.6
27.3
9.1
27.3
36.4
22
5.9
55.7
31.0
65.8
0.0
1.9
21.2
25.0
0.0
25.0
36.5
52
1.0-
10.0
17.7
34.3
31.9
32.4
14.7
0.0
22.2
33.3
0.0
22.2
33.3
9
5.9
72.6
19.5
57.6
0.0
2.5
37.5
32.5
2.5
37.5
55.0
40
13.0
58.6
35.1
44.4
0.0
3.4
26.9
34.5
0.7
20.7
40.0
145
10.0-
100.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
60.0
0.0
20.0
60.0
5
22.4
67.0
23.1
28.4
0.0
0.0
36.0
28.0
0.0
12.0
72.0
25
34.8
55.1
25.4
28.0
0.0
4.5
42.5
26.8
0.0
29.6
63.7
179
Over
100
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
66.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
3
36.4
18.2
0.0
18.2
0.0
0.0
36.4
27.3
0.0
36.4
63.6
11
All Sizes
2.5
35.4
25.3
33.0
1.5
0.0
7.1
23.5
2.4
12.9
12.9
85
3.7
57.6
16.1
50.0
0.0
1.0
28.8
25.0
4.8
25.0
51.0
104
13.5
57.5
31.2
47.6
0.0
3.3
32.2
29.1
0.5
26.0
48.0
419
(Continued)
82
-------
Table 35 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Surface Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Surface Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other Treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
Data: Q.9
0.01 -
0.1
0.0
9.1
0.0
50.9
0.0
0.0
12.5
12.5
12.5
25.0
12.5
8
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.1 -
1.0
0.0
50.2
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
57.1
0.0
42.9
14.3
7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
1.0-
10.0
0.0
17.6
17.6
17.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.7
0.0
50.0
50.0
6
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
10.0-
100.0
31.2
68.8
68.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
100.0
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Over
100 All Sizes
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.8
26.7
5.0
36.4
0.0
0.0
4.0
24.0
4.0
36.0
32.0
25
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization presented by
Table 23 and Table 24.
83
-------
Table 36
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Ground Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Ground Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection, Other Chemical Addition
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.9
0.0
0.0
51
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.1
3.1
32
15.3
0.0
37.5
15.9
0.0
0.0
7.7
0.0
23.1
23.1
0.0
13
0.01 -
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
158
3.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
115
0.0
17.9
0.0
17.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.3
0.0
16
0.1 -
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
9.3
2.7
0.0
0.0
2.9
0.4
2.5
0.0
239
0.2
0.2
0.8
2.5
1.2
0.0
0.0
4.0
0.3
3.7
0.0
349
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.6
0.0
0.0
2.3
2.3
0.0
7.0
0.0
43
1.0-
10.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
10.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.9
0.5
0.5
216
0.0
0.2
1.8
13.2
0.7
0.0
0.5
3.1
0.5
2.1
0.0
191
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.4
17.2
1.6
7.9
11.1
0.0
9.5
3.2
63
10.0-
100.0
0.0
22.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
5
27.4
27.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
2
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.7
6
Over
100 All Sizes
0.1
0.0
0.0
2.8
0.8
0.0
0.1
1.5
0.7
1.3
0.1
669
1.4
0.1
0.4
2.0
0.6
0.0
0.1
2.9
0.4
2.6
0.3
689
5.7
3.9
13.9
12.9
2.2
0.7
5.0
5.7
2.1
9.2
2.1
141
(Continued)
84
-------
Table 36 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Ground Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Ground Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0 - 0.01 -
0.01 0.1
0.0 0.0
0.0 12.1
7.0 10.7
18.8 12.0
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
6.3 3.6
0.0 14.3
37.5 0.0
25.0 57.1
6.3 0.0
16 28
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
0.0
39.7
39.7
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
2
0.1 -
1.0
3.8
28.8
10.0
37.9
3.9
1.6
9.5
9.5
3.2
50.8
15.9
63
27.7
36.6
8.0
80.6
0.0
0.0
16.7
0.0
16.7
33.3
33.3
6
0.0
17.8
0.0
35.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
60.0
20.0
5
1.0-
10.0
13.8
16.9
11.5
10.0
5.0
1.7
8.6
22.4
1.7
36.2
24.1
58
2.1
84.0
14.0
8.9
0.0
0.0
44.4
55.6
11.1
44.4
22.2
9
66.6
60.4
80.2
60.4
0.0
0.0
40.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
60.0
10
10.0-
100.0
9.1
8.1
7.0
71.9
6.3
3.7
7.4
29.6
7.4
44.4
63.0
27
100.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
50.0
50.0
100.0
2
15.5
65.6
34.4
84.5
0.0
0.0
44.4
44.4
0.0
0.0
44.4
9
Over
100
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
100.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
100.0
2
All Sizes
1.9
12.2
9.3
21.6
1.3
1.6
7.8
16.1
5.7
44.3
21.9
192
20.5
52.6
12.5
55.5
0.0
0.0
35.3
29.4
17.6
41.2
35.3
17
4.5
31.3
21.0
63.6
0.0
0.0
35.7
17.9
0.0
17.9
46.4
28
(Continued)
85
-------
Table 36 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Ground Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Ground Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other Treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
Data: Q.9
0.01 -
0.1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.7
0.0
6
0.1 -
1.0
0.0
97.3
97.3
97.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.5
0.0
0.0
25.0
0.0
8
1.0-
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
17.7
17.7
0.0
0.0
75.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4
20.4
8.4
0.0
8.4
3.2
3.6
21.4
7.1
0.0
17.9
7.1
28
10.0-
100.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
39.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
40.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
5
Over
100 All Sizes
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
37.0
37.0
37.9
0.9
0.0
0.0
37.5
12.5
12.5
0.0
8
1.6
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.2
4.0
14.0
10.0
0.0
18.0
4.0
50
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization presented by
Table 23 and Table 24.
86
-------
Table 37
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Mixed Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Mixed Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection, Other Chemical Addition
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.01 -
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.1 -
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
1.0-
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
73.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
33.3
33.3
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
10.0-
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
32.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
Over
100 All Sizes
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11
17.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
25.0
0.0
12.5
12.5
8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
(Continued)
87
-------
Table 37 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Mixed Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Mixed Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.01 -
0.1
0.0
27.3
45.4
72.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
1
0.1 -
1.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
68.5
36.9
31.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
16.7
33.3
6
1.0-
10.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
1
16.1
83.9
83.9
41.9
0.0
0.0
33.3
33.3
0.0
0.0
66.7
3
10.0
82.3
40.3
20.4
0.0
0.0
33.3
33.3
0.0
44.4
77.8
9
10.0-
100.0
47.9
52.1
52.1
47.9
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
50.0
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
40.9
89.8
53.1
36.7
0.0
14.3
28.6
0.0
0.0
14.3
100.0
7
Over
100 All Sizes
5.9
34.7
49.5
71.2
0.0
0.0
16.7
16.7
0.0
16.7
33.3
6
12.8
87.2
66.6
33.3
0.0
0.0
25.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
4
8.4
78.6
38.7
24.8
0.0
4.3
21.7
26.1
0.0
30.4
69.6
23
(Continued)
88
-------
Table 37 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of Mixed Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
Mixed Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management
Practice
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other Treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0 - 0.01 -
0.01 0.1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
ป ป
ป ป
* *
* *
* *
* *
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
Data: Q.9
0.1 -
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
1.0- 10.0-
10.0 100.0
0.0
88.5
88.5
88.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
50.0
2
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization
Over
100 All Sizes
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
presented by
0.0
70.9
70.9
70.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.7
33.3
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
Table 23 and Table 24.
89
-------
Table 38
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of All Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
All Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management Practice
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection, Other Chemical Addition
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.1
0.0
0.0
64
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.1
3.1
32
15.3
0.0
37.5
15.9
0.0
0.0
7.7
0.0
23.1
23.1
0.0
13
0.01 -
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.6
0.6
167
3.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
116
0.0
17.9
0.0
17.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.3
0.0
16
0.1 -
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
8.7
2.6
0.0
0.0
3.3
0.4
2.4
0.0
246
0.2
0.8
0.7
3.0
1.2
0.0
0.3
4.5
0.3
3.9
0.3
359
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.8
0.0
0.0
2.2
2.2
0.0
6.5
0.0
46
1.0-
10.0
2.7
0.0
0.0
10.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.9
0.4
0.4
226
1.6
2.1
1.9
12.1
0.7
0.0
1.5
2.9
0.5
3.4
1.0
205
2.1
0.0
2.4
2.4
16.6
1.5
7.6
12.1
0.0
9.1
3.0
66
10.0-
100.0
0.0
12.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.3
0.0
0.0
14.3
0.0
7
25.1
44.3
28.8
22.9
0.0
0.0
19.0
19.0
4.8
14.3
33.3
21
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.7
6
Over
100
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
25.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
25.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
0.1
0.0
0.0
2.7
0.7
0.0
0.1
1.8
0.7
1.3
0.3
711
1.5
0.7
0.6
2.3
0.5
0.1
1.2
3.5
0.4
3.4
1.8
737
5.8
3.8
13.8
12.8
2.1
0.7
4.8
6.1
2.0
8.8
2.0
147
(Continued)
90
-------
Table 38 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of All Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
All Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management Practice
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
0.0
1.1
7.5
18.5
0.0
0.0
4.8
7.1
14.3
14.3
2.4
42
0.0
60.9
6.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
25.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
25.0
4
0.0
39.0
16.6
33.0
0.0
0.0
12.5
12.5
12.5
37.5
12.5
8
0.01 -
0.1
0.1
17.8
12.0
18.9
0.0
0.0
3.4
17.2
1.7
31.0
1.7
58
0.0
44.1
25.6
49.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.1
0.0
18.2
9.1
11
0.0
55.3
33.6
71.8
0.0
0.0
14.8
25.9
0.0
29.6
7.4
27
0.1 -
1.0
3.1
27.3
14.6
33.2
3.1
1.2
8.6
14.8
3.7
44.4
17.3
81
11.1
41.9
8.8
65.8
0.0
0.0
14.3
21.4
10.7
28.6
35.7
28
3.8
46.3
22.9
54.7
0.0
1.6
17.5
27.0
0.0
27.0
34.9
63
1.0-
10.0
14.5
20.7
15.9
14.8
6.9
1.5
10.3
23.5
1.5
33.8
26.5
68
5.7
76.3
22.6
44.4
0.0
1.9
38.5
36.5
3.8
36.5
50.0
52
14.0
61.1
36.7
42.4
0.0
3.0
28.0
32.3
0.6
20.7
43.3
164
10.0-
100.0
11.9
11.1
10.1
67.0
5.8
2.9
11.8
32.4
5.9
41.2
61.8
34
32.4
58.4
33.0
37.6
0.0
0.0
37.0
25.9
3.7
14.8
74.1
27
33.8
57.0
27.0
31.9
0.0
4.6
42.1
26.7
0.0
27.7
64.1
195
Over
100
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
0.0
66.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
3
31.0
30.2
0.0
22.9
0.0
0.0
46.2
23.1
0.0
38.5
69.2
13
All Sizes
2.0
15.1
11.5
23.2
1.3
1.1
7.8
18.4
4.6
34.3
19.4
283
8.5
57.3
16.9
50.9
0.0
0.8
29.6
26.4
6.4
26.4
48.8
125
11.5
54.5
30.0
48.7
0.0
3.2
31.9
28.3
0.4
25.7
48.9
470
(Continued)
91
-------
Table 38 (Cont.)
Residual Management Practices For Each Treatment Scheme
Percentage of All Water Plants Using Each Residual Management Practice by Treatement Scheme
By Water Source and Plant Average Daily Production
All Water Plant Treatment Schemes and Residual Management Practice
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other Treatment
Dewatering
Mechanical dewatering
Non-mechanical dewatering
Disposal
Land application
On-site storage
Deep well injection
Hazardous waste landfill
Non-hazardous waste landfill
Direct discharge to surface water
Septic system
Sanitary Sewer
Recycle filter backwash
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3
Data: Q.9
0.01 -
0.1
0.0
9.1
0.0
50.9
0.0
0.0
12.5
12.5
12.5
25.0
12.5
8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
14.3
0.0
7
0.1 -
1.0
0.0
73.3
49.9
65.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
40.0
0.0
50.0
10.0
10
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.1
0.0
0.0
22.2
0.0
9
1.0-
10.0
0.0
29.9
29.9
33.0
3.2
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
33.3
33.3
12
20.4
8.4
0.0
8.4
3.2
3.6
21.4
7.1
0.0
17.9
7.1
28
10.0-
100.0
31.2
68.8
68.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
100.0
3
39.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
40.0
0.0
20.0
0.0
5
Over
100 All Sizes
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.4
33.4
23.2
38.5
0.5
0.0
2.8
25.0
5.6
33.3
25.0
36
1.6
0.5
0.0
0.5
0.2
3.8
13.5
9.6
0.0
17.3
3.8
52
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization presented by
Table 23 and Table 24.
92
-------
Table 39
Percentage of Water Treatment Plants Allowed to Discharge to
Surface Water, Septic Systems, or Sanitary Sewers that Use that Option
By Water Source and Treatment Scheme
Water Source and Treatment Scheme
Ground Water Plants
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other chemical addition
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
1
101 -
500
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
501 -
3,300
0.7
0.0
0.0
3.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
ซ
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3,301 -
10,000
1.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.7
0.3
0.0
5.0
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
10,001 -
50,000
1.0
0.0
0.3
4.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
2.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.2
0.0
0.0
9.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
0.7
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
27.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
0.9
0.0
0.2
11.0
1.0
0.3
0.7
3.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.6
0.0
0.4
3.0
0.5
0.0
0.1
8
Over
500,000
0.0
0.0
0.0
49.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
ซ
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
0.7
0.0
0.1
64.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
28.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
0.8
0.1
0.0
39.0
0.8
0.0
0.1
7.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
0.8
0.0
0.2
4.0
0.9
0.0
0.0
11
(Continued)
93
-------
Table 39 (Cont.)
Percentage of Water Treatment Plants Allowed to Discharge to
Surface Water, Septic Systems, or Sanitary Sewers that Use that Option
By Water Source and Treatment Scheme
Water Source and Treatment Scheme
Surface Water Plants
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other chemical addition
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
6.0
*
*
*
*
0.8
0.0
0.0
5.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
*
*
*
*
501 -
3,300
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.2
4.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
10.0
1.0
0.0
0.7
3.0
*
*
*
*
3,301 -
10,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.3
4.0
0.9
0.1
0.0
7.0
0.8
0.0
0.1
20.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
10,001 -
50,000
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
1.0
0.1
0.2
25.0
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.2
5.0
0.9
0.0
0.3
19.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.5
0.0
0.5
2.0
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.3
4.0
0.8
0.0
0.3
9.0
1.0
0.0
0.2
35.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
Over
500,000
*
*
*
*
0.7
0.0
0.3
3.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.7
0.0
0.2
31.0
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
1.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.6
0.0
0.1
7.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.2
21.0
0.9
0.1
0.0
30.0
0.8
0.0
0.1
145.0
1.0
0.0
0.4
7.0
(Continued)
94
-------
Table 39 (Cont.)
Percentage of Water Treatment Plants Allowed to Discharge to
Surface Water, Septic Systems, or Sanitary Sewers that Use that Option
By Water Source and Treatment Scheme
Water Source and Treatment Scheme
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
101 -
500
501 -
3,300
3,301 - 10,001 - 50,001 - 100,001-
10,000 50,000 100,000 500,000
Over
500,000 All Sizes
Mixed Plants
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other chemical addition
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.7
0.0
0.3
3.0
1.0
0.0
0.7
3.0
0.7
0.0
0.3
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.9
0.0
0.5
9.0
(Continued)
95
-------
Table 39 (Cont.)
Percentage of Water Treatment Plants Allowed to Discharge to
Surface Water, Septic Systems, or Sanitary Sewers that Use that Option
By Water Source and Treatment Scheme
Water Source and Treatment Scheme
All Plants
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other chemical addition
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
1
Data: Q.9
101 -
500
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
5.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
*
*
*
*
501 -
3,300
0.7
0.0
0.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
7.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.8
0.0
0.1
14.0
1.0
0.0
0.7
3.0
*
*
*
*
3,301 -
10,000
1.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.8
0.2
0.1
9.0
0.9
0.1
0.0
7.0
0.8
0.0
0.2
23.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
*
*
*
*
10,001 -
50,000
1.0
0.0
0.3
4.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
7.0
0.9
0.0
0.0
7.0
1.0
0.0
0.2
28.0
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
0.7
0.0
0.0
4.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.2
0.0
0.0
9.0
0.9
0.0
0.1
8.0
0.9
0.0
0.3
20.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
500,000
0.7
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.7
0.0
0.0
32.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
8.0
0.9
0.0
0.2
15.0
0.8
0.1
0.4
12.0
1.0
0.0
0.2
37.0
0.6
0.0
0.4
3.0
0.5
0.0
0.1
8
Over
500,000 All
0.0
0.0
0.0
49.0
0.7
0.0
0.3
3.0
*
*
*
*
1.0
0.0
0.0
5.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.7
0.0
0.1
33.0
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Sizes
0.7
0.0
0.1
67.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
39.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
9.0
0.8
0.1
0.0
61.0
0.9
0.1
0.1
39.0
0.9
0.0
0.2
160.0
1.0
0.0
0.3
11.0
0.9
0.0
0.0
11
presented by Table 23 and Table 24.
These are the systems with the option to discharge to surface water, septic systems, or sanitary
sewers, and make use of these options.
96
-------
Table 40
Percentage of Water Treatment Plants Allowed to Discharge to
Surface Water, Septic Systems, or Sanitary Sewers that Use that Option
By Water Source, Treatement Scheme, and Plant Average Daily Production
Water Source and Treatment Scheme
Ground Water Plants
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other chemical addition
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
0.01 -
0.1
0.00
0.00
0.00
5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
0.1 -
1.0
0.88
0.00
0.14
24
0.64
0.00
0.00
22
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
0.80
0.20
0.00
7
0.00
0.00
0.00
2
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
0.00
0.00
1.00
1
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
1.0-
10.0
0.66
0.00
0.00
34
1.00
0.00
0.00
6
1.00
0.00
0.00
7
0.97
0.08
0.06
14
1.00
0.05
0.09
5
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
3
0.26
0.00
0.00
6
10.0-
100.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.15
0.00
0.04
12
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
4
ซ
*
*
*
0.43
0.00
0.21
3
Over
100
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
All Sizes
0.73
0.00
0.08
64
0.81
0.00
0.00
28
1.00
0.00
0.00
8
0.80
0.07
0.01
37
0.76
0.04
0.07
7
1.00
0.00
0.00
5
0.81
0.00
0.19
4
0.88
0.00
0.01
11
(Continued)
97
-------
Table 40 (Cont.)
Percentage of Water Treatment Plants Allowed to Discharge to
Surface Water, Septic Systems, or Sanitary Sewers that Use that Option
By Water Source, Treatement Scheme, and Plant Average Daily Production
Water Source and Treatment Scheme
Surface Water Plants
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other chemical addition
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
3.0
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
1.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.01 -
0.1
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.07
5
*
*
*
*
0.91
0.00
0.00
8
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
0.1 -
1.0
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.16
6
0.86
0.14
0.00
7
0.68
0.00
0.05
19
1.00
0.00
0.28
4
*
*
*
*
1.0-
10.0
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
1.00
0.00
0.34
3
0.98
0.00
0.04
14
0.93
0.03
0.19
52
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
10.0-
100.0
ซ
*
*
*
0.59
0.00
0.41
5
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
3
0.89
0.00
0.22
8
0.83
0.00
0.20
57
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Over
100
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.50
0.00
0.17
6
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
1.00
0.00
0.00
3
0.61
0.00
0.13
7
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
1.00
0.00
0.17
20
0.92
0.06
0.04
29
0.84
0.01
0.13
143
1.00
0.00
0.23
6
(Continued)
98
-------
Table 40 (Cont.)
Percentage of Water Treatment Plants Allowed to Discharge to
Surface Water, Septic Systems, or Sanitary Sewers that Use that Option
By Water Source, Treatement Scheme, and Plant Average Daily Production
Water Source and Treatment Scheme
Mixed Plants
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other chemical addition
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0 - 0.01 -
0.01 0.1
ป ป
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
0.1 -
1.0
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.75
0.00
0.25
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0-
10.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
0.94
0.00
0.68
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
10.0-
100.0
ซ
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Over
100 All Sizes
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
2
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
1.00
0.00
0.00
2
0.86
0.00
0.51
9
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
(Continued)
99
-------
Table 40 (Cont.)
Percentage of Water Treatment Plants Allowed to Discharge to
Surface Water, Septic Systems, or Sanitary Sewers that Use that Option
By Water Source, Treatement Scheme, and Plant Average Daily Production
Water Source and Treatment Scheme
All Plants
Treatment Scheme: Disinfection with no additional treatment
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other chemical addition
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Direct filtration
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Membranes
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Treatment Scheme: Other
Direct Discharge to Surface Water
Septic system
Sanitary sewer
Observations
Plant Average Daily Production (MGD)
0-
0.01
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
0
0
3
*
*
*
*
1
0
0
1
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
Data: Q.9
0.01 -
0.1
0.26
0.00
0.00
6
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
1.00
0.00
0.01
10
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
0.91
0.00
0.00
8
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
*
*
*
*
0.1 -
1.0
0.88
0.00
0.14
25
0.81
0.00
0.00
24
1.00
0.00
0.00
1
0.85
0.15
0.04
13
0.75
0.12
0.00
9
0.76
0.00
0.07
24
0.95
0.00
0.31
5
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
1.0-
10.0
0.67
0.00
0.00
35
1.00
0.00
0.00
6
1.00
0.00
0.00
8
0.98
0.05
0.16
17
0.99
0.01
0.06
20
0.94
0.03
0.27
57
1.00
0.00
0.00
4
0.26
0.00
0.00
6
10.0-
100.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
0.67
0.00
0.33
6
*
*
*
*
0.19
0.00
0.04
15
0.89
0.00
0.22
8
0.84
0.00
0.18
62
*
*
*
*
0.43
0.00
0.21
3
Over
100
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
0.50
0.00
0.17
6
*
*
*
*
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
Notes: Treatment schemes listed are based on the categorization presented
All Sizes
0.74
0.00
0.08
67
0.81
0.00
0.02
37
1.00
0.00
0.00
9
0.84
0.06
0.04
58
0.89
0.05
0.04
38
0.86
0.01
0.17
158
0.97
0.00
0.22
10
0.88
0.00
0.01
11
by
Table 23 and Table 24.
These are the systems with the option to discharge to surface water, septic
systems, or sanitary sewers, and make use of these options.
100
-------
Table 41
Raw Water Concentration of Various Contaminants in Very Large Ground Water and Surface Water Systems
(Concentration in Parts per Billion)
Contaminant
All Plants
1,1-Dichloroethane
1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1 ,4 Dioxane
Alachlor ESA
Alachlor OA
Chlorodibro mo methane
Chloroform
Cryptosporidium
DCPAdiacid
Dichlorobromo methane
MTBE
Metalaxyl
Methylene Chloride
Metolachlor
Metolachlor ESA
Metolachlor OA
Perchlorate
THM's
Trichloroethylene
VOC's
Vinyl Chloride
% Not
Reporting/
Testing
98.2
98.2
59.0
89.7
98.2
98.2
98.2
98.2
65.1
98.2
66.1
93.0
98.2
96.4
75.0
76.2
2.4
98.2
98.2
98.2
98.2
Data:Q.10
Notes: The data presented in this table were
% Reporting
No Detect
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Mean
Median
Concentration Concentration
0.066
0.066
0.956
0.937
1.850
2.923
59.030
0.000
18.205
16.051
2.098
0.810
0.066
0.290
2.558
1.918
1.217
78.009
0.066
0.379
0.0659
requested only of systems serving
0.066
0.066
0.900
0.280
1.850
2.923
59.030
0.000
13.950
16.051
1.050
0.845
0.066
0.290
1.550
1.080
0.880
78.009
0.066
0.379
0.066
90th Percentile
Concentration Observations
0.066
0.066
1.300
4.190
1.850
2.923
59.030
0.000
43.400
16.051
5.200
1.310
0.066
0.340
6.010
5.140
2.430
78.009
0.066
0.379
0.066
populations of more than 500,000.
1
1
25
6
1
1
1
1
22
1
20
4
1
2
16
15
80
1
1
1
1
These
Systems
Reporting
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
systems were asked to provide data on their unregulated contaminants. This is a listing of the most prevalent responses.
Unweighted data. Data are for contaminant test points reported by systems in the survey. The percent not reporting or
testing includes all test points for systems reporting at least one raw water contaminant. The percent reporting no detect
only includes points where the contaminant is tested. Mean, median, and 90th percentile are for test points with positive
concentrations. The number of observations and systems reporting are for those with no detect or positive concentrations.
101
-------
Table 42
Finished Water Concentration of Various Contaminants in Very Large Ground Water and Surface Water Systems
By Water Source
(Concentration in Parts per Billion, Unless Otherwise Noted)
Water Source and Contaminant
All Plants
1 ,1-Dichloroethane
1 ,2,3-Trichloropropane
1 ,2-Dichloroethylene
1 ,4 Dioxane
Acetaminophen
Alachlor ESA
Alachlor OA
Aluminum
Bicarbonate
Boron
Bromide
Bromo benzene
Bromochloroacetic acid
Bromodichloromethane
Bromoform
Caffeine
Calcium
Carbon Dioxide
Chloral Hydrate
Chlorate
Chloride
Chlorodibromo methane
Chloroform
Chromium
Cobalt
DCPAacid metabolites
DCPA diacid
Dibromoacetic acid
Dibromochloromethane
Dichloroacetic acid
Dichlorobromo methane
Foaming Agents
Ibuprofen
Iodide
Iron
Lithium
MTBE
Magnesium
Manganese
Metalaxyl
Methylene Chloride
% Not
Reporting/
Testing
99.2
99.2
99.2
81.1
99.2
95.3
99.2
85.0
99.2
86.6
95.3
99.2
97.6
88.2
94.5
99.2
77.2
98.4
99.2
97.6
80.3
97.6
87.4
96.1
99.2
99.2
83.6
97.6
91.3
96.1
99.2
98.4
99.2
99.2
88.2
99.2
84.6
76.4
99.2
96.9
99.2
% Reporting
No Detect
100.0
0.0
100.0
32.0
0.0
83.3
100.0
52.6
0.0
23.5
66.7
100.0
0.0
6.7
28.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
6.3
20.0
100.0
0.0
81.8
0.0
27.3
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
80.0
0.0
65.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
Mean
Concentration
ซ
400.000
*
0.953
0.018
0.350
ซ
52.346
1 63000.000
135.385
59.500
*
13.000
8.492
3.332
0.017
40055.172
58500.000
2.100
42.500
64227.199
2.240
23.479
2.880
*
9.500
5.625
1.900
6.409
37.360
1.364
*
0.002
5.900
70522.336
2.700
1.200
11272.333
0.003
*
*
Median
Concentration
ซ
400.000
*
0.800
0.018
0.350
ซ
65.000
163000.000
140.000
59.500
*
13.000
4.450
2.600
0.017
30000.000
58500.000
2.100
42.500
49990.000
1.800
10.000
1.570
*
9.500
5.000
1.900
6.400
50.000
1.364
*
0.002
5.900
539.000
2.700
0.500
9950.000
0.003
*
*
90th Percentile
Concentration
ซ
400.000
*
1.400
0.018
0.350
ซ
79.000
1 63000.000
200.000
110.000
*
13.000
21.000
6.850
0.017
95000.000
112000.000
2.100
51.000
140000.000
4.400
89.000
8.260
*
9.500
10.700
1.900
14.000
50.000
1.364
*
0.002
5.900
211000.000
2.700
5.000
24000.000
0.003
*
*
Observations
1
1
1
25
1
6
1
19
1
17
6
1
3
15
7
1
29
2
1
3
25
3
16
5
1
1
22
3
11
5
1
2
1
1
15
1
20
30
1
4
1
Systems
Reporting
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
1
5
3
1
1
9
4
1
11
2
1
2
10
3
10
3
1
1
1
1
6
3
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
12
1
1
1
(Continued)
102
-------
Table 42 (Cont.)
(Table 28 in the 2000 Report, Table 33 from draft 1)
Finished Water Concentration of Various Contaminants in Very Large Ground Water and Surface Water Systems
By Water Source
(Concentration in Parts per Billion, Unless Otherwise Noted)
Water Source and Contaminant
Metolachlor
Metolachlor ESA
Metolachlor OA
Molybdenum
Monobromoacetic acid
Monochloroacetic acid
NDMA
Nickel
Orthophosphates
Perchlorate
Phosphates
Phosphorus
Potassium
Radon (pCi/L)
Silica
Silicon
Silver
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfate
Surfactants
THM's
Total Dissolved Solids
Total Organic Carbon
Trichloroacetic acid
Trichloroethylene
VOC's
Vanadium
Vinyl Chloride
Zinc
p-lsopropyltoluene
pH (pH)
% Reporting % Reporting
N/A
94.5
88.1
88.8
98.4
97.6
97.6
93.7
95.3
99.2
39.9
99.2
99.2
78.7
97.6
92.1
99.2
96.1
62.2
99.2
99.2
88.2
99.2
99.2
78.0
83.5
96.1
99.2
99.2
96.1
99.2
99.2
99.2
78.7
Data: QIOandCCR
Notes: The data presented in this table were requestec
No Detect
71.4
93.8
93.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
75.0
0.0
0.0
35.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
19.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
20.0
100.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
Mean
Concentration
1.400
2.350
1.770
16.000
2.400
4.300
0.001
668.833
3.000
1.382
700.000
380.000
2505.185
350.335
9560.000
5280.000
*
36281 .043
330.000
0.002
105820.000
100.000
7.668
378829.281
2091 .765
13.800
*
*
2.363
*
254.000
*
8.187
Median
Concentration
1.400
2.350
1.770
16.000
2.400
4.300
0.001
3.450
3.000
0.880
700.000
380.000
2510.000
350.335
11150.000
5280.000
*
19500.000
330.000
0.002
50000.000
100.000
7.668
288000.000
2200.000
16.000
*
*
2.225
*
254.000
*
8.200
90th Percentile
Concentration Observations
1.400
2.350
1.770
31.000
2.400
4.300
0.001
4000.000
3.000
3.000
700.000
380.000
4100.000
407.670
12400.000
5280.000
*
83000.000
330.000
0.002
255000.000
100.000
7.668
770000.000
3330.000
16.000
*
*
4.100
*
254.000
*
9.100
7
16
15
2
3
3
8
6
1
92
1
1
27
3
10
1
5
48
1
1
15
1
1
28
21
5
1
1
5
1
1
1
27
Systems
Reporting
3
1
1
2
1
1
6
4
1
5
1
1
10
2
5
1
2
27
1
1
10
1
1
13
9
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
9
only of systems serving populations of more than 500,000. These systems
were asked to provide data on their unregulated contaminants. The data received by the CWS survey are supplemented with
data from Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR) issued by the systems.
Unweighted data. Data are for contaminant test points reported by systems in the survey. The percent not reporting or
testing includes all test points for systems reporting at least one finished water contaminant. The percent reporting no detect
only includes points where the contaminant is tested. Mean, median, and 90th percentile are for test points with positive
103
-------
Please note that the unit of analysis changes for the following tables.
The remaining tables report data for water systems except where noted.
104
-------
Table 43
Treatment Schemes
Percentage of Systems Using Each Treatment Scheme
By Water Source
Water Source
100% Ground Water System
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Other chemical addition
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Other chemical addition
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
100% Surface Water System
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Ion exchange, Activated Alumina, Aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
Primarily Surface Water System
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Ion exchange, Activated Alumina, Aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
52.2
12.0
17.9
17.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.1
87
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
15.4
0.0
0.0
62.0
8.0
10.9
3.6
0.0
44
100.0
0.0
0.0
36.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5
101 -
500
52.9
12.9
9.9
16.9
0.0
1.4
1.4
5.9
103
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
27.9
1.4
0.0
27.8
13.7
24.2
5.6
0.0
62
54.3
0.0
0.0
31.4
0.0
22.9
0.0
22.9
5
501 -
3,300
47.8
27.6
10.6
15.3
1.1
2.1
1.1
1.1
107
25.0
50.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4
4.9
6.6
0.0
27.9
15.3
39.9
7.1
0.0
61
60.9
9.4
0.0
30.7
12.1
35.6
16.2
0.0
17
3,301 -
10,000
49.2
28.1
10.0
20.9
0.0
5.5
0.0
0.0
45
32.1
16.7
0.0
40.3
13.8
24.8
0.0
0.0
17
0.0
9.8
2.0
12.0
22.0
52.1
6.0
0.0
50
6.3
0.0
24.5
6.3
6.3
62.8
0.0
0.0
15
10,001 -
50,000
36.7
29.9
32.4
28.2
8.1
0.4
0.4
3.1
50
25.4
55.0
10.0
20.0
7.5
15.0
0.0
5.4
16
0.0
2.0
2.0
6.0
15.4
76.5
0.0
0.0
57
11.3
15.3
3.8
19.0
22.8
65.7
3.8
0.0
28
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
6.9
53.9
20.8
41.0
6.9
6.9
3.5
0.0
28
32.6
57.1
11.7
23.4
16.1
20.6
0.0
11.7
12
9.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
12.4
84.1
3.1
0.0
35
5.4
16.2
0.0
5.4
29.2
65.4
2.3
0.0
19
33.4
29.8
20.1
43.2
3.3
10.0
0.0
10.0
33
32.4
27.3
22.1
44.7
9.1
35.2
4.4
22.5
23
0.0
2.3
0.0
3.5
17.6
85.9
1.2
0.0
77
19.3
18.2
7.7
12.5
10.2
85.4
2.1
2.1
47
Over
500,000
31.5
0.0
0.0
15.7
0.0
68.5
0.0
0.0
4
0.0
50.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
0.0
2
0.0
15.8
0.0
0.0
15.8
84.2
10.5
0.0
20
15.8
36.8
0.0
15.8
21.1
78.9
0.0
5.3
19
All Sizes
49.9
19.1
13.2
17.7
0.7
1.6
0.8
3.0
457
32.6
35.6
4.0
35.0
7.7
14.5
0.3
2.6
77
7.6
4.5
0.8
19.5
16.0
50.2
4.5
0.0
406
27.4
11.1
6.3
18.9
15.1
56.5
6.0
1.0
155
(Continued)
105
-------
Table 43 (Cont.)
Treatment Schemes
Percentage of Systems Using Each Treatment Scheme
By Water Source
Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water System
Disinfection with no additional treatment
Other chemical addition
Ion exchange, activated alumina, aeration
Other filtration (not direct or conventional)
Direct filtration
Conventional filtration (with and without softening)
Membranes
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
1
Data: Q.8A
101 -
500
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
501 -
3,300
66.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.6
4
3,301 -
10,000
21.7
56.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
21.9
0.0
0.0
4
10,001 -
50,000
32.0
32.0
0.0
0.0
24.0
12.0
0.0
0.0
9
50,001 -
100,000
33.0
31.1
16.5
35.9
0.0
31.1
0.0
16.5
10
100,001-
500,000
31.2
27.7
18.6
18.6
13.4
26.1
9.1
4.4
24
Over
500,000
38.8
19.4
19.4
19.4
20.4
40.8
19.4
19.4
5
All Sizes
58.5
14.5
2.5
3.5
5.2
8.7
0.9
14.4
58
Notes: Excludes plants that only treat purchased water.
See treatment scheme description in Volume I.
106
-------
Table 44
Treated-Water Storage Information
Percentage of Systems That Have Each Type of Treated-Water Storage
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Fully or partially buried
Confidence Interval
Ground level
Confidence Interval
Elevated
Confidence Interval
Hydropneumatic
Confidence Interval
Standpipes
Confidence Interval
Standpipes operated as surge tanks
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Fully or partially buried
Confidence Interval
Ground level
Confidence Interval
Elevated
Confidence Interval
Hydropneumatic
Confidence Interval
Standpipes
Confidence Interval
Standpipes operated as surge tanks
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
System Service
100
or Less
24.7
+|- 29.4
40.1
+\-31.1
32.1
+|- 27.9
26.9
+|- 27.3
25.6
+|- 26.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
19.3
+|- 17.9
80.7
+|- 17.9
7.0
+|- 13.9
35.2
+|- 32.2
7.0
+|- 13.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
101 -
500
22.7
+|- 19.8
26.4
+|- 19.3
25.3
+|- 16.6
13.2
+|- 13.6
12.4
+|- 13. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
12.7
+|- 12.6
81.2
+|- 14.4
7.7
+\- 9.2
18.8
+|- 16.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
501 -
3,300
7.1
+I-5.8
30.2
+|- 12.4
58.4
+|- 13.2
7.1
+|- 6.3
15.1
+|- 8. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
11.0
+|- 7.4
70.7
+\- 13.3
21.9
+|- 9.4
8.6
+|- 8.9
23.0
+|- 13.9
1.6
+|- 3. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
3,301 -
10,000
24.8
+|- 12.0
30.0
+|- 12.6
64.8
+|- 13.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
22.4
+|- 11.5
4.1
+|- 5.6
0.0
+|- 0.0
17.6
+|- 12.0
34.0
+|- 11. 8
70.6
+|- 11.2
4.4
+|- 4.8
29.3
+|- 12.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
14.7
+|- 10.4
36.6
+|- 13.5
76.2
+|- 12.0
5.8
+|- 6.0
32.1
+|- 13. 1
2.1
+|- 4. 1
2.1
+|- 4. 1
25.9
+|- 9.4
46.1
+|- 10.7
58.6
+|- 10.6
2.6
+|- 3.5
24.8
+|- 9.2
2.7
+|- 3.5
2.6
+|- 3.5
50,001 -
100,000
26.7
+|- 15. 0
54.8
+|- 22.0
68.9
+|- 16.4
16.7
+|- 12. 1
7.5
+I-7.7
2.8
+|- 5.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
28.9
+|- 11.5
54.2
+|- 12.6
78.8
+|- 70.2
6.5
+|- 6.3
40.0
+|- 72.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
100,001-
500,000
30.1
+|- 9.5
73.8
+|- 9.3
45.8
+|- 70.5
13.1
+I-7.7
10.7
+|- 6.4
2.0
+I-2.7
2.2
+|- 3. 7
37.7
+|- 8.9
66.0
+|- 70.2
71.5
+|- 6. 7
7.2
+|- 3.3
26.2
+|- 6.4
3.2
+|- 2.2
1.6
+|- 7.6
Over
500,000
18.7
+I-27.7
81.3
+I-27.7
100.0
+|- 0.0
18.7
+I-27.7
100.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
61.1
+|- 70.0
86.1
+I-7.7
66.7
+|- 9.6
19.4
+I-8.7
36.1
+I-9.8
5.6
+I-4.7
0.0
+|- 0.0
All Sizes
16.3
+|- 6.2
31.7
+|- 7.8
52.0
+|- 7.8
9.2
+|- 4.5
18.6
+|- 5.9
1.0
+|- 7.0
0.2
+|- 0.4
20.9
+|- 4.5
54.9
+|- 5. 7
50.5
+|- 5.2
7.3
+|- 3. 7
24.5
+|- 5.3
1.4
+|- 7.2
0.8
+|- 0.9
(Continued)
107
-------
Table 44 (Cont.)
Treated-Water Storage Information
Percentage of Systems That Have Each Type of Treated-Water Storage
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Fully or partially buried
Confidence Interval
Ground level
Confidence Interval
Elevated
Confidence Interval
Hydropneumatic
Confidence Interval
Standpipes
Confidence Interval
Standpipes operated as surge tanks
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
All Systems
Fully or partially buried
Confidence Interval
Ground level
Confidence Interval
Elevated
Confidence Interval
Hydropneumatic
Confidence Interval
Standpipes
Confidence Interval
Standpipes operated as surge tanks
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
+|- 0.0
51.4
+|- 68.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
48.6
+|- 68.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
20.9
+|- 24.5
43.7
+|- 26.9
26.3
+|- 23. 1
23.5
+|- 22.6
28.0
+|- 23.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
Data: Q.11B
101 -
500
39.0
+|- 42.6
59.8
+|- 42.6
19.8
+I-33.8
40.6
+|- 42.6
18.6
+I-33.7
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
24.8
+|- 16.9
35.6
+|- 17.5
23.2
+|- 14.0
18.2
+|- 13.5
12.7
+|- 11.6
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
501 -
3,300
3.9
+I-7.7
43.0
+|- 24.2
51.6
+|- 210
3.9
+I-7.7
16.5
+|- 15.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
6.7
+|- 4.4
37.1
+|- 10.4
53.3
+|- 10.2
6.5
+I-4.7
16.2
+|- 6.9
0.1
+|- 0.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
3,301 -
10,000
10.5
+|- 12.4
28.3
+|- 19.3
70.3
+|- 19.8
1.2
+|- 2.3
26.3
+|- 18.4
4.7
+|- 8.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
19.9
+|- 7.8
30.4
+|- 8.7
67.3
+|- 9. 1
1.2
+I-7.7
24.7
+|- 8.2
3.4
+|- 3.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
12.4
+|- 15.9
27.9
+I-22.7
28.1
+\-21.1
0.0
+|- 0.0
31.7
+|- 215
2.3
+|- 4.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
17.8
+I-6.7
38.0
+|- 8.6
62.2
+|- 8. 7
3.8
+|- 3.3
29.7
+|- 8.2
2.3
+|- 2.5
1.9
+|- 2.4
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
53.1
+|- 19.9
59.0
+|- 19.7
43.2
+|- 19.7
14.6
+|- 13.6
17.4
+|- 14.6
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
32.9
+|- 8.9
55.4
+|- 70.7
68.0
+|- 8.8
11.9
+I-5.8
23.4
+|- 7.3
1.0
+|- 1.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
60.3
+|- 72.5
71.8
+|- 70.5
61.8
+|- 77.6
25.2
+|- 70.0
15.4
+|- 8.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
2.4
+|- 3.2
40.3
+|- 6. 7
68.9
+I-6.8
63.7
+|- 5.4
12.0
+|- 3.3
20.6
+|- 4. 7
2.3
+|- 7.4
1.9
+|- 7.3
Over
500,000
32.7
+I-27.7
75.8
+|- 78.0
51.2
+|- 27.4
16.1
+|- 74.4
16.1
+|- 74.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
50.7
+|- 70.7
83.4
+|- 6.4
66.4
+|- 9. 7
18.6
+|- 6.9
37.8
+|- 70.9
3.8
+|- 3.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
All Sizes
13.1
+|- 8. 7
41.8
+|- 73.2
46.0
+|- 72.7
8.4
+|- 7.5
22.4
+|- 70.0
1.3
+|- 2. 7
0.0
+|- 0. 7
16.4
+|- 4.3
37.4
+|- 5.9
50.5
+|- 5.5
8.8
+|- 3.4
20.3
+|- 4.4
1.1
+I-0.8
0.3
+|- 0.3
Notes: Column totals do not equal 100.
Systems that use any surface water includes systems that use ground water under the direct
influence of surface water and systems that purchase surface water.
100% ground water systems includes systems that purchase ground water.
108
-------
Table 45
Storage Capacity past the First Residential Customer by Type of Vessel
By Primary Water Source
(In Millions of Gallons)
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Average storage capacity
Confidence Interval
Average Number of Vessels
Fully or partially buried
Ground level
Elevated
Hydropneumatic
Standpipes
Standpipes operated as surge tanks
Other
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Average storage capacity
Confidence Interval
Average Number of Vessels
Fully or partially buried
Ground level
Elevated
Hydropneumatic
Standpipes
Standpipes operated as surge tanks
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
0.2
+|- 0.2
1.0
0.8
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.0
0.0
76
0.1
+I-0.7
0.2
1.1
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.0
47
101 -
500
0.2
+|- 0.3
0.3
0.6
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
94
0.4
+|- 0.5
0.1
1.9
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
62
501 -
3,300
0.6
+|- 0.6
0.2
0.6
0.7
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
107
0.6
+I-0.7
0.1
1.1
0.4
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
75
3,301 -
10,000
1.2
+|- 0.3
1.0
0.7
1.1
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
56
1.5
+|- 0.3
0.2
0.9
1.4
0.1
0.6
0.0
0.0
64
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
4.4
+|- 1.6
0.3
1.3
2.0
0.1
0.8
0.0
0.1
62
3.9
+I-0.7
0.6
2.2
1.7
0.1
0.8
0.0
0.1
84
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
9.2
+|- 2.9
1.0
3.0
3.5
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.0
36
10.8
+|- 2.6
0.6
3.1
3.0
0.1
1.1
0.0
0.0
49
24.1
+|- 5.8
1.9
4.2
2.1
1.5
0.6
0.0
0.0
49
26.5
+|- 5.4
1.5
4.1
3.3
0.8
2.1
0.1
0.0
114
Over
500,000
22.3
+|- 14.2
0.4
4.2
11.1
7.5
5.8
0.0
0.0
4
179.0
+|- 43.6
3.7
19.0
5.5
1.6
3.3
0.2
0.0
38
All Sizes
1.3
+|- 0.3
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
484
7.4
+|- 1.0
0.5
2.1
1.4
0.2
0.7
0.0
0.0
533
(Continued)
109
-------
Table 45 (Cont.)
Storage Capacity past the First Residential Customer by Type of Vessel
By Primary Water Source
(In Millions of Gallons)
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Average storage capacity
Confidence Interval
Average Number of Vessels
Fully or partially buried
Ground level
Elevated
Hydropneumatic
Standpipes
Standpipes operated as surge tanks
Other
Observations
All Systems
Average storage capacity
Confidence Interval
Average Number of Vessels
Fully or partially buried
Ground level
Elevated
Hydropneumatic
Standpipes
Standpipes operated as surge tanks
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
1.4
+|- 1.9
0.0
2.6
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
7
0.4
+|- 0.4
0.8
1.1
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.0
0.0
130
Data: Q.11 A and B.
101 -
500
0.8
+|- 1.2
0.3
0.8
0.0
0.8
0.2
0.0
0.0
22
0.3
+|- 0.3
0.3
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
178
501 -
3,300
1.2
+|- 1.5
0.3
1.1
0.6
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
44
0.8
+|- 0.5
0.2
0.7
0.6
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
226
3,301 -
10,000
0.8
+|- 0.2
0.1
0.6
1.1
0.0
0.9
0.1
0.0
27
1.2
+|- 0.2
0.6
0.7
1.1
0.0
0.5
0.1
0.0
147
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
3.7
+|- 2.0
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.0
0.9
0.0
0.0
23
4.2
+|- 0.9
0.5
1.5
1.7
0.1
0.8
0.0
0.0
169
Notes: Average number of vessels is the average for systems tha
50,001 -
100,000
19.3
+|- 9.2
1.8
3.7
2.0
0.2
1.1
0.0
0.0
25
11.9
+|- 2.6
1.0
3.2
3.0
0.2
0.8
0.0
0.0
110
t report a
100,001-
500,000
40.7
+|- 9.9
3.3
8.4
3.5
0.7
0.5
0.0
0.0
41
28.7
+|- 4.0
1.9
5.0
3.0
0.9
1.4
0.1
0.0
204
count for that
Over
500,000
111.4
+|- 90.4
3.7
8.2
1.9
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
10
148.8
+\-40.1
3.4
15.2
5.3
1.9
2.9
0.1
0.0
52
All Sizes
3.0
+|- 1.0
0.4
1.2
0.7
0.1
0.6
0.0
0.0
199
2.6
+|- 0.3
0.4
1.1
0.9
0.1
0.4
0.0
0.0
1,216
storage unit.
The calculation includes zeros reported in the denominator, i.e., if a system reported a storage
capacity, every record was used for the average number of vessels calculation, including zeros.
110
-------
Table 46
Practices to Maintain Water Quality in Storage Vessels
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Percentage of systems that:
Modeling or other detention time evaluations
Confidence Interval
Longer fill/draw cycles to increase mixing
Confidence Interval
Inlet/outlet modifications
Confidence Interval
Mechanical mixing
Confidence Interval
Increase or switch disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Operational modifications to maintain
disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
Average number of years between cleaning
Confidence Interval
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
+|- 0.0
17.2
+|- 22.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
17.4
+|- 22.9
0.2
+|- 0.2
9.0
+|- 16.2
9.5
+|- 4.4
101 -
500
0.0
+|- 0.0
21.1
+|- 16.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
4.1
+|- 8.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
8.3
+|- 11.4
22.4
+|- 18.3
5.9
+|- 2.4
501 -
3,300
2.3
+|- 3.3
29.3
+|- 12.8
10.2
+|- 8.0
2.8
+|- 4.0
2.3
+|- 3.2
8.6
+|- 6.3
3.7
+|- 4.3
6.5
+|- 1.2
3,301 -
10,000
12.7
+|- 8.9
48.5
+|- 13.8
14.4
+|- 9.8
6.2
+I-6.7
22.9
+|- 11.5
37.8
+|- 13.3
5.5
+I-6.7
5.8
+I-7.7
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
29.6
+|- 72.9
53.5
+|- 14.2
11.3
+|- 8.2
3.4
+|- 4.4
20.3
+|- 11.3
48.4
+|- 14.2
8.9
+|- 8.0
7.4
+|- 1.5
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
23.1
+|- 14.1
36.8
+|- 17.9
13.6
+|- 10.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
22.3
+|- 14.0
26.3
+|- 15.0
2.8
+|- 5.0
5.6
+I-7.7
45.6
+|- 10.5
56.3
+|- 10.4
29.9
+|- 9.4
12.6
+|- 6.6
36.7
+|- 10.1
60.5
+|- 10.3
6.6
+|- 5.3
5.2
+|- 0.6
Over
500,000
62.7
+|- 45.0
62.7
+|- 45.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
62.7
+|- 45.0
37.3
+|- 45.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
6.5
+I-4.7
All Sizes
6.9
+|- 2.6
32.5
+|- 7.3
8.1
+I-3.7
3.5
+|- 2.6
9.3
+|- 3.6
17.5
+I-4.7
9.0
+I-4.7
6.5
+|- 0.8
(Continued)
111
-------
Table 46 (Cont.)
Practices to Maintain Water Quality in Storage Vessels
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Percentage of systems that:
Modeling or other detention time evaluations
Confidence Interval
Longer fill/draw cycles to increase mixing
Confidence Interval
Inlet/outlet modifications
Confidence Interval
Mechanical mixing
Confidence Interval
Increase or switch disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Operational modifications to maintain
disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
Average number of years between cleaning
Confidence Interval
System Service
100
or Less
4.2
+|- 8.5
7.0
+|- 13.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
7.0
+|- 13.9
21.1
+I-27.7
40.2
+|- 32.6
5.9
+|- 4.0
101 -
500
7.7
+|- 10.6
20.5
+|- 15.8
1.4
+I-2.7
1.5
+|- 2.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
17.3
+|- 77.7
13.9
+|- 16.9
8.1
+|- 2.4
501 -
3,300
9.4
+|- 7.7
24.6
+|- 11.8
9.9
+|- 8.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
2.2
+|- 3.3
14.1
+|- 8.8
8.6
+|- 8.8
5.9
+|- 1.6
3,301 -
10,000
35.4
+|- 12.0
47.2
+|- 13.1
20.7
+I-9.7
5.9
+|- 5.4
39.7
+|- -73.3
38.3
+|- -72.3
3.0
+|- 3.9
7.1
+|- 1.5
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
41.2
+|- -70.5
56.9
+|- -70.6
24.8
+|- 9.2
8.1
+|- 5.9
38.5
+|- -70.4
53.4
+|- -70.7
5.3
+|- 4.9
6.5
+I-7.7
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
48.6
+|- -72.6
71.1
+|- -715
25.8
+|- -710
4.6
+|- 5.6
26.8
+|- -712
55.7
+|- -72.6
8.6
+|- 7.2
6.6
+|- 16
54.6
+|- 9.4
62.8
+|- 9.0
28.7
+I-6.7
10.5
+I-8.7
32.3
+|- 7.3
53.7
+|- 9.0
8.1
+I-8.7
6.4
+|- 0.8
Over
500,000
83.3
+|- 7.6
72.2
+|- 9.2
63.9
+|- 9.8
22.2
+|- 8.5
47.2
+|- -70.2
72.2
+|- 9.2
22.2
+|- 8.5
7.3
+|- 13
All Sizes
31.2
+|- 4.6
44.7
+|- 5.5
19.0
+|- 4.2
5.2
+|- 2.2
25.8
+I-4.7
37.6
+I-5.-7
7.7
+|- 3.3
6.7
+|- 0.6
(Continued)
112
-------
Table 46 (Cont.)
Practices to Maintain Water Quality in Storage Vessels
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Percentage of systems that:
Modeling or other detention time evaluations
Confidence Interval
Longer fill/draw cycles to increase mixing
Confidence Interval
Inlet/outlet modifications
Confidence Interval
Mechanical mixing
Confidence Interval
Increase or switch disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Operational modifications to maintain
disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
Average number of years between cleaning
Confidence Interval
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
+|- 0.0
51.4
+|- 68.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
51.4
+|- 68.4
1.3
+|- 3.2
3.6
+I-2.-7
101 -
500
0.0
+|- 0.0
38.4
+|- 419
1.2
+|- 2.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
18.6
+I-33.7
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
8.1
+|- 2.0
501 -
3,300
0.0
+|- 0.0
35.3
+|- 216
13.8
+|- 17.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
2.4
+I-4.7
6.3
+|- 9.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
7.3
+|- 3.4
3,301 -
10,000
1.2
+|- 2.3
78.8
+|- -76.7
22.7
+|- 18.8
4.7
+|- 8.9
14.8
+|- -73.7
37.3
+I-20.-7
7.7
+|- 10.5
5.6
+|- 15
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
34.1
+|- 23.6
63.4
+|- 22.6
21.9
+|- 79.2
2.3
+|- 4.4
17.0
+|- -76.8
73.6
+|- 216
6.2
+|- -716
6.8
+|- 2.0
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
64.9
+|- -78.9
64.9
+|- -78.9
43.2
+|- -79.7
4.7
+|- 7.9
32.0
+|- -78.0
77.3
+|- -76.4
10.6
+|- -72.5
4.2
+|- 0.8
48.1
+|- -72.2
74.2
+|- -70.2
51.9
+|- -72.2
20.6
+|- 9.4
42.5
+|- -718
74.4
+|- -70.2
2.4
+|- 3.2
4.5
+I-0.7
Over
500,000
56.8
+1-30. 1
67.8
+I-21-7
67.8
+I-21-7
8.1
+|- -70.0
32.7
+I-217
40.7
+I-24.7
8.1
+|- -70.0
3.6
+|- 0.9
All Sizes
6.5
+|- 3.6
50.9
+|- -73.0
15.7
+|- 9.5
1.8
+I-2.-7
10.4
+|- 6.6
25.1
+|- 9.5
2.8
+|- 2.8
6.5
+|- 13
(Continued)
113
-------
Table 46 (Cont.)
Practices to Maintain Water Quality in Storage Vessels
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
All Systems
Percentage of systems that:
Modeling or other detention time evaluations
Confidence Interval
Longer fill/draw cycles to increase mixing
Confidence Interval
Inlet/outlet modifications
Confidence Interval
Mechanical mixing
Confidence Interval
Increase or switch disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Operational modifications to maintain
disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
Average number of years between cleaning
Confidence Interval
System Service
100
or Less
0.2
+|- 0.4
21.6
+I-22.7
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
14.4
+|- 18. 7
8.5
+|- 14.6
9.4
+|- 13.3
7.6
+|- 3.6
Data: Q.11D
Notes:
101 -
500
0.5
+I-0.7
24.0
+|- 14.7
0.3
+|- 0.4
3.3
+|- 6.3
3.2
+|- 6.3
7.5
+|- 8.9
18.0
+|- 14.2
6.5
+|- 1.8
501 -
3,300
2.4
+|- 2.3
30.3
+|- 10.3
11.1
+|- 6.9
1.9
+|- 2.6
2.3
+|- 2.4
8.6
+|- 4.8
3.3
+|- 3.0
6.6
+1-1.1
3,301 -
10,000
14.4
+|- 5.5
55.7
+|- 9.6
17.7
+|- 7.5
5.7
+|- 4.5
24.3
+|- 7.8
37.8
+|- 9.2
5.5
+|- 4.3
6.0
+|- 0.8
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
34.0
+|- 8.5
56.3
+|- 9.0
17.4
+|- 6.2
4.7
+|- 3.0
25.4
+|- 7.3
54.4
+|- 9.0
7.3
+|- 4.8
7.0
+|- 0.9
50,001 -
100,000
42.3
+|- 9.8
57.0
+|- 10.7
24.7
+|- 7.9
2.9
+|- 2.9
26.1
+I-8.-7
49.0
+|- 10.3
6.8
+|- 4.5
5.8
+|- 0.8
100,001-
500,000
51.3
+|- 6.2
63.5
+I-6.7
33.4
+|- 5.3
12.9
+|- 5.5
35.3
+|- 5.4
59.3
+|- 6.2
6.6
+|- 5.3
5.7
+|- 0.5
Over
500,000
75.4
+|- 10.5
70.3
+|- 8.4
58.6
+|- 10.8
16.9
+I-6.7
45.5
+|- 10.9
61.8
+|- 11.6
16.9
+I-6.7
6.4
+1-1.1
All Sizes
10.5
+|- 1.9
38.3
+|- 5.5
11.4
+I-3.7
3.4
+|- 1.8
12.1
+|- 2.8
22.2
+|- 3.5
7.5
+I-3.7
6.5
+|- 0.6
114
-------
Table 47
Percentage of Systems that Want Additional Information about Practices to Maintain Water Quality in Storage Vessels
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Modeling or other detention time evaluations
Confidence Interval
Longer fill/draw cycles to increase mixing
Confidence Interval
Inlet/outlet modifications
Confidence Interval
Mechanical mixing
Confidence Interval
Increase or switch disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Operational modifications to maintain disinfectant
residual
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Modeling or other detention time evaluations
Confidence Interval
Longer fill/draw cycles to increase mixing
Confidence Interval
Inlet/outlet modifications
Confidence Interval
Mechanical mixing
Confidence Interval
Increase or switch disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Operational modifications to maintain disinfectant
residual
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
4.2
+|- 8.5
4.2
+|- 8.5
4.2
+|- 8.5
4.2
+|- 8.5
4.2
+|- 8.5
4.2
+|- 8.5
4.2
+|- 8.5
101 -
500
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
9.1
+|- 77.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
15.2
+|- 12.8
15.7
+|- 11.9
19.9
+|- 13.5
9.1
+|- 10.0
9.1
+|- 10.0
16.5
+|- 13.8
6.1
+|- 8.2
501 -
3,300
13.9
+|- 8.0
14.1
+|- 9.2
11.0
+|- 9.0
9.6
+|- 8.6
7.9
+I-6.7
9.6
+|- 8.6
3.4
+|- 4.6
18.3
+|- 70.8
14.6
+|- 9.9
15.1
+|- 70.3
14.6
+|- 70.0
16.7
+|- 70.6
16.7
+|- 70.7
8.4
+|- 8.4
3,301 -
10,000
6.7
+|- 6.8
8.2
+I-7.7
5.5
+I-6.7
3.4
+I-4.7
4.6
+|- 5.6
6.7
+|- 6.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
13.2
+|- 8.0
7.4
+I-6.7
11.8
+|- 7.6
10.3
+I-7.7
11.8
+|- 7.6
8.9
+|- 6.6
0.0
+|- 0.0
10,001 -
50,000
7.1
+|- 7.0
9.7
+I-8.7
10.2
+I-8.7
5.6
+|- 6.0
6.7
+|- 7.0
10.5
+|- 8.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
22.2
+|- 8.9
16.4
+|- 8.0
15.1
+|- 7.7
13.7
+|- 7.4
11.6
+|- 6.8
20.4
+I-8.7
0.0
+|- 0.0
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
22.0
+|- 73.9
10.5
+|- 9.3
12.0
+|- 9.9
13.6
+|- 70.9
5.3
+|- 6.6
16.4
+I-77.9
2.8
+|- 5.0
9.5
+|- 6.8
6.4
+|- 5.8
16.3
+|- 9.4
14.1
+|- 8.8
7.7
+I-6.7
5.5
+I-5.7
2.4
+|- 4.2
6.3
+|- 4.9
6.3
+|- 4.9
8.5
+I-5.7
4.2
+I-4.7
6.3
+|- 4.9
8.5
+I-5.7
2.2
+I-3.7
13.1
+I-5.7
9.7
+|- 3.9
15.5
+|- 5.4
13.1
+I-5.7
4.8
+I-2.7
8.1
+|- 3.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
Over
500,000
18.7
+I-27.7
18.7
+I-27.7
18.7
+I-27.7
18.7
+I-27.7
18.7
+I-27.7
18.7
+I-27.7
0.0
+|- 0.0
19.4
+I-8.7
5.6
+I-4.7
19.4
+I-8.7
19.4
+I-8.7
5.6
+I-4.7
13.9
+I-7.7
2.8
+|- 3.4
All Sizes
7.7
+|- 3.5
8.2
+|- 4.0
8.5
+|- 5.2
5.2
+|- 3.6
4.8
+|- 2.9
6.3
+I-3.7
1.4
+|- 7.8
16.6
+|- 4.2
12.1
+|- 3.6
14.5
+|- 3.9
12.6
+I-3.7
11.6
+I-3.7
14.0
+|- 4.0
2.7
+I-2.7
(Continued)
115
-------
Table 47 (Cont.)
Percentage of Systems that Want Additional Information about Practices to Maintain Water Quality in Storage Vessels
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Modeling or other detention time evaluations
Confidence Interval
Longer fill/draw cycles to increase mixing
Confidence Interval
Inlet/outlet modifications
Confidence Interval
Mechanical mixing
Confidence Interval
Increase or switch disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Operational modifications to maintain disinfectant
residual
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
All Systems
Modeling or other detention time evaluations
Confidence Interval
Longer fill/draw cycles to increase mixing
Confidence Interval
Inlet/outlet modifications
Confidence Interval
Mechanical mixing
Confidence Interval
Increase or switch disinfectant residual
Confidence Interval
Operational modifications to maintain disinfectant
residual
Confidence Interval
Other
Confidence Interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.2
+|- 0.4
0.2
+|- 0.4
0.2
+|- 0.4
0.2
+|- 0.4
0.2
+|- 0.4
0.2
+|- 0.4
0.2
+|- 0.4
Data: Q.11D
Notes:
101 -
500
37.2
+I-418
18.6
+I-33.7
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
7.3
+|- 8.8
4.2
+|- 6.4
8.2
+|- 13.2
0.6
+|- 0.6
0.6
+|- 0.6
1.1
+|- 0.9
0.4
+|- 0.5
501 -
3,300
11.8
+|- 13.2
7.9
+|- 10.8
3.9
+|- 7.7
4.7
+|- 7.9
3.9
+|- 7.7
3.9
+|- 7.7
0.0
+|- 0.0
13.8
+|- 6.6
12.7
+I-7.7
9.7
+|- 6.4
8.9
+|- 6.2
7.8
+|- 5.0
8.9
+|- 6.2
3.0
+|- 3.2
3,301 -
10,000
14.0
+|- 14.6
9.3
+|- 12.3
4.7
+|- 8.9
4.7
+|- 8.9
5.8
+|- 9.2
10.5
+|- 72.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
9.8
+|- 5.5
8.3
+|- 5.4
6.5
+|- 4.3
5.1
+I-3.7
6.4
+|- 4. 1
8.0
+|- 5.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
10,001 -
50,000
18.5
+|- 78.7
18.5
+|- 78.7
12.4
+|- 75.9
2.3
+|- 4.4
8.5
+|- 72.4
14.7
+|- 76.4
6.2
+|- 77.6
13.8
+I-5.7
13.3
+|- 5.9
12.1
+|- 5.6
7.5
+|- 3.9
8.6
+I-4.7
14.3
+|- 5.8
1.1
+I-2.7
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
19.9
+|- 75.7
9.9
+I-77.8
14.6
+|- 73.6
15.2
+|- 74.3
15.2
+|- 74.3
12.1
+|- 72. 7
9.9
+|- 77.8
16.2
+|- 6.6
8.7
+I-4.9
14.3
+|- 6.2
14.2
+|- 6.3
8.3
+I-4.8
10.9
+|- 5.5
4.1
+I-3.5
500,000
10.2
+|- 6.9
7.6
+|- 6.0
10.0
+I-6.7
5.0
+|- 4.9
5.0
+|- 4.9
16.5
+|- 77.6
0.0
+|- 0.0
11.0
+|- 3.4
8.5
+I-2.7
12.9
+|- 3.6
9.5
+|- 3.2
5.2
+I-2.7
9.8
+|- 3.4
0.5
+I-0.7
Over
500,000
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
15.0
+|- 6.3
5.6
+I-3.9
15.0
+|- 6.3
15.0
+|- 6.3
5.6
+I-3.9
11.3
+|- 5.5
1.9
+|- 2.3
All Sizes
16.0
+I-9.7
10.4
+|- 7.6
4.6
+|- 4.3
3.7
+|- 4.0
4.3
+|- 4.2
6.2
+|- 4.9
0.9
+|- 7.4
10.8
+|- 3.2
9.3
+|- 3.2
8.6
+|- 3.5
6.0
+|- 2.5
5.7
+I-2.7
7.5
+|- 2.6
1.5
+|- 7.2
116
-------
Table 48
Distribution System and Transmission Line Summary
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Distribution Mains
Miles of Pipe in Place
Confidence interval
Service Connections per Mile
Confidence interval
Average Pipe Replaced Annually in the Past 5 Years (miles)
Confidence interval
Average New Pipe Installed Annually in the Past 5 Years
(miles)
Confidence interval
Observations
Transmission Lines
Miles of Pipe in Place
Confidence interval
Average Pipe Replaced Annually in the Past 5 Years (miles)
Confidence interval
Average New Pipe Installed Annually in the Past 5 Years
(miles)
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
4
+|-3
31
+\-12
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
27
1
+|-7
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
27
101 -
500
4
+|-7
43
+\-10
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
80
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
81
501 -
3,300
20
+|-8
50
+\-10
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
172
1
+|-7
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
172
3,301 -
10,000
46
+I--73
83
+I-39
1
+|-2
1
+|-7
120
16
+\-14
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
121
10,001 -
50,000
152
+I-42
79
+\-21
1
+|-0
3
+|-2
141
24
+I-77
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
144
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
415
+|- 130
68
+I-22
2
+M
6
+|-2
99
38
+I-20
0
+|-0
1
+M
101
682
+I-65
99
+I-38
2
+|-0
8
+|-7
193
89
+I-22
0
+|-0
1
+|-0
194
Over
500,000
2,778
+|- 522
81
+I--78
7
+|-3
15
+|-6
48
342
+|- 163
0
+|-0
1
+|-0
48
All Sizes
52
+|-8
53
+|-6
0
+|-0
1
+|-0
880
9
+|-3
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
888
(Continued)
117
-------
Table 48 (Cont.)
Distribution System and Transmission Line Summary
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Private Systems
Distribution Mains
Miles of Pipe in Place
Confidence interval
Service Connections per Mile
Confidence interval
Average Pipe Replaced Annually in the Past 5 Years (miles)
Confidence interval
Average New Pipe Installed Annually in the Past 5 Years
(miles)
Confidence interval
Observations
Transmission Lines
Miles of Pipe in Place
Confidence interval
Average Pipe Replaced Annually in the Past 5 Years (miles)
Confidence interval
Average New Pipe Installed Annually in the Past 5 Years
(miles)
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
4
+|-6
263
+|- 347
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
115
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
117
101 -
500
3
+|-2
81
+\-21
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
107
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
109
501 -
3,300
24
+I--72
67
+I-33
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
54
1
+|-0
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
55
3,301 -
10,000
80
+I-39
49
+I-23
1
+|-0
0
+|-0
22
14
+I--73
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
24
10,001 -
50,000
242
+|- 167
80
+I-95
0
+|-0
1
+|-7
19
70
+I-49
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
19
50,001 -
100,000
344
+|- 151
246
+|- 287
1
+1-1
2
+|-7
10
54
+I-74
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
10
100,001-
500,000
701
+|- 397
1,136
+|- 1,441
1
+1-1
10
+|-6
17
94
+I-88
0
+|-0
3
+|-4
17
Over
500,000
1,636
+|- 1,341
447
280
15
+\-15
7
+|-3
5
461
236
0
0
1
1
5
All Sizes
13
+|-4
148
+|- 130
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
349
2
+|-7
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
356
(Continued)
118
-------
Table 48 (Cont.)
Distribution System and Transmission Line Summary
By Ownership
Ownership Type
All Systems
Distribution Mains
Miles of Pipe in Place
Confidence interval
Service Connections per Mile
Confidence interval
Average Pipe Replaced Annually in the Past 5 Years (miles)
Confidence interval
Average New Pipe Installed Annually in the Past 5 Years
(miles)
Confidence interval
Observations
Transmission Lines
Miles of Pipe in Place
Confidence interval
Average Pipe Replaced Annually in the Past 5 Years (miles)
Confidence interval
Average New Pipe Installed Annually in the Past 5 Years
(miles)
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
4
+|-5
229
+|- 296
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
142
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
144
Data: Q.12A
101 -
500
4
+|-7
66
+I--75
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
187
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
190
501 -
3,300
21
+|-7
55
+I--72
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
226
1
+|-0
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
227
3,301 -
10,000
53
+\-14
75
+\-31
1
+1-1
1
+|-7
142
15
+\-11
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
145
10,001 -
50,000
159
+I-42
79
+\-21
1
+|-0
3
+|-2
160
28
+I--76
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
163
50,001 -
100,000
411
+|- 123
78
+I-29
2
+1-1
6
+|-2
109
40
+I--79
0
+|-0
1
+M
111
100,001-
500,000
684
+I-75
231
+|- 245
2
+|-0
8
+|-7
210
89
+I-22
0
+|-0
1
+M
211
Over
500,000
2,643
+|- 518
124
+I-74
8
+|-3
14
+|-5
53
357
+|- 147
0
+|-0
1
+|-0
53
All Sizes
32
+|-4
102
+I-67
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
1,229
6
+|-2
0
+|-0
0
+|-0
1,244
Notes: Includes systems reporting zero miles of pipe.
Service connections include residential customers only.
119
-------
Table 49
Average Size of Distribution Systems
By Diameter of Pipe and Ownership
(Length of Pipe in Miles)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Distribution Mains Less Than 6"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Distribution Mains 6" to 10"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Distribution Mains Greater Than 10" and Less Than 24"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Distribution Mains Greater Than 24"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Observations
Private Systems
Distribution Mains Less Than 6"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Distribution Mains 6" to 10"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Distribution Mains Greater Than 10" and Less Than 24"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Distribution Mains Greater Than 24"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
91.1
3.6
+|- 3.6
32.6
1.9
+|- 1.6
0.4
19.9
+I-24.9
0.1
9.7
+|- 0.0
27
90.8
3.4
+|- 5.4
19.2
1.2
+|- 1.2
0.0
*
*
0.0
*
*
115
101 -
500
80.2
2.3
+|- 0.8
82.0
3.1
+|- 1.2
4.3
2.7
+|- 0.3
0.1
0.2
+|- 0.0
80
85.1
3.2
+|- 1.7
28.0
2.4
+|- 1.3
2.3
3.3
+|- 2.9
0.0
*
*
108
501 -
3,300
84.3
12.4
+|- 9.5
93.1
9.3
+|- 2. 1
33.9
2.6
+I-0.7
2.9
0.9
+|- 1.2
172
85.1
63.8
+|- 89.3
86.7
10.1
+|- 3. 1
17.3
2.1
+|- 1.3
0.0
*
*
55
3,301 -
10,000
72.6
70.6
+I-77.7
81.7
53.2
+I-23.3
57.1
5.8
+|- 1.4
1.1
0.9
+|- 0.9
118
84.9
106.5
+|- 730.2
91.6
56.3
+|- 20.6
37.0
16.8
+|- 16.2
12.9
2.5
+|- 1.7
22
10,001 -
50,000
76.2
51.2
+I-318
92.6
96.7
+|- 16.3
82.5
23.9
+I-5.7
26.4
6.4
+|- 4. 1
142
82.3
93.1
+I-97.8
87.1
137.9
+|- 27.5
86.9
38.6
+|- 72.7
35.5
4.1
+|- 4.2
19
50,001 -
100,000
76.4
42.3
+|- 70.7
87.7
256.5
+I-95.0
86.7
64.0
+|- 8.9
65.5
13.4
+|- 3.4
100
73.3
51.5
+I-33.6
84.5
197.1
+|- 78.9
73.3
47.8
+I-23.0
52.2
10.9
+|- 3.4
10
100,001-
500,000
82.5
103.1
+|- 76.2
87.1
436.7
+|- 40. 1
88.8
126.3
+|- 77.5
74.4
34.7
+|- 4.0
189
95.4
100.8
+I-53.6
95.4
446.6
+|- 247.8
95.4
121.3
+I-67.5
60.6
28.5
+|- 70.5
17
Over
500,000
63.6
335.1
+|- 708.6
80.0
1,831.3
+\- 304.1
80.0
590.6
+|- 732.9
62.2
156.9
+|- 40.6
48
100.0
156.1
+I-39.7
100.0
1,435.1
+|- 7,027.0
100.0
325.1
+|- 799.9
100.0
60.5
+|- 39.7
5
All Sizes
80.9
23.9
+|- 77.4
84.7
43.0
+|- 6.2
35.7
21.6
+|- 3.2
7.2
15.8
+I-3.7
876
87.4
16.6
+|- 74.6
36.3
17.7
+|- 4.6
6.0
18.2
+|- 7.4
1.0
9.7
+I-4.7
351
(Continued)
120
-------
Table 49 (Cont.)
Average Size of Distribution Systems
By Diameter of Pipe and Ownership
(Length of Pipe in Miles)
Ownership Type
All Systems
Distribution Mains Less Than 6"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Distribution Mains 6" to 10"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Distribution Mains Greater Than 10" and Less Than 24"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Distribution Mains Greater Than 24"
Percentage of systems with this size pipe
Average length of pipe
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
90.9
3.4
+|- 4.8
21.0
1.4
+|- 1.0
0.0
19.9
+I-24.9
0.0
9.7
+|- 0.0
142
Data: Q.12A
101 -
500
83.2
2.8
+\-1.1
48.7
2.8
+|- 0.9
3.1
3.0
+|- 1.3
0.0
0.2
+|- 0.0
188
501 -
3,300
84.5
26.6
+I-26.3
91.4
9.5
+|- 1.8
29.3
2.5
+|- 0.6
2.1
0.9
+|- 1.2
227
3,301 -
10,000
74.7
77.8
+I-67.4
83.5
53.8
+|- 19.2
53.5
7.2
+|- 2.3
3.2
2.1
+|- 1.3
140
10,001 -
50,000
76.7
54.8
+I-30.5
92.2
99.8
+|- 15.3
82.9
25.1
+|- 5.3
27.1
6.1
+I-3.7
161
50,001 -
100,000
76.1
43.0
+|- 10.2
87.5
251.6
+I-87.9
85.5
62.8
+|- 8.5
64.4
13.2
+|- 3.2
110
100,001-
500,000
83.9
102.9
+|- 15.7
88.0
437.8
+\-44.7
89.5
125.7
+|- 12.8
72.9
34.2
+I-3.7
206
Over
500,000
68.2
301.9
+|- 90.6
82.6
1,770.5
+|- 314.0
82.6
549.9
+|- 722.7
67.0
138.6
+|- 36.3
53
All Sizes
84.1
20.2
+|- 9.3
60.7
35.5
+|- 4.4
21.0
21.1
+|- 2.9
4.1
15.1
+|- 3.2
1,227
Notes: Includes systems reporting zero miles of pipe.
121
-------
Table 50
Pressure Zones and Booster Disinfection Practices
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Average number of pressure zones in the distribution
system
Confidence interval
Average number of pressure zones with booster
disinfection stations
Confidence interval
Average number of booster disinfection stations in the
distribution system
Confidence interval
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Average number of pressure zones in the distribution
system
Confidence interval
Average number of pressure zones with booster
disinfection stations
Confidence interval
Average number of booster disinfection stations in the
distribution system
Confidence interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.4
+|- 0.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.6
+|- 0.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
101 -
500
1.2
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.6
+|- 0.5
0.1
+|- 0.2
0.1
+|- 0.2
501 -
3,300
1.5
+|- 0.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.1
+|- 0. 1
1.8
+|- 0.3
0.1
+|- 0. 1
0.1
+|- 0. 1
3,301 -
10,000
2.5
+|- 12
0.6
+|- 0.4
0.5
+|- 0.3
2.3
+|- 0.5
0.3
+|- 0. 1
0.3
+|- 0.2
10,001 -
50,000
3.6
+|- 2.6
0.3
+|- 0.2
0.2
+|- 0. 1
3.7
+|- 1.0
0.3
+|- 0. 1
0.5
+|- 0.3
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
5.1
+|- 2.9
0.5
+|- 0.3
1.2
+|- 0.9
4.2
+|- 12
0.6
+|- 0.4
0.6
+|- 0.3
6.5
+|- 2.3
0.5
+|- 0.2
0.8
+|- 0.3
8.4
+|- 2.4
0.9
+|- 0.3
1.5
+|- 0.4
Over
500,000
20.7
+|- -73.7
0.5
+|- 0.5
0.5
+|- 0.5
31.3
+|- 9.4
3.1
+|- 1.4
5.4
+|- 3.9
All Sizes
1.6
+|- 0.2
0.1
+|- 0.0
0.1
+|- 0.0
3.2
+|- 0.4
0.3
+|- 0. 1
0.4
+|- 0. 1
(Continued)
122
-------
Table 50 (Cont.)
Pressure Zones and Booster Disinfection Practices
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Average number of pressure zones in the distribution
system
Confidence interval
Average number of pressure zones with booster
disinfection stations
Confidence interval
Average number of booster disinfection stations in the
distribution system
Confidence interval
All Systems
Average number of pressure zones in the distribution
system
Confidence interval
Average number of pressure zones with booster
disinfection stations
Confidence interval
Average number of booster disinfection stations in the
distribution system
Confidence interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.3
+|- 0.4
0.3
+|- 0.4
0.3
+|- 0.4
1.4
+|- 0.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
Data: Q.13.A
Notes:
101 -
500
2.7
+|- 2.0
0.2
+|- 0.3
0.2
+|- 0.3
1.5
+|- 0.3
0.0
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
501 -
3,300
1.8
+I-0.8
0.3
+|- 0.3
0.4
+|- 0.3
1.6
+|- 0.3
0.1
+|- 0. 1
0.1
+|- 0. 1
3,301 -
10,000
4.0
+|- 3. 1
0.6
+|- 0.5
0.8
+|- 0.5
2.8
+|- 1.0
0.5
+|- 0.3
0.5
+|- 0.2
10,001 -
50,000
2.7
+|- 1.0
0.4
+|- 0.5
0.4
+|- 0.4
3.4
+|- 13
0.3
+|- 0.2
0.3
+|- 0. 1
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
6.2
+|- 2.0
0.5
+|- 0.3
0.6
+|- 0.3
5.0
+|- 12
0.5
+|- 0.2
0.8
+|- 0.3
500,000
8.7
+|- 2.0
2.3
+|- 10
5.5
+|- 4.2
8.1
+|- 15
1.1
+|- 0.3
2.2
+|- 0.9
Over
500,000
10.1
+|- 6.9
2.1
+|- 18
5.9
+|- 6.5
24.7
+|- 6.9
2.5
+|- 10
4.9
+|- 2.9
All Sizes
2.5
+I-0.7
0.4
+|- 0.2
0.4
+|- 0.2
1.9
+|- 0.2
0.1
+|- 0.0
0.2
+|- 0.0
123
-------
Table 51
Number of Annual Pressure Losses below 20 PSI
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Pressure losses due to power outage
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to fire
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to main pipeline burst
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to other reasons
Confidence interval
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Pressure losses due to power outage
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to fire
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to main pipeline burst
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to other reasons
Confidence interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.3
+|- 0.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.3
+|- 0.2
0.1
+|- 0. 1
0.6
+|- 0.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.3
+|- 0.4
0.4
+|- 0.5
101 -
500
0.2
+|- 0.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.9
+I-17
0.0
+|- 0. 1
0.3
+|- 0.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.1
+|- 1.6
0.0
+I-0.7
501 -
3,300
0.1
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.4
+|- 1.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.0
+I-17
0.0
+|- 0.0
3,301 -
10,000
0.9
+|- 1.3
0.3
+|- 0.4
1.3
+|- 1.0
1.5
+|- 2.2
0.2
+|- 0.3
0.3
+|- 0.4
2.0
+|- 1.5
1.2
+|- 1.8
10,001 -
50,000
0.0
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.9
+|- 1.6
0.1
+|- 0.2
0.3
+|- 0.4
0.0
+|- 0. 1
7.3
+|- 7.3
2.3
+I-3.8
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
10.6
+|- 7.9
6.2
+|- 7.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
10.3
+I-6.8
0.6
+1-1.1
0.1
+|- 0. 1
0.2
+|- 0.2
17.2
+|- 10.8
16.2
+|- 15.3
0.3
+|- 0.3
0.0
+|- 0.0
11.5
+|- 8.8
6.5
+|- 8.8
Over
500,000
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.3
+|- 0.4
2.4
+|- 1.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.3
+|- 0.2
0.1
+|- 0. 1
4.3
+|- 4.3
1.8
+|- 1.7
All Sizes
0.2
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.0
+|- 0.5
0.2
+|- 0. 1
0.2
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0. 1
3.2
+|- 1.6
1.1
+|- 0.9
(Continued)
124
-------
Table 51 (Cont.)
Number of Annual Pressure Losses below 20 PSI
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Pressure losses due to power outage
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to fire
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to main pipeline burst
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to other reasons
Confidence interval
All Systems
Pressure losses due to power outage
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to fire
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to main pipeline burst
Confidence interval
Pressure losses due to other reasons
Confidence interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.3
+|- 0.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.3
+|- 0.2
0.1
+|- 0. 1
Data: Q.13.B
Notes:
101 -
500
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
4.6
+|- 8.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.2
+|- 0.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.5
+|- 1.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
501 -
3,300
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
2.1
+|- 3.4
0.1
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.5
+|- 12
0.0
+|- 0.0
3,301 -
10,000
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.6
+|- 1.6
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.6
+|- 0.9
0.3
+|- 0.3
1.5
+I-0.7
1.2
+|- 1.4
10,001 -
50,000
0.3
+|- 0.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.1
+|- 15
0.2
+|- 0.3
0.2
+|- 0.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
3.3
+|- 2.3
0.8
+|- 1.1
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
0.2
+|- 0.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.4
+|- 1.6
2.9
+|- 4. 1
0.1
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
8.1
+|- 4. 1
3.4
+|- 3. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
8.7
+I-6.8
12.0
+|- 15.5
0.2
+|- 0.2
0.1
+|- 0. 1
12.5
+I-5.8
10.1
+|- 7.0
Over
500,000
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
7.9
+|- 9.3
0.3
+|- 0.3
0.1
+|- 0. 1
0.1
+|- 0. 1
5.1
+|- 4. 1
0.9
+I-0.8
All Sizes
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
2.7
+|- 2.9
0.2
+|- 0.2
0.2
+|- 0. 1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1.5
+|- 0.6
0.3
+|- 0. 1
125
-------
Table 52
System Flushing Practices
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Percentage of systems that flush their distribution system on a
regular basis
Of the systems that flush on a regular basis:
Average percentage of systems flushed each year
Percentage of systems that use each type of the following
approaches:
Uni-directional
Conventional or random
Dead end
Other
Of systems that do not flush on a regular basis:
Percentage that flushed their system once
Percentage that flushed their system more than one time
Average number of years between last two system flushes
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Percentage of systems that flush their distribution system on a
regular basis
Of systems that flush on a regular basis:
Average percentage of system flushed each year
Percentage of systems that use each type of the following
approaches:
Uni-directional
Conventional or random
Dead end
Other
Of systems that do not flush on a regular basis:
Percentage that flushed their system once
Percentage that flushed their system more than one time
Average number of years between last two system flushes
System Service
100
or Less
31.8
98.9
7.0
40.0
63.4
0.0
5.1
3.5
1.0
32.4
89.7
25.5
27.2
39.2
14.2
3.0
0.0
*
101 -
500
70.4
98.5
12.4
60.6
52.2
1.4
17.3
16.1
2.2
53.9
92.8
13.4
77.8
40.4
1.0
5.6
2.6
1.0
501 -
3,300
87.5
94.2
21.5
60.2
43.7
2.0
14.1
32.8
1.2
82.7
87.3
23.2
59.9
48.0
0.0
56.2
13.1
1.0
3,301 -
10,000
88.0
77.9
26.4
71.5
85.3
1.8
13.4
61.0
4.3
76.1
82.5
22.0
73.1
78.0
4.9
23.1
30.9
3.3
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
91.5
75.9
41.3
68.1
72.2
5.3
28.0
0.0
*
87.0
78.3
30.1
71.4
78.0
4.0
12.2
61.2
2.2
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
85.4
44.1
47.5
64.8
89.2
3.2
0.0
18.6
1.0
80.9
70.3
21.2
85.7
80.0
8.6
0.0
5.2
1.0
75.3
52.3
46.5
67.3
89.2
13.6
16.9
16.2
1.5
69.2
63.4
40.0
75.0
82.2
13.2
11.3
26.3
1.6
Over
500,000
64.1
72.9
81.3
100.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
*
55.3
36.4
61.9
71.4
66.7
14.3
29.4
17.6
1.0
All Sizes
65.3
93.8
17.8
58.9
55.1
1.7
10.0
11.0
1.9
72.2
82.3
24.8
68.1
62.9
3.8
17.6
15.1
2.2
(Continued)
126
-------
Table 52 (Cont.)
System Flushing Practices
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Percentage of systems that flush their distribution system on a
regular basis
Of systems that flush on a regular basis:
Average percentage of system flushed each year
Percentage of systems that use each type of the following
approaches:
Uni-directional
Conventional or random
Dead end
Other
Of systems that do not flush on a regular basis:
Percentage that flushed their system once
Percentage that flushed their system more than one time
Average number of years between last two system flushes
All Systems
Percentage of systems that flush their distribution system on a
regular basis
Of systems that flush on a regular basis:
Average percentage of system flushed each year
Percentage of systems that use each type of the following
approaches:
Uni-directional
Conventional or random
Dead end
Other
Of systems that do not flush on a regular basis:
Percentage that flushed their system once
Percentage that flushed their system more than one time
Average number of years between last two system flushes
System Service
100
or Less
49.3
100.0
67.9
66.1
33.9
0.0
0.0
66.1
1.0
32.9
98.7
13.6
42.3
59.7
0.4
4.8
6.5
1.0
Data: Q.14, Q.15,
101 -
500
78.8
91.5
6.6
65.4
53.3
0.0
0.0
24.6
1.0
71.0
97.2
11.5
61.9
52.0
1.1
14.7
16.2
2.0
Q.16, Q.17
501 -
3,300
86.1
97.3
28.6
46.3
44.5
0.0
15.3
30.7
4.5
86.7
94.5
23.5
56.4
44.2
1.3
18.8
30.2
2.2
Notes: The questionnaire did not define '
3,301 -
10,000
86.2
69.4
33.0
41.5
98.4
10.6
39.8
50.0
1.0
85.3
76.5
27.3
64.2
87.4
4.6
22.6
49.2
3.3
regular basis.'
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
76.4
44.3
11.3
72.2
80.4
8.2
0.0
36.7
1.0
87.6
71.4
33.6
69.6
75.0
5.4
14.0
29.6
1.7
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
71.0
58.1
53.1
62.6
82.2
11.2
14.5
14.5
1.0
80.2
57.4
38.5
72.5
84.1
7.0
5.1
12.2
1.0
500,000
85.1
59.0
59.8
70.2
85.2
15.0
16.0
52.1
1.0
73.9
59.6
46.3
71.9
84.7
13.7
13.2
26.9
1.5
Over
500,000
35.9
43.8
75.0
75.0
100.0
0.0
14.0
0.0
*
52.9
43.8
66.9
76.7
76.6
10.0
22.3
11.3
1.0
All Sizes
79.8
88.7
25.1
54.0
55.4
2.0
8.0
38.6
1.8
68.4
91.8
19.9
58.7
55.8
2.0
10.3
14.4
1.9
127
-------
Table 53
Seasonal Disinfection Residuals for Entry Points and Distribution Systems
Season
Summer (June through September)
Average entry point disinfectant residual for the treatment
plant with the highest average daily flow (mg/L as CI2)
Ground water treatment plants
Total CI2
Free CI2
Surface water treatment plants (including mixed plants)
Total CI2
Free CI2
Average distribution system residual (mg/L as CI2)
Ground water treatment plants
Total CI2
Free CI2
Surface water treatment plants (including mixed plants)
Total CI2
Free CI2
Average percentage of systems samples <0.2 mg/L
(including non-detects), total CI2
System Service
100
or Less
1.65
1.02
1.93
0.94
1.04
0.77
0.83
0.65
7.6
101 -
500
1.10
1.09
1.71
1.18
0.78
0.81
1.38
0.63
5.6
501 -
3,300
1.48
1.15
1.85
1.44
1.01
0.62
1.26
0.70
4.9
3,301 -
10,000
1.52
0.99
1.96
1.37
1.11
0.77
1.41
0.77
3.7
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
1.47
3.39
2.15
1.37
1.13
2.66
1.68
0.94
7.5
50,001 -
100,000
2.05
0.93
2.41
1.38
1.86
0.63
1.58
0.87
5.3
100,001-
500,000
2.37
0.68
2.45
1.03
1.66
0.54
1.64
0.66
2.7
Over
500,000
1.89
0.40
2.13
1.02
1.54
0.51
1.63
0.75
4.8
All Sizes
1.76
1.31
2.23
1.23
1.33
0.94
1.56
0.74
5.0
(Continued)
128
-------
Table 53 (Cont.)
Seasonal Disinfection Residuals for Entry Points and Distribution Systems
Season
Winter (December, January, and February)
Average entry point disinfectant residual for the treatment
plant with the highest average daily flow (mg/L as CI2)
Ground water treatment plants
Total CI2
Free CI2
Surface water treatment plants (including mixed plants)
Total CI2
Free CI2
Average distribution system residual (mg/L as CI2)
Ground water treatment plants
Total CI2
Free CI2
Surface water treatment plants (including mixed plants)
Total CI2
Free CI2
Average percentage of systems samples <0.2 mg/L
(including non-detects), total CI2
System Service
100
or Less
1.65
0.96
1.70
0.91
0.96
0.75
1.24
0.69
5.5
Data: Q.18
101 -
500
1.06
1.10
3.50
1.19
0.78
0.85
1.35
0.66
5.6
Notes: If system has more than
501 -
3,300
1.36
1.11
1.91
1.43
0.91
0.64
1.34
0.75
5.7
3,301 -
10,000
1.43
1.07
2.02
1.33
0.97
0.80
1.49
0.85
2.9
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
1.49
3.10
2.07
1.30
1.14
2.92
1.76
1.05
6.5
50,001 -
100,000
2.19
0.91
2.45
1.35
1.75
0.64
1.77
0.97
4.5
one treatment plant, the residuals reported
100,001-
500,000
2.43
0.73
2.31
1.01
1.83
0.58
1.74
0.75
2.2
are for the pi
Over
500,000
1.86
0.43
2.04
0.97
1.46
0.53
1.65
0.79
4.9
ant with the
All Sizes
1.76
1.27
2.18
1.20
1.31
0.99
1.65
0.81
4.6
i
highest average daily flow.
The estimate of distribution system residuals distinguishes between ground and surface water
plants. The distribution system is characterized as ground water if the largest treatment plant treats
ground water. If the largest treatment plant treats surface water or surface and ground water, the
distribution system is characterized as surface water.
129
-------
Table 54
Water Security Awareness and Security Barriers
By Ownership
(Percentage of Systems)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Attended EPA-sponsored water security training
Used EPA Web-based water security technology product guides
Heard of EPA's Response Protocol Toolbox
Heard of the 14 features of an "active and effective" water security program
Heard of mutual aid and assistance agreements/compacts
Interested in joining such an agreement or compact
Barriers to enhancing security
Lack of interest at the system, public, or rate board level
Competing priorities (regulatory compliance, aging infrastructure, etc.)
Lack of funding
Lack of knowledge / guidance / training materials
Other
Preferred sources of water security information and products
Department of Homeland Security
EPA
Water Associations
No preference
Other
Private Systems
Attended EPA-sponsored water security training
Used EPA Web-based water security technology product guides
Heard of EPA's Response Protocol Toolbox
Heard of the 14 features of an "active and effective" water security program
Heard of mutual aid and assistance agreements/compacts
Interested in joining such an agreement or compact
Systems reporting the following barriers to enhancing security
Lack of interest at the system, public, or rate board level
Competing priorities (regulatory compliance, aging infrastructure, etc.)
Lack of funding
Lack of knowledge / guidance / training materials
Other
Preferred sources of water security information and products
Department of Homeland Security
EPA
Water Associations
No preference
Other
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
48.4
0.0
23.1
9.2
56.8
68.9
31.0
74.1
33.9
9.4
17.2
0.0
25.7
48.1
17.8
7.8
17.4
3.9
6.6
2.7
19.4
39.6
22.3
47.0
37.9
22.9
44.1
1.2
2.7
21.8
46.6
12.8
101 -
500
33.0
12.7
22.3
15.1
60.6
60.3
54.7
63.9
25.1
8.9
25.9
4.3
8.4
38.1
42.5
0.3
19.9
7.7
10.7
14.4
28.3
38.5
32.1
44.2
39.5
22.2
37.6
0.0
10.8
20.9
52.8
10.8
501 -
3,300
27.5
10.0
18.7
16.9
68.5
56.0
46.4
70.6
27.0
18.5
21.6
3.4
5.4
35.9
44.5
9.9
30.9
5.7
17.0
28.8
55.2
48.5
40.2
58.6
36.1
10.6
41.7
2.5
6.1
41.6
32.1
13.5
3,301 -
10,000
54.7
21.4
39.7
24.1
56.5
73.3
54.0
64.9
12.7
24.4
22.6
12.9
11.6
35.1
31.8
5.0
71.4
22.6
41.0
41.7
55.1
59.6
56.2
53.8
16.5
10.9
41.2
8.3
15.9
31.0
31.5
8.2
10,001 -
50,000
55.8
30.0
38.9
23.0
58.5
65.7
57.5
64.8
12.5
9.5
34.0
5.2
10.0
36.7
38.4
5.3
35.5
7.7
33.6
6.9
13.6
37.1
54.6
13.7
4.3
12.9
62.1
8.6
17.1
12.9
38.6
0.0
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
60.2
37.3
47.8
27.4
68.5
80.9
64.4
64.7
13.0
9.6
31.4
14.4
9.5
28.4
40.7
2.6
58.4
21.3
55.0
26.9
46.1
61.1
65.2
47.1
16.9
25.8
37.1
16.9
7.9
21.3
53.9
0.0
79.5
50.8
75.5
45.0
83.2
71.3
71.1
57.5
9.6
4.4
32.8
9.6
21.3
24.0
36.8
5.3
79.3
17.3
35.1
24.9
38.8
26.3
44.7
38.8
10.5
0.0
62.1
33.9
17.0
6.8
14.2
24.8
Over
500,000
87.1
68.3
85.4
53.6
88.9
72.7
71.7
49.9
1.9
12.8
37.7
16.4
14.9
19.0
42.4
5.5
100.0
24.4
87.8
63.4
87.8
72.2
36.6
12.2
0.0
0.0
100.0
12.2
48.8
0.0
38.9
0.0
All Sizes
39.3
15.6
27.2
18.7
63.3
62.0
50.8
67.3
22.4
15.0
24.5
5.4
9.2
36.7
39.6
6.0
23.0
6.5
11.6
12.8
29.7
43.2
30.6
47.5
36.9
20.1
41.4
1.4
7.1
24.6
46.1
11.8
(Continued)
130
-------
Table 54 (Cont.)
Water Security Awareness and Security Barriers
By Ownership
(Percentage of Systems)
Ownership Type
All Systems
Attended EPA-sponsored water security training
Used EPA Web-based water security technology product guides
Heard of EPA's Response Protocol Toolbox
Heard of the 14 features of an "active and effective" water security program
Heard of mutual aid and assistance agreements/compacts
Interested in joining such an agreement or compact
Systems reporting the following barriers to enhancing security
Lack of interest at the system, public, or rate board level
Competing priorities (regulatory compliance, aging infrastructure, etc.)
Lack of funding
Lack of knowledge / guidance / training materials
Other
Preferred sources of water security information and products
Department of Homeland Security
EPA
Water Associations
No preference
Other
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
21.5
3.3
8.8
3.5
24.3
48.6
23.4
50.5
37.4
21.1
40.6
1.0
5.8
25.3
42.8
12.1
Data: Q.20
Notes:
101 -
500
25.0
9.6
15.1
14.7
40.7
50.9
40.7
51.8
34.0
17.1
33.1
1.7
9.9
27.5
48.9
6.8
501 -
3,300
28.4
8.8
18.2
20.1
64.9
54.2
44.7
67.4
29.5
16.4
27.0
3.2
5.5
37.5
41.1
10.9
3,301 -
10,000
58.2
21.7
40.0
27.8
56.2
70.5
54.5
62.6
13.5
21.6
26.5
12.0
12.5
34.2
31.7
5.7
10,001 -
50,000
54.1
28.2
38.5
21.7
54.8
65.1
57.3
60.6
11.8
9.8
36.3
5.4
10.6
34.7
38.4
4.8
50,001 -
100,000
60.0
35.8
48.5
27.4
66.3
79.6
64.5
63.0
13.4
11.1
32.0
14.6
9.3
27.7
41.9
2.4
100,001-
500,000
79.5
46.8
70.7
42.6
77.9
68.6
68.0
55.2
9.7
3.8
36.3
12.5
20.8
22.0
34.1
7.6
Over
500,000
88.8
62.5
85.7
54.9
88.7
72.6
67.0
44.9
1.6
11.1
46.0
15.8
19.4
16.4
42.0
4.8
All Sizes
31.3
11.1
19.5
15.8
46.7
56.1
40.8
57.5
29.6
17.5
32.8
3.4
8.2
30.7
42.8
8.9
131
-------
Table 55
Water Security Awareness and Security Barriers
By Ownership
(Percentage of Systems)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Attended EPA-sponsored water security training
Used EPA Web-based water security technology product guides
Heard of EPA's Response Protocol Toolbox
Heard of the 14 features of an "active and effective" water security program
Heard of mutual aid and assistance agreements/compacts
Interested in joining such an agreement or compact
Barriers to enhancing security
Lack of interest at the system, public, or rate board level
Competing priorities (regulatory compliance, aging infrastructure, etc.)
Lack of funding
Lack of knowledge / guidance / training materials
Other
Preferred sources of water security information and products
Department of Homeland Security
EPA
Water Associations
No preference
Other
Private Systems
Attended EPA-sponsored water security training
Used EPA Web-based water security technology product guides
Heard of EPA's Response Protocol Toolbox
Heard of the 14 features of an "active and effective" water security program
Heard of mutual aid and assistance agreements/compacts
Interested in joining such an agreement or compact
Systems reporting the following barriers to enhancing security
Lack of interest at the system, public, or rate board level
Competing priorities (regulatory compliance, aging infrastructure, etc.)
Lack of funding
Lack of knowledge / guidance / training materials
Other
Preferred sources of water security information and products
Department of Homeland Security
EPA
Water Associations
No preference
Other
System Service Population Category
25 - 3,300
31.2
10.1
20.3
15.6
64.7
58.3
47.9
68.6
27.0
14.4
22.7
3.4
8.2
37.7
41.5
6.4
20.6
5.7
9.9
11.6
28.7
41.8
29.1
47.7
38.3
20.6
41.1
0.9
6.6
24.6
46.8
12.1
3,301 -
49,999
55.2
25.3
39.4
23.6
57.4
69.8
55.6
64.9
12.6
17.6
27.8
9.4
10.9
35.8
34.8
5.1
63.3
19.3
39.4
33.9
45.8
58.1
55.8
44.8
13.8
11.3
45.9
8.4
16.2
26.9
33.1
6.3
50,000 -
99,999
60.2
37.3
47.8
27.4
68.5
80.9
64.4
64.7
13.0
9.6
31.4
14.4
9.5
28.4
40.7
2.6
58.4
21.3
55.0
26.9
46.1
61.1
65.2
47.1
16.9
25.8
37.1
16.9
7.9
21.3
53.9
0.0
Over
100,000 All Sizes
80.8
53.8
77.2
46.5
84.2
71.6
71.2
56.2
8.3
5.8
33.6
10.7
20.2
23.2
37.8
5.3
83.2
18.6
45.0
32.1
48.0
42.0
43.2
33.8
8.5
0.0
69.2
29.8
22.9
5.5
18.8
20.1
39.3
15.6
27.2
18.7
63.3
62.0
50.8
67.3
22.4
15.0
24.5
5.4
9.2
36.7
39.6
6.0
23.0
6.5
11.6
12.8
29.7
43.2
30.6
47.5
36.9
20.1
41.4
1.4
7.1
24.6
46.1
11.8
132
-------
Table 55 (Cont.)
Water Security Awareness and Security Barriers
By Ownership
(Percentage of Systems)
Ownership Type
All Systems
Attended EPA-sponsored water security training
Used EPA Web-based water security technology product guides
Heard of EPA's Response Protocol Toolbox
Heard of the 14 features of an "active and effective" water security program
Heard of mutual aid and assistance agreements/compacts
Interested in joining such an agreement or compact
Systems reporting the following barriers to enhancing security
Lack of interest at the system, public, or rate board level
Competing priorities (regulatory compliance, aging infrastructure, etc.)
Lack of funding
Lack of knowledge / guidance / training materials
Other
Preferred sources of water security information and products
Department of Homeland Security
EPA
Water Associations
No preference
Other
System Service Population Category
25 - 3,300
25.1
7.6
14.4
13.3
44.1
52.2
37.2
56.6
33.5
18.0
33.2
2.0
7.3
30.2
44.5
9.7
Data: Q.20
Notes:
3,301 -
49,999
56.5
24.4
39.4
25.2
55.6
68.3
55.7
61.7
12.8
16.6
30.6
9.2
11.7
34.4
34.5
5.3
50,000 -
99,999
60.0
35.8
48.5
27.4
66.3
79.6
64.5
63.0
13.4
11.1
32.0
14.6
9.3
27.7
41.9
2.4
Over
100,000
81.1
49.5
73.3
44.7
79.8
69.4
67.8
53.4
8.3
5.1
37.9
13.0
20.6
21.0
35.5
7.1
All Sizes
31.3
11.1
19.5
15.8
46.7
56.1
40.8
57.5
29.6
17.5
32.8
3.4
8.2
30.7
42.8
8.9
133
-------
Table 56
Service Connections Profile
By Ownership
(Number of Connections)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean Residential Connections
Confidence Interval
Median Residential Connections
Mean Non-Residential Connections
Confidence Interval
Median Non-Residential Connections
Observations
Private Systems
Mean Residential Connections
Confidence Interval
Median Residential Connections
Mean Non-Residential Connections
Confidence Interval
Median Non-Residential Connections
Observations
All Systems
Mean Residential Connections
Confidence Interval
Median Residential Connections
Mean Non-Residential Connections
Confidence Interval
Median Non-Residential Connections
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
50
36
7
3
25
24
+I-77
23
17
+|- 74
4
117
30
+I-77
24
15
+I-77
4
142
Data: Q.21A
Notes
101 -
500
115
+I-25
105
14
5
84
88
+I-37
65
24
+I-40
1
111
110
+I-27
77
16
+I-77
5
195
501 -
3,300
512
+I-67
355
51
+I-77
35
181
602
+|- 495
310
29
+I-20
10
56
527
+|- 700
347
48
+|- 70
33
237
3,301 -
10,000
2,724
+|- 7,587
1,701
366
+|- 373
160
127
1,686
+|- 528
1,855
55
+I-34
10
27
2,422
+1-7,750
1,768
276
+|- 228
116
154
10,001 -
50,000
6,831
+|- 977
5,500
561
+|- 703
450
156
5,378
+|- 7,262
4,628
95
+I-97
10
20
6,770
+|- 937
5,400
542
+|- 700
435
176
50,001 -
100,000
18,279
+|- 7,335
17,176
1,536
+I-470
1,395
111
65,938
+|- 76,266
17,331
8,917
+|- 70,378
2,643
12
21 ,243
+|- 5,447
17,331
1,995
+|- 856
1,395
123
100,001-
500,000
39,31 1
+1-3,834
34,345
3,816
+|- 362
3,296
204
92,001
+|- 32,527
64,279
8,113
+|- 3, 758
6,543
21
47,035
+|- 8,357
39,302
4,446
+|- 737
3,475
225
Over
500,000
184,684
+|- 36,097
148,473
15,349
+|- 3,502
12,641
52
333,021
+|- 700,565
424,185
30,696
+|- 70,367
40,152
6
204,696
+|- 43,357
168,670
17,419
+|- 4,379
14,362
58
All Sizes
3,385
+|- 399
320
310
+I-45
37
940
2,662
+|- 7,448
50
236
+|- 747
5
370
3,217
+|- 405
120
293
+I-44
25
1,310
134
-------
Table 57
Population Served
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean Population Served Directly
Confidence Interval
by System
Mean Population Served per Residential Connection
Confidence Interval
Mean Population Served through
Confidence Interval
Mean Total Population Served
Confidence Interval
Observations
Private Systems
Mean Population Served Directly
Confidence Interval
Sales to Other Systems
by System
Mean Population Served per Residential Connection
Confidence Interval
Mean Population Served through
Confidence Interval
Mean Total Population Served
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
Sales to Other Systems
Mean Population Served Directly by System
Confidence Interval
Mean Population Served per Residential Connection
Confidence Interval
Mean Population Served through
Confidence Interval
Mean Total Population Served
Confidence Interval
Observations
Data:
Notes:
Sales to Other Systems
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
65
+I-74
2.0
0
65
+I-74
27
59
4.2
0
59
118
60
3.9
0
60
145
Q.21A
101 -
500
259
+I-37
3.8
1
259
+I-37
84
237
+I-25
3.3
0
238
+I-25
111
246
+I-79
3.5
+1-1
0
+1-1
246
+I-79
195
501 -
3,300
1
+I-
,241
727
2.9
20
+I-79
1
+I-
1
+I-
,260
728
181
,191
796
3.4
+1-1
1
+I-
1
+I-
1
,192
796
56
,227
706
3.0
15
+I-74
1
+I-
,242
707
237
3,301 -
10,000
4,989
+|- 420
2.9
504
+|- 795
5,493
+|- 395
127
5,818
+|- 953
3.0
+1-1
273
+|- 250
6,090
+|- 877
27
5,165
+|- 392
2.9
455
+|- 763
5,620
+|- 365
154
10,001 -
50,000
18,845
+1-2,039
3.0
2,574
+|- 729
21,420
+|- 7,908
156
20,223
+1-5,458
2.9
3,926
+1-3,064
24,148
+1-5,459
20
18,960
+|- 7,930
3.0
2,686
+|- 775
21,646
+|- 7,807
176
50,001 -
100,000
53,621
+1-3,867
3.2
15,350
+1-3,856
68,971
+1-3,777
111
42,684
+|- 74,959
2.9
26,657
+|- 73,970
69,341
+1-6,088
13
52,540
+1-3,830
3.2
16,468
+1-3,844
69,008
+1-2,875
124
100,001-
500,000
136,788
+|- 70,746
3.7
63,005
+|- 70,802
199,793
+|- 9,037
204
217,830
+|- 63,920
3.0
41 ,707
+1-24,732
259,536
+|- 52,344
21
146,908
+|- 74,605
3.6
60,345
+|- 70,240
207,254
+|- 77,898
225
Over
500,000
792,060
+|- 798,330
6.6
454,076
+|- 722,082
1,246,136
+|- 228,454
52
902,748
+|- 262, 723
3.0
85,420
+|- 54,977
988,168
+1-273,777
6
807,248
+1-776,777
6.1
403,489
+1-770,783
1,210,737
+1-798,702
58
All Sizes
9,611
+|- 7,205
3.1
3,272
+|- 559
12,884
+|- 7,577
942
1,874
+|- 657
3.6
266
+I-92
2,140
+|- 687
372
5,795
+|- 565
3.4
1,789
+|- 250
7,584
+|- 646
1,314
135
-------
Table 58
Total Water System Revenue and Revenue Per Thousand Gallons Delivered
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Produced in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Produced in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Produced in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Produced in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
8
+|-4
0
2.60
+|- 142
88
24
+|- 13
23
6.00
+I-4.49
49
20
+|- 16
10
4.94
+|- 1.01
8
9
+|-4
0
2.91
+|- 128
145
Data: Q.21
101 -
500
23
+|-6
17
2.97
+I-0.77
105
66
+I-34
17
5.18
+I-3.05
67
56
+I-38
28
5.77
+I-2.79
23
29
+|-8
17
3.44
+I-0.78
195
501 -
3,300
183
+I-60
125
4.29
+|- 145
111
354
+I-98
240
5.75
+|- 132
78
1,001
+|- 1, 163
138
5.68
+|- 164
48
418
+|- 326
130
4.78
+|- 106
237
3,301 -
10,000
447
+|- 140
199
3.62
+|- 1.21
62
726
+|- 201
607
3.62
+I-0.58
65
632
+|- 196
608
4.53
+|- 1 14
26
543
+I-99
390
3.89
+I-0.72
153
10,001 -
50,000
2,122
+|- 649
1,399
2.91
+I-0.54
66
2,639
+|- 592
2,110
3.91
+I-0.73
85
3,234
+|- 7,276
1,916
3.60
+\-0.61
25
2,492
+|- 462
1,634
3.32
+I-0.37
176
50,001 -
100,000
6,275
+|- 7,844
6,575
3.49
+I-0.65
40
17,543
+|- 73,702
7,206
5.10
+I-2.42
54
9,606
+1-2,807
7,923
3.64
+|- 7.64
30
11,463
+1-5,478
7,008
4.20
+|- 7.77
124
100,001-
500,000
14,810
+1-3,986
8,597
4.39
+1-2.57
56
27,851
+|- 7, 723
16,860
2.88
+I-0.32
124
29,676
+1-5,027
23,757
4.97
+|- 7.62
45
25,042
+1-4,302
17,092
3.63
+I-0.67
225
Over
500,000
125,197
+1-42,382
168,169
2.08
+|- 0. 72
6
148,038
+1-29,058
95,200
2.53
+1-0.25
39
94,925
+1-42,503
86,020
2.55
+|- 7.07
13
132,404
+1-23,226
95,200
2.49
+1-0.28
58
All Sizes
318
+I-66
16
3.26
+I-0.63
534
5,558
+|- 7, 758
231
4.78
+I-0.76
561
1,520
+|- 569
93
5.32
+|- 7.04
218
996
+|- 745
24
3.76
+I-0.52
1,313
Notes: Total water system revenue includes revenue from water sales to residential and non-residential
customers and to other systems; fees; transfers from the government including municipal
government transfers from the general fund; and other sources including penalties and fines.
136
-------
Table 59
Total Water System Revenue
By Ownership
(Thousands of Dollars)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Number of Systems Reporting Zero Revenue
Observations
Private Systems
Ancillary Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Number of Systems Reporting Zero Revenue
Observations
Other Private Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Number of Systems Reporting Zero Revenue
Observations
All Private Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Number of Systems Reporting Zero Revenue
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
37
+I-23
17
4
27
1
+\-1
0
53
61
9
+|-4
5
17
57
5
+|-2
0
70
118
Data: Q.21
101 -
500
49
+I-77
31
12
84
5
+|-4
0
32
43
25
+|-8
18
17
68
17
+|-6
3
49
111
501 -
3,300
477
+|- 440
144
8
181
50
+I-66
0
5
7
281
+I-278
111
11
49
259
+|- 203
103
16
56
3,301 -
10,000
523
+|- 704
411
46
127
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
618
+|- 270
390
10
26
618
+|- 275
390
10
26
10,001 -
50,000
2,569
+|- 494
1,696
37
156
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1,633
+|- 980
1,330
9
20
1,633
+|- 1,023
1,330
9
20
50,001 -
100,000
7,732
+|- 1,210
7,008
25
111
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
46,432
+1-52,073
6,783
5
13
46,432
+1-52,350
6,783
5
13
100,001-
500,000
21,999
+1-2,509
16,286
42
204
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
47,430
+|- 22, 789
35,898
6
21
47,430
+|- 22, 762
35,898
6
21
Over
500,000
136,101
+|- 26, 799
94,936
3
52
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
108,252
+1-48,776
168,169
2
6
108,252
+1-47,872
168,169
2
6
All Sizes
1,607
+|- 254
108
177
942
5
+|-3
0
90
111
608
+I-370
13
77
260
370
+|- 772
1
167
371
Notes: Total water system revenue includes revenue from water sales to residential and non-residential
customers and to other systems; fees; transfers from the government including municipal
government transfers from the general fund; and other sources including penalties and fines.
137
-------
Table 60
Total Water System Revenue and Revenue Per Thousand Gallons Delivered, Excluding Systems With Zero Revenue
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Produced in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Produced in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Produced in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Produced in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
19
+|-8
11
5.19
+|- 2.59
37
34
+|- 18
26
8.09
+|- 7.37
27
20
+|- 16
10
4.96
+|- 1.01
7
20
+|-8
11
5.29
+|- 2. 10
71
Data: Q.21
101 -
500
35
+|-7
27
4.49
+|- 0.94
68
110
+I-34
63
8.78
+|- 3.28
49
74
+I-47
44
6.95
+I-2.98
18
45
+I-77
29
5.06
+I-0.94
135
501 -
3,300
207
+I-66
133
4.75
+|- 156
97
377
+|- 104
244
6.07
+|- 137
73
1,135
+|- 1,311
195
6.33
+|- 174
43
471
+|- 366
142
5.28
+|- 1 14
213
Notes: Excludes systems that do not report
3,301 -
10,000
853
+|- 197
758
3.86
+|- 124
38
1,224
+|- 195
1,057
3.83
+|- 0.54
42
879
+|- 779
835
4.53
+|- 1 14
20
927
+|- 124
835
4.06
+I-0.73
100
10,001 -
50,000
2,840
+|- 767
1,696
3.20
+I-0.57
50
3,873
+|- 670
2,972
4.07
+I-0.73
60
3,916
+|- 1,401
2,241
3.60
+I-0.67
20
3,345
+|- 545
2,383
3.52
+I-0.36
130
50,001 -
100,000
9,730
+|- 2,476
7,314
3.64
+|- 0.59
25
22,387
+|- 77,269
7,706
5.24
+|- 2.47
43
11,109
+1-2,974
9,044
3.64
+|- 7.65
26
15,221
+|- 7, 737
7,923
4.30
+|- 7. 73
94
100,001-
500,000
24,556
+|- 5,484
18,870
5.39
+|- 3.09
34
32,360
+|- 7,895
20,297
2.93
+|- 0.32
105
35,027
+1-5,060
26,043
5.11
+|- 7.64
38
31 ,489
+1-5,076
21,573
3.84
+I-0.69
177
Over
500,000
142,215
+|- 34,992
168,169
2.08
+|- 0. 72
5
156,040
+|- 29,828
99,039
2.53
+|- 0.25
37
109,398
+1-57,676
94,936
2.55
+|- 7.07
11
143,831
+1-24,799
102,102
2.49
+I-0.28
53
All Sizes
510
+|- 703
61
4.60
+I-0.80
354
7,535
+|- 7,559
655
5.45
+I-0.76
436
1,817
+|- 678
138
5.85
+|- 7.07
183
1,475
+I-270
87
4.96
+I-0.60
973
positive revenue.
Total water system revenue includes revenue from water sales to residential and non-residential
customers and to other systems; fees; transfers from the government including municipal
government transfers from the general fund; and other sources including penalties and fines.
138
-------
Table 61
Total Water System Revenue and Revenue Per Thousand Gallons Delivered, Excluding Systems With Zero Revenue
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Delivered in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
Private Systems
Mean Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Confidence Interval
Median Revenue in Thousands of Dollars
Mean Revenue Per Thousand Gallons of Water
Delivered in Dollars
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
46
+I-25
18
9.17
+I-7.88
23
12
+|-4
10
4.19
+|- 1. 19
48
Data: Q.21
101 -
500
57
+|- 19
38
4.56
+|- 124
72
32
+|-8
23
5.21
+|- 1. 16
63
Notes: Excludes systems that do
501 -
3,300
504
+|- 465
150
4.24
+I-0.56
173
357
+|- 262
133
6.61
+|- 1.91
40
not report
3,301 -
10,000
890
+|- 134
758
3.63
+I-0.56
84
1,089
+|- 293
976
5.61
+I-2.57
16
10,001 -
50,000
3,366
+|- 574
2,344
3.39
+|- 0.36
119
3,009
+|- 1,313
2,725
5.17
+|- 128
11
50,001 -
100,000
10,011
+|- 7,360
7,676
4.01
+|- 1 10
86
80,994
+|- 83,489
15,107
3.20
+I-0.78
8
100,001-
500,000
27,639
+1-3,077
20,293
3.63
+1-0.72
162
60,014
+|- 27,902
42,571
4.03
+I-0.78
15
Over
500,000
143,904
+|- 27,583
97,763
2.49
+|- 0.32
49
143,229
+|- 28, 760
168,169
2.41
+|- 0.45
4
All Sizes
1,913
+|- 299
149
4.43
+|- 0.62
768
731
+|- 365
26
5.19
+I-0.76
205
positive revenue.
Total water system revenue includes revenue from water sales to residential and non-residential
customers and to other systems; fees; transfers from the government including municipal
government transfers from the general fund; and other sources including penalties and fines.
139
-------
Table 62
Total Water System Revenue for Systems Reporting Positive Revenue and Expenses
By Ownership
(Thousands of Dollars)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Private Systems
Ancillary Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Other Private Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
All Private Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
All Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
49
+I-27
18
22
6
+|-7
6
8
14
+|-6
11
33
12
+|-5
10
41
21
+|-9
11
63
Data: Q.21
101 -
500
58
+I-20
38
69
18
+|-6
16
9
36
+|- 10
27
46
33
+|-8
23
55
46
+I-77
28
124
Notes: Excludes systems that did
501 -
3,300
268
+I-97
146
167
189
+\-81
155
2
378
+|- 298
114
35
370
+|- 296
133
37
290
+I-99
138
204
3,301 -
10,000
889
+|- 141
758
78
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1,081
+|- 343
976
13
1,081
+|- 357
976
13
921
+|- 732
835
91
not report positive
10,001 -
50,000
3,146
+|- 510
2,173
115
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3,009
+|- 1,314
2,725
11
3,009
+|- 1,484
2,725
11
3,138
+|- 484
2,187
126
50,001 -
100,000
10,255
+|- 1,451
7,847
80
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1 1 ,742
+1-2,762
13,776
6
1 1 ,742
+|- 2,445
13,776
6
10,342
+|- 1,386
7,923
86
100,001-
500,000
27,951
+1-3,773
20,179
153
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
57,039
+|- 24,648
42,571
13
57,039
+1-24,777
42,571
13
31 ,303
+1-5,255
20,941
166
Over
500,000
144,747
+1-28,775
95,200
48
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
90,985
+|- 27,456
90,985
2
90,985
+|- 30, 760
90,985
2
142,663
+|- 27,054
95,200
50
All Sizes
1,800
+|- 222
139
732
20
+I-73
10
19
547
+|- 289
32
159
451
+|- 224
26
178
1,321
+|- 735
87
910
revenue or expenses.
140
-------
Table 63
Percentage of Systems with Each Type of Revenue Source
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Water Sales
Confidence Interval
Water-Related Operations
Confidence Interval
General Fund
Confidence Interval
Other Revenue Sources
Confidence Interval
Percentage of Systems Reporting No
Revenue
Confidence Interval
Observations
Private Systems
Water Sales
Confidence Interval
Water-Related Operations
Confidence Interval
Other Revenue Sources
Confidence Interval
Percentage of Systems Reporting No
Revenue
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
74.4
+|- 29.9
26.6
+|- 24.9
7.8
+|- 14.5
1.1
+|- 1.6
17.4
+|- 29.0
27
39.2
+|- 12.1
12.3
+|- 8.8
36.8
+|- 10.5
29.1
+|- 11.5
118
101 -
500
85.1
+I-9.7
45.6
+|- 14.3
9.4
+|- 8.5
6.0
+|- 6.8
12.9
+I-9.7
84
52.2
+|- 11.5
13.4
+|- 8.0
41.6
+|- 11.3
12.8
+|- 7.2
111
501 -
3,300
94.4
+|- 4.6
70.0
+|- 9.2
9.6
+I-5.7
10.1
+I-5.7
5.3
+|- 4.6
181
72.6
+|- 15.8
46.1
+|- 16.0
12.4
+|- 10.7
19.2
+|- 12.0
56
3,301 -
10,000
56.4
+|- 10.2
55.2
+|- 10.2
4.5
+I-3.7
18.9
+|- 7.8
39.6
+|- 10.1
127
56.0
+|- 20.8
47.7
+|- 210
35.7
+|- 79.2
41.5
+|- 20.8
27
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
74.9
+|- 7.6
67.3
+|- 8.3
6.3
+|- 3.6
29.9
+|- 8.2
23.7
+|- 7.4
156
54.3
+|- 25.5
54.3
+|- 25.5
24.1
+\-22.1
45.7
+|- 25.5
20
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
74.0
+|- 7.7
64.6
+I-8.7
20.8
+I-7.7
42.8
+|- 10.0
22.8
+|- 7.4
111
57.3
+|- 25.0
32.6
+|- 22.9
9.0
+|- 15.0
42.7
+|- 25.0
13
78.1
+\-4.1
73.0
+|- 4.5
15.0
+|- 3.5
48.1
+|- 5.4
20.4
+|- 4.0
204
79.0
+|- 13.8
44.1
+|- 23.4
47.5
+|- 24.2
21.0
+|- 13.8
21
Over
500,000
92.8
+I-4.7
83.0
+|- 10.1
22.8
+|- 10.1
55.3
+|- 9.8
5.4
+|- 3.6
52
75.6
+|- 23.9
24.4
+|- 23.9
63.4
+|- 30.9
24.4
+|- 23.9
6
All Sizes
82.3
+|- 3.9
59.1
+|- 6.0
8.7
+|- 3.0
13.8
+|- 3.3
15.7
+I-3.7
942
50.2
+|- 7.3
19.8
+I-6.7
34.8
+|- 6.6
22.0
+|- 6.0
372
(Continued)
141
-------
Table 63 (Cont.)
Percentage of Systems with Each Type of Revenue Source
By Ownership
Ownership Type
All Systems
Water Sales
Confidence Interval
Water-Related Operations
Confidence Interval
General Fund
Confidence Interval
Other Revenue Sources
Confidence Interval
Percentage of Systems Reporting No
Revenue
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
43.8
+|- 11.4
14.1
+|- 8.2
1.0
+|- 2.0
32.1
+|- 9.4
27.5
+|- 10.8
145
Data: Q.21
Notes: Systems have
101 -
500
64.8
+I-9.7
25.7
+|- 8.3
3.6
+|- 3.4
28.0
+|- 8.8
12.8
+|- 5.6
195
more thar
501 -
3,300
88.5
+|- 6.0
63.5
+I-8.-7
7.0
+I-3.7
10.8
+|- 5.3
9.1
+|- 5.2
237
i one type (
3,301 -
10,000
56.3
+I-9.7
53.6
+|- 9.2
3.6
+|- 2.5
22.4
+|- 7.4
40.0
+|- 9.0
154
jf revenue
10,001 -
50,000
73.2
+|- 7.3
66.2
+|- 7.9
5.8
+|- 3.3
29.4
+|- 7.8
25.5
+I-7.7
176
50,001 -
100,000
72.4
+|- 7.5
61.5
+|- 8.5
18.8
+|- 6.4
39.5
+|- 9.5
24.7
+|- 7.2
124
100,001-
500,000
78.2
+|- 4.0
69.5
+|- 5.4
13.2
+I-3.7
48.0
+|- 5.6
20.5
+|- 3.9
225
therefore column totals do not eqi
Over
500,000
90.5
+|- 4.5
75.2
+|- 11.0
19.8
+|- 9.2
56.4
+I-9.7
7.9
+|- 4.2
58
al 100.
All Sizes
66.5
+|- 4.4
39.7
+|- 4.4
4.4
+|- 1.6
24.2
+|- 3.9
18.8
+|- 3.5
1314
Water Sales includes revenue from the sale of water to residential and non-residential customers.
Water Related Operations includes revenue from connection and development fees, transfers from
the general fund of municipal governments, and other related fees (fines and penalties, for
example.)
General Fund includes transfers from municipal government general funds to publicly owned
systems.
Other is all other sources of water-related revenue, including fines, penalties, and other fees.
142
-------
Table 64
Percentage of System Revenue Received from Each Revenue Source For Systems Reporting Positive Revenue
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Water Sales
Confidence Interval
Water-Related Operations
Confidence Interval
General Fund
Confidence Interval
Other Revenue Sources
Confidence Interval
Observations
Private Systems
Water Sales
Confidence Interval
Water-Related Operations
Confidence Interval
Other Revenue Sources
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
86.3
+|- 17.3
3.5
+|- 4.5
9.4
+|- 17.3
0.9
+|- 1.6
24
45.2
+|- 12.2
3.7
+|- 3.6
51.2
+|- 13.3
86
101 -
500
86.1
+|- 7.9
6.0
+|- 3.9
5.2
+|- 5.4
2.7
+|- 4.6
73
52.7
+|- 12.2
1.0
+|- 0.6
46.3
+|- 12.4
96
501 -
3,300
86.7
+|- 3.6
7.9
+|- 2.4
2.6
+|- 1.6
2.8
+|- 2.3
173
84.9
+|- 11.4
4.5
+|- 2.5
10.6
+|- 11.8
44
3,301 -
10,000
82.3
+|- 6.9
12.4
+|- 5.6
3.2
+|- 4.3
2.2
+|- 1.3
81
84.5
+|- 9.8
4.5
+I-2.7
11.0
+|- 9.8
18
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
82.6
+|- 3.8
13.9
+|- 3.4
1.2
+|- 0.8
2.4
+|- 1.2
119
85.7
+|- 8.8
11.0
+I-8.-7
3.3
+|- 4.5
11
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
77.7
+|- 4.5
11.3
+|- 2.9
5.7
+|- 3.3
5.4
+|- 2.0
86
94.9
+|- 5.0
5.1
+|- 5.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
8
78.4
+|- 2.5
15.0
+|- 2.0
1.2
+|- 0.5
5.4
+|- 1.5
162
97.3
+|- 2.2
1.8
+|- 1.6
0.9
+|- 0.6
15
Over
500,000
79.8
+|- 3.6
12.5
+|- 2.9
1.8
+|- 1.0
5.9
+\-2.1
49
98.7
+|- 1.5
0.2
+|- 0.3
1.0
+|- 1.2
4
All Sizes
85.2
+|- 2.8
8.5
+|- 1.7
3.6
+|- 1.9
2.7
+|- 1.5
767
56.3
+|- 7.4
2.7
+|- 1.5
41.0
+|- 7.8
282
(Continued)
143
-------
Table 64 (Cont.)
Percentage of System Revenue Received from Each Revenue Source For Systems Reporting Positive Revenue
By Ownership
Ownership Type
All Systems
Water Sales
Confidence Interval
Water-Related Operations
Confidence Interval
General Fund
Confidence Interval
Other Revenue Sources
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
51.3
+|- 11.2
3.6
+|- 3.2
1.4
+I-2.7
43.6
+|- 11.9
110
Data: Q.21
Notes: Systems have
101 -
500
65.5
+|- 9.2
2.9
+|- 1.6
2.0
+|- 2.2
29.6
+|- 9.5
169
501 -
3,300
86.2
+|- 4.0
7.1
+I-2.7
2.0
+|- 1.3
4.7
+|- 3.6
217
3,301 -
10,000
82.7
+|- 5.9
10.8
+|- 4.6
2.5
+|- 3.5
4.0
+|- 2.2
99
more than one type of revenue,
10,001 -
50,000
82.8
+|- 3.6
13.7
+|- 3.3
1.1
+I-0.7
2.4
+\-1.1
130
50,001 -
100,000
78.9
+|- 4.3
10.9
+I-2.7
5.2
+|- 3.0
5.0
+|- 1.9
94
100,001- Over
500,000 500,000
80.7
+|- 2.6
13.4
+|- 2.0
1.0
+|- 0.5
4.8
+|- 1.3
177
therefore column totals do not equal
81.9
+I-3.7
11.2
+|- 2.8
1.6
+|- 0.9
5.4
+|- 2.0
53
100.
All Sizes
71.5
+\-4.1
5.8
+\-1.1
1.9
+|- 1.0
20.9
+|- 4.2
1049
Water Sales includes revenue from the sale of water to residential and non-residential customers.
Water Related Operations includes revenue from connection and development fees, transfers from
the general fund of municipal governments, and other related fees (fines and penalties, for
example.)
General Fund includes transfers from municipal government general funds to publicly owned
systems.
Other is all other sources of water-related revenue, including fines, penalties, and other fees.
144
-------
Table 65
Average Revenue of Community Water Systems Serving 10,000 or Fewer Reporting Positive Revenue
By Ownership and Type of Revenue Source
Population Served
Water Revenue
Water Sales
Revenue
Water Related Revenue
General Fund
Transfers
Other Water
Related
Revenue
Total Water
Related
Revenue
Total Water
Revenue
Non-water
Revenue
Municipal
Non -water
System
Revenue (Net of
Transfers to
Water System)
Total
Revenue,
Including
Municipal
Government
Revenue
Public Systems
Mean Revenue
25-100
101-500
Subtotal, 25-500
501-3,300
3,301-10,000
Subtotal, 25-10,000
26,962
42,398
39,575
233,998
783,150
230,244
63,702
84,995
81 ,246
89,416
179,361
94,61 1
1,916
9,966
8,917
39,305
133,986
47,346
15,964
27,437
25,577
50,779
144,298
59,943
31,180
57,132
51 ,997
271 ,632
890,168
276,020
25,495
44,046
43,249
137,623
64,975
96,268
385,927
213,651
240,486
993,251
5,349,726
1,571,303
186,474
164,078
168,291
908,21 1
3,914,971
1,171,867
Observations
25-100
101-500
Subtotal, 25-500
501-3,300
3,301-10,000
Subtotal, 25-10,000
20
72
92
171
77
340
2
7
9
20
11
40
11
45
56
132
74
262
13
46
59
135
76
270
21
72
93
172
84
349
2
3
5
20
26
51
7
38
45
107
70
222
22
75
97
173
117
387
(Continued)
145
-------
Table 65 (Cont.)
Average Revenue of Community Water Systems Serving 10,000 or Fewer Reporting Positive Revenue
By Ownership and Type of Revenue Source
Population Served
Water Revenue
Water Sales
Revenue
Water Related Revenue
General Fund
Transfers
Other Water
Related
Revenue
Total Water
Related
Revenue
Total Water
Revenue
Non-water
Revenue
Municipal
Non-water
System
Revenue (Net of
Transfers to
Water System)
Total
Revenue,
Including
Municipal
Government
Revenue
Private Systems
Mean Revenue
25-100
101-500
Subtotal, 25-500
501-3,300
3,301-10,000
Subtotal, 25-10,000
10,613
31 ,743
22,385
338,117
1 ,020,381
136,609
3,536
4,366
3,958
28,753
74,548
20,514
3,536
4,366
3,958
30,079
80,602
21 ,023
11,719
32,455
23,393
357,235
1,088,984
143,447
211,715
580,569
402,364
3,685,785
6,014,066
773,652
116,343
292,685
21 1 ,801
791 ,382
4,577,333
431,109
Observations
25-100
101-500
Subtotal, 25-500
501-3,300
3,301-10,000
Subtotal, 25-10,000
48
62
110
40
16
166
13
21
34
25
17
76
13
21
34
24
14
72
48
63
111
40
16
167
43
41
84
5
12
101
86
97
183
44
18
245
(Continued)
146
-------
Table 65 (Cont.)
Average Revenue of Community Water Systems Serving 10,000 or Fewer Reporting Positive Revenue
By Ownership and Type of Revenue Source
Population Served
Water Revenue
Water Sales
Revenue
Water Related Revenue
General Fund
Transfers
Other Water
Related
Revenue
Total Water
Related
Revenue
Total Water
Revenue
Non-water
Revenue
Municipal
Non -water
System
Revenue (Net of
Transfers to
Water System)
Total
Revenue,
Including
Municipal
Government
Revenue
All Systems
Mean Revenue
25-100
101-500
Subtotal, 25-500
501-3,300
3,301-10,000
Subtotal, 25-10,000
14,254
37,117
29,427
257,359
832,171
191,953
63,702
84,995
81 ,246
89,416
179,361
94,61 1
3,136
8,174
6,704
37,146
122,293
39,729
7,245
20,067
16,141
46,745
132,816
49,275
16,390
44,755
35,147
290,787
927,074
222,291
210,909
536,067
385,638
1,113,768
1 ,986,360
639,251
385,927
213,651
240,486
993,251
5,349,726
1,571,303
126,840
242,323
198,735
880,052
4,010,351
804,636
Observations
25-100
101-500
Subtotal, 25-500
501-3,300
3,301-10,000
Subtotal, 25-10,000
68
134
202
211
93
506
2
7
9
20
11
40
24
66
90
157
91
338
26
67
93
159
90
342
69
135
204
212
100
516
45
44
89
25
38
152
7
38
45
107
70
222
108
172
280
217
135
632
Data:
Note:
Q. 21
Total revenue is not derived from the simple addition of all the subcategories of revenue. Rather, it is the weighted average
of the revenue with the weights dependent on the likelihood that the average system will have access to a particular
revenue subcategory.
147
-------
Table 66
Average Water Sales Revenue Profile:
Percentage of Revenue from Each Customer Category
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Residential
Confidence Interval
Non-Residential
Confidence Interval
Wholesale
Confidence Interval
Observations
Private Systems
Residential
Confidence Interval
Non-Residential
Confidence Interval
Wholesale
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
Residential
Confidence Interval
Non-Residential
Confidence Interval
Wholesale
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
93.8
+|- 8.8
6.2
+|- 8.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
27
96.6
+I-5.8
0.5
+|- 0.6
2.9
+I-5.8
118
96.0
+|- 5.0
1.8
+|- 2. 1
2.3
+|- 4.5
145
Data: Q.21
101 -
500
93.3
+|- 5. 1
6.4
+|- 5. 1
0.3
+|- 0.5
84
99.5
+|- 0.6
0.3
+|- 0.3
0.3
+|- 0.5
111
96.4
+|- 2.6
3.4
+|- 2.6
0.3
+|- 0.4
195
501 -
3,300
86.1
+I-4.7
12.8
+I-4.7
1.0
+|- 0.9
181
93.5
+|- 7.0
6.4
+|- 6.9
0.2
+|- 0.3
56
87.8
+|- 4.0
11.4
+|- 4.0
0.8
+I-0.7
237
3,301 -
10,000
69.9
+|- 9.0
19.3
+|- 6.5
10.8
+I-7.7
127
87.6
+|- 8.9
7.3
+|- 5.4
5.0
+|- 7.3
27
73.5
+I-7.7
16.9
+|- 5.5
9.6
+|- 6.3
154
10,001 -
50,000
73.3
+|- 4.6
20.7
+I-3.7
6.1
+|- 3.0
156
79.0
+|- -75.3
2.7
+|- 2.2
18.3
+\-14.1
20
73.6
+|- 4.4
19.6
+|- 3.6
6.8
+|- 2.9
176
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
69.5
+|- 5.0
18.7
+|- 3.0
11.8
+|- 4.9
111
56.9
+I-213
18.2
+|- 12.8
24.9
+I-25.7
13
68.6
+|- 5.0
18.6
+|- 2.9
12.8
+|- 4.9
124
58.3
+|- 2.9
27.0
+|- 2.0
14.7
+|- 2.9
204
65.0
+I-4.8
30.8
+|- 3. 1
4.2
+|- 3.0
21
59.1
+I-2.7
27.5
+|- 18
13.4
+I-2.7
225
Over
500,000
48.2
+|- 6. 1
23.4
+|- 3.3
28.4
+|- 7.0
52
61.6
+|- 2.9
34.8
+|- 3.3
3.6
+|- 0.5
6
49.7
+|- 5.5
24.7
+|- 3. 1
25.7
+|- 6.6
58
All Sizes
84.3
+|- 2.9
12.8
+I-2.7
2.9
+|- 1.0
942
96.2
+|- 2.5
2.2
+|- 1.6
1.6
+|- 1.9
372
88.8
+|- 2.0
8.8
+|- 18
2.4
+|- 0.9
1,314
Notes: Column totals may not equal 100 due to rounding.
148
-------
Table 67
Water System Revenue from All Sources per Thousand Gallons Delivered
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Private Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
All Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
9.04
+\-7.71
4.62
24
2.05
+I-0.77
0.00
95
2.91
+|- 128
0.99
119
101 -
500
4.04
+|- 1.18
3.42
78
2.81
+|- 0.92
1.19
95
3.30
+I-0.74
2.50
173
501 -
3,300
4.04
+|- 0.55
3.08
168
5.13
+|- 182
4.69
52
4.34
+|- 0.63
3.58
220
Data: Q.21
Notes: Includes wholesale deliveries and
3,301 -
10,000
3.46
+|- 0.57
3.37
74
5.48
+|- 2.46
4.70
15
3.89
+I-0.72
3.43
89
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
3.18
+|- 0.37
2.93
111
5.17
+|- 128
5.60
11
3.31
+|- 0.38
3.10
122
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
3.91
+|- 108
2.97
77
3.20
+1-0.78
3.48
7
3.86
+|- 100
3.00
84
3.41
+|- 0.69
2.47
158
3.64
+|- 0.94
3.69
15
3.44
+|- 0.62
2.58
173
Over
500,000
2.39
+|- 0.35
2.24
47
2.41
+|- 0.45
2.07
4
2.39
+|- 0.32
2.19
51
All Sizes
4.15
+|- 0.60
3.30
737
2.99
+|- 0.59
1.64
294
3.57
+|- 0.43
2.84
1,031
unaccounted for water.
149
-------
Table 68
Water System Revenue from Water Sales per Thousand Gallons Delivered
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Private Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
All Systems
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
4.31
+|- 1.65
3.74
24
1.85
+|- 0.69
0.00
95
2.15
+|- 0.66
0.84
119
Data: Q.21
Notes:
101 -
500
3.19
+|- 0.66
2.97
78
2.70
+|- 0.91
1.19
95
2.90
+|- 0.60
2.36
173
501 -
3,300
3.40
+|- 0.44
2.91
168
4.91
+|- 182
4.63
52
3.81
+|- 0.59
3.14
220
3,301 -
10,000
2.81
+|- 0.50
2.63
74
5.10
+|- 2.33
4.24
15
3.29
+|- 0.68
3.04
89
10,001 -
50,000
2.61
+|- 0.37
2.59
111
4.43
+|- 1.16
4.38
11
2.73
+|- 0.32
2.69
122
50,001 -
100,000
3.26
+|- 0.97
2.51
77
3.03
+I-0.77
3.11
7
3.24
+|- 0.90
2.52
84
100,001-
500,000
2.62
+|- 0.54
2.01
158
3.54
+|- 0.97
3.59
15
2.73
+|- 0.51
2.22
173
Over
500,000
2.03
+|- 0.25
1.99
47
2.41
+|- 0.45
2.07
4
2.07
+|- 0.23
2.02
51
All Sizes
3.23
+|- 0.29
2.83
737
2.82
+|- 0.57
1.34
294
3.03
+|- 0.31
2.52
1,031
150
-------
Table 69
Water System Revenue from Water Sales per Thousand Gallons Delivered
By Ownership and Customer Class
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Residential
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Non-Residential
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Wholesale
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Private Systems
Residential
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Non-Residential
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Wholesale
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
4.90
+|- 2. 10
4.30
24
2.95
+|- 158
2.18
6
*
*
*
1.95
+I-0.72
0.00
91
1.15
+I-2.48
0.00
6
0.50
+I-0.74
0.00
2
101 -
500
3.63
+I-0.72
3.27
78
4.40
+|- 127
4.49
21
0.00
+I-0.00
0.00
1
2.92
+I-0.97
1.33
95
7.88
+|- 8.98
2.00
8
*
*
*
501 -
3,300
4.04
+I-0.58
3.26
168
4.42
+|- 174
3.34
73
2.01
+I-0.93
1.75
13
5.41
+I-2.07
5.12
51
3.22
+I-2.06
5.38
15
3.71
+I-4.46
6.49
2
3,301 -
10,000
3.64
+I-0.77
3.11
68
3.12
+I-0.73
2.73
57
1.62
+I-0.65
1.44
26
6.22
+I-3.03
4.83
14
4.86
+I-2.83
2.91
11
4.11
+I-0.42
3.84
3
10,001 -
50,000
3.35
+I-0.39
3.18
105
2.90
+I-0.44
2.52
86
2.09
+I-0.58
2.08
43
5.67
+|- 150
5.63
11
3.60
+|- 133
3.91
8
3.35
+|- 180
3.01
8
50,001 -
100,000
4.15
+|- 1 13
3.04
70
3.02
+I-0.74
2.69
61
2.40
+I-0.93
1.87
43
6.23
+|- 175
6.25
5
3.20
+|- 1.71
4.02
5
2.11
+I-0.88
2.77
4
100,001-
500,000
2.78
+|- 0. 17
2.66
138
2.67
+I-0.28
2.11
126
1.66
+|- 0. 15
1.53
104
6.00
+|- 187
5.30
15
4.34
+|- 124
4.66
15
2.67
+I-0.80
2.91
12
Over
500,000
2.68
+I-0.37
2.53
38
2.76
+I-0.54
2.53
36
1.99
+|- 0.26
1.71
41
3.00
+|- 0.49
2.65
4
2.87
+I-0.86
2.20
4
1.68
+|- 0.22
1.55
4
All Sizes
3.85
+I-0.36
3.25
689
3.80
+I-0.87
3.00
466
1.83
0.37
1.59
271
3.09
+|- 0.62
1.64
286
3.99
+|- 2.00
2.60
72
1.95
+|- 124
1.07
35
(Continued)
151
-------
Table 69 (Cont.)
Water System Revenue from Water Sales per Thousand Gallons Delivered
By Ownership and Customer Class
Ownership Type
All Systems
Residential
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Non-Residential
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
Wholesale
Mean
Confidence Interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
2.33
+I-0.72
0.99
115
1.68
+I-2.09
0.00
12
0.50
+I-0.74
0.00
2
Q26 Q.21
Notes:
101 -
500
3.20
+I-0.65
2.48
173
5.05
+I-2.07
4.49
29
0.00
+|- 0.00
0.00
1
501 -
3,300
4.42
+I-0.70
3.51
219
4.21
+|- 148
3.44
88
2.09
+|- 0.90
1.75
15
3,301 -
10,000
4.22
+I-0.96
3.59
82
3.46
+I-0.86
2.82
68
1.86
+|- 0.67
1.53
29
10,001 -
50,000
3.51
+\-0.41
3.22
116
2.93
+|- 0.42
2.64
94
2.22
+|- 0.56
2.08
51
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
4.27
+|- 107
3.10
75
3.03
+|- 0.69
2.69
66
2.38
+I-0.87
1.93
47
3.19
+|- 0.46
2.89
153
2.90
+|- 0.36
2.22
141
1.80
+|- 0.23
1.74
116
Over
500,000
2.72
+|- 0.33
2.65
42
2.78
+|- 0.48
2.53
40
1.95
+|- 0.23
1.55
45
All Sizes
3.48
+|- 0.36
2.89
975
3.84
+I-0.75
2.91
538
1.85
+|- 0.37
1.52
306
152
-------
Table 70
Annual Residential Revenue per Connection
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean Residential Revenues per Connection
Confidence interval
Median Residential Revenues per Connection
Observations
Private Systems
Ancillary Systems
Mean Residential Revenues per Connection
Confidence interval
Median Residential Revenues per Connection
Observations
Other Private Systems
Mean Residential Revenues per Connection
Confidence interval
Median Residential Revenues per Connection
Observations
All Private Systems
Mean Residential Revenues per Connection
Confidence interval
Median Residential Revenues per Connection
Observations
All Systems
Mean Residential Revenues per Connection
Confidence interval
Median Residential Revenues per Connection
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
470
+|- 287
309
22
196
+I-48
180
6
408
+|- 105
415
38
361
+\-91
312
44
388
+|- 126
312
66
Data: Q.21
101 -
500
314
+I-60
274
72
352
+|- 164
313
11
429
+\-119
313
49
413
+|- 102
313
60
363
+I-59
291
132
Notes: Excludes systems that did
501 -
3,300
445
+|- 244
283
169
727
+I-65
700
2
592
+|- 245
397
38
596
+|- 242
397
40
479
+|- 197
304
209
not report
3,301 -
10,000
320
+I-54
264
63
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
480
+|- 727
423
13
480
+|- 724
423
13
358
+I-56
340
76
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
290
+I-28
259
98
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
390
+\-112
366
11
390
+\-116
366
11
297
+I-29
269
109
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
352
+I-40
308
66
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
483
+|- 141
469
6
483
+|- 138
469
6
362
+I-39
330
72
500,000
343
+I-20
302
137
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
401
+I-53
432
15
401
+I-53
432
15
351
+I-20
328
152
Over
500,000
349
+I-30
334
38
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
291
+I-48
251
4
291
+I-50
251
4
341
+I-28
305
42
All Sizes
383
+\-117
278
665
305
+|- 101
283
19
467
+I-84
365
174
441
+I-74
342
193
405
+I-79
298
858
positive revenue.
153
-------
Table 71
Percentage of Systems with Each Residential Rate Structure and Billing Profile
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Metered Charges
Uniform Rate
Declining Block Rate
Increasing Block Rate
Seasonal Rate
Unmetered Charges
Separate Flat Fee for Water
Annual Connection Fee
Combined Flat Fee for Water and Other
Services
Other billing methods
Observations
Private Systems
Metered Charges
Uniform Rate
Declining Block Rate
Increasing Block Rate
Seasonal Rate
Unmetered Charges
Separate Flat Fee for Water
Annual Connection Fee
Combined Flat Fee for Water and Other
Services
Other billing methods
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
41.2
7.8
16.0
0.0
8.9
0.0
17.0
0.7
27
15.1
0.0
8.7
0.0
12.9
0.0
34.8
15.2
118
101 -
500
46.3
9.7
14.7
2.0
26.7
0.0
2.3
6.2
84
27.3
5.0
9.6
0.0
18.1
1.3
37.3
1.6
111
501 -
3,300
54.5
20.6
13.6
0.0
18.8
0.0
0.0
6.5
181
48.0
15.6
14.0
0.0
12.0
0.0
1.8
11.1
56
3,301 -
10,000
35.6
16.1
10.9
0.0
19.7
3.9
3.0
2.3
127
50.7
2.6
24.9
0.0
7.9
5.0
0.0
0.0
27
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
38.7
16.2
25.7
0.0
19.5
6.7
5.1
2.6
155
55.2
18.5
2.1
0.0
19.4
4.8
0.0
12.9
19
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
30.9
6.1
34.5
3.0
10.0
3.6
2.6
1.8
111
29.2
7.9
7.9
0.0
25.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
13
27.3
17.8
31.1
4.8
21.7
2.8
2.4
8.9
204
33.1
56.5
0.0
3.4
3.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
21
Over
500,000
35.1
17.2
27.5
7.5
18.4
7.5
1.9
16.5
52
51.2
63.4
12.2
0.0
24.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
6
All Sizes
46.0
15.7
15.9
0.6
20.2
1.5
2.7
5.0
941
26.6
4.8
10.4
0.0
14.7
0.7
28.9
8.6
371
(Continued)
154
-------
Table 71 (Cont.)
Percentage of Systems with Each Residential Rate Structure and Billing Profile
By Ownership
Ownership Type
All Systems
Metered Charges
Uniform Rate
Declining Block Rate
Increasing Block Rate
Seasonal Rate
Unmetered Charges
Separate Flat Fee for Water
Annual Connection Fee
Combined Flat Fee for Water and Other
Services
Other billing methods
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
18.5
1.0
9.7
0.0
12.4
0.0
32.5
13.3
145
Data: Q.22
Notes: These rate str
101 -
500
34.6
6.8
11.6
0.8
21.4
0.8
23.9
3.4
195
uctures on
501 -
3,300
52.7
19.2
13.7
0.0
17.0
0.0
0.5
7.7
237
y apply to
3,301 -
10,000
38.7
13.3
13.8
0.0
17.2
4.2
2.4
1.8
154
residential
10,001 -
50,000
40.0
16.4
23.9
0.0
19.5
6.6
4.7
3.3
174
customers.
50,001 -
100,000
30.8
6.2
31.9
2.7
11.5
3.3
2.4
1.6
124
100,001-
500,000
28.0
22.4
27.3
4.7
19.5
2.5
2.1
7.8
225
Over
500,000
37.3
23.3
25.5
6.5
19.2
6.5
1.6
14.3
58
All Sizes
36.4
10.3
13.2
0.3
17.4
1.1
15.7
6.8
1,312
Column totals may be greater than or less than 100.
155
-------
Table 72
Percentage of Systems with Each Non-residential Rate Structure and Billing Profile
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Metered Charges
Uniform Rate
Declining Block Rate
Increasing Block Rate
Seasonal Rate
Unmetered Charges
Separate Flat Fee for Water
Annual Connection Fee
Combined Flat Fee for Water and Other
Services
Other billing methods
Observations
Private Systems
Metered Charges
Uniform Rate
Declining Block Rate
Increasing Block Rate
Seasonal Rate
Unmetered Charges
Separate Flat Fee for Water
Annual Connection Fee
Combined Flat Fee for Water and Other
Services
Other billing methods
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
24.0
7.8
8.0
0.0
16.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
27
1.4
0.0
0.1
0.0
3.9
0.0
2.5
3.9
118
101 -
500
29.3
6.4
8.3
2.0
17.5
0.0
2.2
4.3
84
5.1
2.5
1.4
0.0
5.5
0.0
5.1
0.1
111
501 -
3,300
45.3
17.2
9.9
0.0
14.3
0.0
0.0
5.2
181
29.8
2.8
7.3
0.0
4.9
0.0
0.0
4.7
56
3,301 -
10,000
30.0
15.9
8.3
0.0
15.1
4.3
4.0
2.0
127
40.6
5.9
16.5
0.0
12.9
2.6
0.0
0.0
27
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
37.7
18.0
20.0
0.0
21.9
6.7
6.1
4.0
155
27.8
20.2
2.1
0.0
7.0
4.8
0.0
0.0
19
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
41.6
7.3
25.7
3.0
9.0
2.6
1.7
1.9
111
30.3
15.8
11.3
0.0
17.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
13
33.4
20.6
24.8
5.3
19.0
5.1
2.4
4.8
204
17.3
72.2
0.0
3.4
6.8
0.0
0.0
3.4
21
Over
500,000
44.3
22.7
14.7
11.2
16.6
11.2
1.8
7.3
52
63.4
63.4
0.0
0.0
24.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
6
All Sizes
36.8
13.8
11.0
0.7
16.2
1.6
1.9
4.0
941
9.0
2.1
2.4
0.0
5.1
0.1
3.0
2.4
371
(Continued)
156
-------
Table 72 (Cont.)
Percentage of Systems with Each Non-residential Rate Structure and Billing Profile
By Ownership
Ownership Type
All Systems
Metered Charges
Uniform Rate
Declining Block Rate
Increasing Block Rate
Seasonal Rate
Unmetered Charges
Separate Flat Fee for Water
Annual Connection Fee
Combined Flat Fee for Water and Other
Services
Other billing methods
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
4.4
1.0
1.1
0.0
5.6
0.0
2.2
3.4
145
Data: Q.22
Notes: These rate str
101 -
500
14.4
4.0
4.1
0.8
10.1
0.0
4.0
1.8
195
uctures on
501 -
3,300
41.1
13.3
9.2
0.0
11.7
0.0
0.0
5.1
237
y apply to
3,301 -
10,000
32.2
13.9
10.0
0.0
14.6
3.9
3.2
1.6
154
10,001 -
50,000
37.0
18.1
18.7
0.0
20.8
6.6
5.7
3.7
174
50,001 -
100,000
40.5
8.1
24.3
2.7
9.9
2.4
1.5
1.7
124
100,001-
500,000
31.4
26.8
21.8
5.1
17.6
4.5
2.1
4.6
225
Over
500,000
46.8
28.1
12.7
9.7
17.7
9.7
1.5
6.3
58
All Sizes
23.1
8.0
6.7
0.3
10.7
0.9
2.5
3.2
1,312
non-residential customers.
Column totals may be greater than or less than 100.
157
-------
Table 73
Percentage of Systems with Programs to Lower the Cost of Drinking Water for Low-income Households
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Percentage of systems with a program
Average number of households that qualify
Of the systems with a program, the
percentage that use the following eligibility
requirements
Income
Age, Disability, and/or Income
Other
Observations
Private Systems
Percentage of systems with a program
Average number of households that qualify
Of the systems with a program, the
percentage that use the following eligibility
requirements
Income
Age, Disability, and/or Income
Other
Observations
All Systems
Percentage of systems with a program
Average number of households that qualify
Of the systems with a program, the
percentage that use the following eligibility
requirements
Income
Age, Disability, and/or Income
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
17.0
24
100.0
0.0
0.0
27
5.2
2
33.0
33.0
33.9
118
6.8
11
59.7
19.9
20.4
145
Data: Q.23
Notes:
101 -
500
0.4
7
0.0
58.9
41.1
84
0.0
*
*
*
*
111
0.1
7
0.0
58.9
41.1
195
501 -
3,300
1.3
12
9.6
90.4
0.0
181
2.5
20
0.0
0.0
100.0
56
1.6
14
5.9
55.9
38.1
237
3,301 -
10,000
5.8
71
26.8
73.2
0.0
117
0.0
*
*
*
*
26
4.5
71
26.8
73.2
0.0
143
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
8.6
261
42.5
57.5
0.0
151
12.9
0
*
*
*
19
8.9
231
42.5
57.5
0.0
170
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
15.8
422
34.0
46.0
20.0
107
9.8
100
100.0
0.0
0.0
12
15.2
402
40.7
41.3
18.0
119
500,000
18.9
370
37.6
55.7
6.7
196
42.0
1,024
100.0
0.0
0.0
21
21.8
495
63.4
32.7
4.0
217
Over
500,000
16.9
4,168
50.0
50.0
0.0
51
24.4
0
100.0
0.0
0.0
6
17.9
3,842
60.2
39.8
0.0
57
All Sizes
4.2
247
48.6
49.3
2.1
914
2.8
57
31.8
25.9
42.3
369
3.5
185
42.8
41.2
16.1
1,283
158
-------
Table 74
Characteristics of Water Systems Serving Less than 100,000 with a Seasonal Population
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Percentage of systems that serve a residential population
that changes on a seasonal basis
Average daily flow during the peak season (millions of
gallons per day)
Year-Round Average daily flow (millions of gallons per day)
Average duration of peak season (days)
Observations
Private Systems
Percentage of systems that serve a residential population
that changes on a seasonal basis
Average daily flow during the peak season (millions of
gallons per day)
Year-Round Average daily flow (millions of gallons per day)
Average duration of peak season (days)
Observations
All Systems
Percentage of systems that serve a residential population
that changes on a seasonal basis
Average daily flow during the peak season (millions of
gallons per day)
Year-Round Average daily flow (millions of gallons per day)
Average duration of peak season (days)
Observations
System Service Population Category
100 101 -
or Less 500
0.0 0.0
.
* *
.
0 1
0.0
* *
.
* *
0.0 1
0.0 0.0
.
* *
.
0 2
Data: Q.24
Notes:
501 - 3,301 -
3,300 10,000
0.0 8.6
1.3
0.8
87.5
10 139
0.0 26.0
1.0
0.4
121.6
1 47
0.0 12.3
1.1
0.6
102.9
11 186
10,001 -
50,000
10.5
3.6
2.9
90.9
212
2.2
7.0
5.6
60.0
18
9.9
3.6
3.0
90.4
230
50,001 -
100,000
7.8
12.2
9.5
96.8
120
0.0
19.3
17.0
90.0
10
7.1
12.2
9.5
96.8
130
All Sizes
<100,001
8.6
3.1
2.4
89.7
482
19.8
1.1
0.5
120.2
77
10.2
2.6
1.9
97.9
559
159
-------
Table 75
Total Expenses
By Primary Water Source
(Thousands of Dollars)
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
All Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
10
+|-4
3
88
167
+|- 252
43
49
16
+I-77
7
8
15
+|-8
4
145
Data: Q.26
101 -
500
43
+I-23
18
105
238
+|- 191
85
67
43
+I-20
32
23
50
+\-21
20
195
501 -
3,300
168
+I-43
104
111
469
+|- 154
246
78
330
+|- 165
166
48
236
+I-54
132
237
Notes: Systems reporting zero expenses are
3,301 -
10,000
598
+|- 215
321
62
1,353
+|- 460
766
65
755
+|- 182
798
27
778
+|- 156
522
154
included
10,001 -
50,000
2,674
+|- 812
1,273
65
3,125
+|- 689
2,547
82
3,380
+|- -7,265
2,074
25
2,944
+|- 531
1,636
172
50,001 -
100,000
7,379
+|- 2,121
7,304
40
9,225
+\-2,118
7,597
54
9,779
+|- 2,252
9,261
30
8,689
+|- 7,259
8,029
124
100,001-
500,000
23,182
+1-7,799
10,669
56
33,857
+|- 8,695
20,371
124
39,788
+\-7,147
27,702
45
32,447
+|- 5,398
20,371
225
Over
500,000
99,861
+|- 78,307
0
6
184,151
+|- 46, 705
120,700
39
153,373
+|- 76,677
81 ,991
13
165,944
+1-38,489
108,484
58
All Sizes
382
+I-65
17
533
6,321
+|- 1, 161
416
558
1,535
+|- 375
91
219
1,110
+|- 116
26
1,310
in this analysis.
160
-------
Table 76
Total Expenses per Thousand Gallons Delivered
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
All Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
4.52
+|- 1.81
2.25
69
8.98
+I-2.87
7.35
38
3.80
+|- 1.71
3.85
8
4.61
+|- 1.61
2.55
115
Data: Q.26, Q.21
Notes:
101 -
500
3.44
+I-0.79
2.62
93
7.16
+|- 170
5.45
55
4.86
+|- 148
5.15
19
3.76
+I-0.70
2.76
167
501 -
3,300
3.81
+|- 0.95
2.55
103
6.26
+|- 1.31
4.39
71
5.59
+|- 1.12
4.67
45
4.48
+|- 0.69
3.15
219
3,301 -
10,000
2.92
+I-0.89
2.97
32
5.59
+|- 1.41
4.13
37
4.64
+|- 142
4.02
18
3.94
+\-0.71
3.36
87
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
3.39
+|- 0.92
2.65
46
4.08
+\-0.81
3.11
58
3.70
+|- 126
3.24
19
3.64
+|- 0.59
2.75
123
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
3.72
+|- 1.17
4.17
23
4.39
+|- 173
2.74
41
3.30
+|- 128
2.66
22
3.89
+1-0.88
2.77
86
3.06
+1-0.88
2.52
37
3.69
+|- 0.45
3.16
100
4.23
+|- 0.56
3.54
35
3.66
+|- 0.34
3.12
172
Over
500,000
1.33
+|- 134
0.00
4
3.16
+|- 0.38
2.76
37
3.75
+|- 174
3.05
11
3.10
+|- 0.53
2.69
52
All Sizes
3.80
+|- 0.62
2.53
407
5.79
+|- 0.59
4.37
437
4.95
+I-0.70
4.40
177
4.18
+|- 0.48
2.93
1,021
161
-------
Table 77
Total Expenses
By Ownership
(Thousands of Dollars)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Private Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
64
+I-62
15
27
7
+|-3
3
118
Data: Q.26
101 -
500
74
+\-41
35
84
36
+I-23
10
111
Notes: Systems reporting zero
501 -
3,300
262
+I-73
144
181
165
+I-65
85
56
expenses are
3,301 -
10,000
799
+|- 177
571
127
696
+|- 340
474
27
included
10,001 -
50,000
2,997
+|- 558
1,659
153
2,283
+|- 7,580
1,395
19
50,001 -
100,000
9,134
+|- 7,330
8,029
111
4,518
+1-3,797
0
13
100,001-
500,000
30,612
+|- 3,656
19,727
204
16,738
+|- 5,278
20,548
18
Over
500,000
187,589
+1-47,777
120,700
52
24,563
+1-24,576
0
6
All Sizes
1,976
+|- 249
115
939
144
+I-39
8
368
in this analysis.
162
-------
Table 78
Total Expenses per Thousand Gallons Delivered
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Private Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
8.31
+I-7.75
3.85
22
4.08
+|- 140
2.40
93
Data: Q.26, Q.21
Notes:
101 -
500
4.78
+|- 134
3.19
77
3.04
+|- 0.65
2.62
90
501 -
3,300
4.89
+|- 0.95
3.28
168
3.40
+I-0.80
2.93
51
3,301 -
10,000
4.05
+I-0.83
3.36
74
3.47
+|- 123
3.95
13
10,001 -
50,000
3.62
+|- 0.61
2.75
114
4.05
+|- 168
4.82
9
50,001 -
100,000
4.07
+|- 0.94
2.90
78
1.81
+I-0.79
2.62
8
100,001-
500,000
3.63
+|- 0.33
3.05
158
3.92
+|- 155
3.80
14
Over
500,000
3.34
+|- 0.49
2.76
48
1.15
+|- 1.31
0.00
4
All Sizes
4.78
+\-0.71
3.20
739
3.53
+|- 0.63
2.62
282
163
-------
Table 79
Total Expenses for Systems Reporting Positive Revenues and Expenses
By Ownership
(Thousands of Dollars)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Private Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
All Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
82
+I-82
17
22
15
+|-7
10
41
32
+\-21
11
63
Data: Q.26
101 -
500
88
+I-49
40
69
45
+I-28
23
55
67
+I-29
28
124
Notes: Excludes systems that
501 -
3,300
287
+I-82
156
167
228
+I-89
116
37
274
+I-66
151
204
3,301 -
10,000
1,098
+|- 244
718
78
1,153
+|- 442
822
13
1,108
+\-217
781
91
did not report positive
10,001 -
50,000
3,753
+|- 676
2,547
115
3,611
+1-2,045
2,793
11
3,744
+|- 647
2,715
126
50,001 -
100,000
1 1 ,468
+|- 7,485
9,499
80
10,879
+1-3,353
1 1 ,596
6
1 1 ,434
+|- 7,472
10,115
86
100,001-
500,000
38,390
+|- 4,635
26,646
153
63,599
+|- 34,496
32,170
13
41 ,295
+|- 6,650
27,702
166
Over
500,000
202,343
+|- 44,087
168,087
48
100,581
+|- -79,094
100,581
2
198,399
+|- 42,304
160,798
50
All Sizes
2,326
+|- 300
157
732
463
+|- 272
23
178
1,665
+|- -775
91
910
revenues or expenses.
164
-------
Table 80
Percentage Breakdown of Expenses By Major Categories
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Purchased water
Confidence interval
Security
Confidence interval
Depreciation
Confidence interval
Payments to General Fund
Confidence interval
Other Routine Operating Expenses
Confidence interval
Debt Service Expenses
Confidence interval
Capital Improvements
Confidence interval
Payments to Reserve funds
Confidence interval
Private Systems
Purchased water
Confidence interval
Security
Confidence interval
Depreciation
Confidence interval
Income Taxes
Confidence interval
Other Routine Operating Expenses
Confidence interval
Debt Service Expenses:
Confidence interval
Capital Improvements
Confidence interval
Payments to Reserve funds
Confidence interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
10.2
+|- 10.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
4.6
+|- 7.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
77.3
+|- 19.6
0.8
+|- 0.9
4.0
+|- 6.2
3.2
+|- 6.0
3.5
+|- 6.2
0.3
+|- 0.5
1.8
+|- 1.6
0.9
+|- 0.8
79.8
+|- 8.6
3.7
+|- 4.4
7.3
+|- 4.8
2.7
+I-2.7
101 -
500
7.4
+|- 6.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
5.5
+I-4.7
0.8
-H-7.7
64.5
+|- 8.9
10.8
+|- 5.0
6.8
+|- 5.3
4.3
+|- 3.9
7.3
+|- 5.2
0.2
+|- 0.2
0.9
+|- 0.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
78.6
+|- 9. 1
1.5
+|- 19
8.1
+|- 5.9
3.5
+|- 2.8
501 -
3,300
10.6
+|- 4.8
0.1
+|- 0. 1
5.9
+|- 1.8
2.3
+|- 1.6
58.6
+I-5.7
14.9
+|- 3.3
5.9
+|- 3.2
1.8
+|- 13
13.9
+|- 8.2
0.1
+|- 0. 1
6.8
+|- 3.5
2.9
+|- 3.8
63.0
+|- 10.0
9.8
+|- 4.2
1.9
+|- 1.4
1.8
+|- 2.2
3,301 -
10,000
12.2
+|- 6.3
2.6
+|- 3.6
10.4
+|- 2.4
4.2
+|- 3.5
48.8
+|- 7.2
12.5
+I-3.7
8.2
+|- 3.3
1.1
+I-0.7
16.0
+|- 72.2
8.4
+|- 75.5
14.9
+|- 6.5
3.0
+|- 3.0
42.0
+|- 74.0
8.6
+|- 5.0
6.9
+|- 5.3
0.2
+|- 0.3
10,001 -
50,000
11.5
+|- 4.4
0.2
+|- 0. 7
10.3
+|- 7.7
3.5
+|- 7.5
45.4
+|- 5.0
11.9
+|- 2.9
14.0
+|- 3.8
3.2
+|- 7.7
6.9
+|- 9.0
0.0
+|- 0.0
15.6
+|- 7.5
1.2
+|- 2.2
38.3
+|- 72.2
17.8
+|- 9.4
19.7
+|- 76.4
0.4
+|- 0.5
50,001 -
100,000
15.9
+I-4.7
1.3
+|- 7.8
11.9
+|- 2.2
3.9
+|- 7.4
35.8
+|- 3.9
14.1
+|- 3.2
16.1
+|- 3.0
1.1
+I-0.7
37.6
+|- 26.9
0.0
+|- 0.0
9.2
+|- 3.8
5.0
+|- 3.6
26.3
+|- 75.0
7.1
+|- 8.0
14.8
+|- 70.4
0.0
+|- 0.0
100,001-
500,000
11.3
+|- 2.0
1.0
+|- 0.9
11.0
+|- 7.0
4.0
+|- 0.9
36.4
+|- 2.6
15.6
+|- 7.2
18.3
+|- 2.0
2.3
+I-0.7
6.8
+|- 70.9
0.5
+|- 0.2
14.1
+|- 5.4
5.3
+I-4.7
46.4
+|- 7.5
8.2
+I-3.7
18.5
+|- 7.3
0.1
+|- 0.2
Over
500,000
14.2
+|- 6.5
0.4
+|- 0. 7
10.7
+|- 7.6
1.9
+|- 0.5
32.9
+|- 4.2
17.9
+I-2.7
20.4
+|- 3.3
1.6
+I-0.7
0.4
+|- 0.4
1.9
+|- 7.6
14.5
+|- 0.8
4.7
+|- 4. 7
39.3
+|- 7.8
21.0
+I-7.7
18.2
+|- 77.2
0.0
+|- 0.0
All Sizes
10.2
+|- 2.9
0.4
+|- 0.5
7.0
+|- 7.6
2.2
+|- 0.9
57.6
+|- 3.9
12.4
+|- 2.0
7.6
+|- 2. 7
2.6
+|- 7.2
7.1
+|- 3.6
0.4
+|- 0.5
2.8
+|- 7.0
1.0
+I-0.7
75.0
+I-5.7
4.1
+|- 2. 7
6.9
+I-3.7
2.7
+|- 7.6
(Continued)
165
-------
Table 80 (Cont.)
Percentage Breakdown of Expenses By Major Categories
By Ownership
Ownership Type
All Systems
Purchased water
Confidence interval
Security
Confidence interval
Depreciation
Confidence interval
Income Taxes
Confidence interval
Payments to General Fund
Confidence interval
Other Routine Operating Expenses
Confidence interval
Debt Service Expenses
Confidence interval
Capital Improvements
Confidence interval
Payments to Reserve funds
Confidence interval
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
4.5
+|- 5.5
0.2
+|- 0.4
2.2
+|- 1.8
0.0
+|- 0.0
0.8
+I-0.7
79.4
+|- 7.9
3.3
+I-3.7
6.8
+|- 4.2
2.8
+|- 2.4
101 -
500
7.3
+|- 4.6
0.1
+|- 0. 1
2.8
+|- 2. 1
0.3
+|- 0.5
0.0
+|- 0.0
72.7
+|- 7.0
5.4
+|- 2.6
7.5
+|- 4. 1
3.8
+|- 2.3
501 -
3,300
11.4
+|- 4. 1
0.1
+|- 0. 1
6.1
+|- 1.6
1.7
+|- 1.3
0.7
+|- 0.9
59.6
+|- 4.9
13.7
+|- 2.8
4.9
+|- 2.5
1.8
+\-1.1
3,301 - 10,001 -
10,000 50,000
12.8
+|- 5.6
3.6
+|- 4. 1
11.2
+|- 2.3
3.5
+|- 2.9
0.5
+|- 0.6
47.6
+|- 6.5
11.8
+|- 3.2
8.0
+|- 2.9
0.9
+|- 0.6
11.2
+|- 4.2
0.2
+|- 0. 1
10.6
+|- 1.7
3.3
+|- 1.4
0.1
+|- 0. 1
45.0
+|- 4.8
12.3
+|- 2.8
14.3
+I-3.7
3.1
+|- 1.6
50,001 -
100,000
17.0
+I-4.7
1.3
+|- 1.7
11.7
+|- 2. 1
3.7
+|- 1.3
0.3
+|- 0.3
35.3
+|- 3.8
13.7
+|- 3. 1
16.0
+|- 2.9
1.1
+I-0.7
100,001-
500,000
10.8
+|- 2. 1
0.9
+|- 0.8
11.3
+|- 1.0
3.6
+|- 0.9
0.6
+|- 0.6
37.5
+|- 2.6
14.8
+|- 12
18.3
+|- 19
2.1
+|- 0.6
Over
500,000
13.7
+|- 6.3
0.4
+|- 0. 1
10.8
+|- 15
1.8
+|- 0.5
0.2
+|- 0.2
33.1
+|- 4. 1
18.0
+|- 2.6
20.4
+|- 3.2
1.5
+I-0.7
All Sizes
8.8
+|- 2.4
0.4
+|- 0.3
5.0
+|- 10
1.2
+|- 0.5
0.4
+|- 0.3
65.6
+|- 3.5
8.5
+|- 15
7.3
+|- 18
2.6
+|- 10
Data: Q.26
Notes: Column totals may not equal 100 due to rounding.
Excludes systems that did not report positive expenses.
Debt service includes principal and interest. The general fund includes payments in lieu of taxes.
166
-------
Table 81
Ratio of Revenue to Expenses for Systems Reporting Positive Revenue and Expenses
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Average Ratio
Confidence interval
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
50th Percentile
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
Observations
Private Systems
Average Ratio
Confidence interval
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
50th Percentile
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
Observations
All Systems
Average Ratio
Confidence interval
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
50th Percentile
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
1.4
+|- 0.4
0.7
1.0
1.5
1.6
2.1
22
1.6
+|- 0.8
0.4
0.8
1.1
1.6
2.3
41
1.5
+|- 0.6
0.4
0.9
1.2
1.6
2.1
63
Data: Q.21.Q.26C
Notes: Refer to next table for additional detail on
101 -
500
1.5
+|- 0.3
0.7
1.0
1.3
1.8
3.0
69
1.5
+|- 0.3
0.9
1.0
1.2
1.4
2.6
55
1.5
+|- 0.2
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.6
2.8
124
501 -
3,300
1.4
+I-0.7
0.7
1.0
1.2
1.5
2.4
167
1.8
+|- 0.6
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.7
2.9
37
1.5
+|- 0.2
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.5
2.4
204
3,301 -
10,000
1.6
+I-0.7
0.6
0.9
1.1
1.5
2.0
78
1.2
+|- 0.2
0.8
0.9
1.2
1.3
1.6
13
1.5
+|- 0.6
0.6
0.9
1.1
1.4
1.9
91
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
1.4
+|- 0.2
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.7
2.2
115
1.7
+|- 0.8
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.7
2.2
11
1.4
+|- 0.2
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.7
2.2
126
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
1.5
+|- 0.2
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.6
2.3
80
1.4
+|- 0.3
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.5
2.1
6
1.5
+|- 0.2
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.6
2.2
86
500,000
1.4
+|- 0.2
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.4
2.1
153
1.3
+|- 0.2
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.3
2.1
13
1.4
+I-0.7
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.4
2.1
166
Over
500,000
1.3
+I-0.7
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
48
1.2
+I-0.7
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.3
2
1.3
+I-0.7
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
50
All Sizes
1.4
+I-0.7
0.7
1.0
1.2
1.6
2.5
732
1.6
+|- 0.3
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.6
2.4
178
1.5
+I-0.7
0.7
1.0
1.2
1.6
2.4
910
private systems.
Revenues include water sales and other water-related fees. Expenses include operating expenses, depreciation, and interest. It
excludes principal payments and payments to capital and reserve funds. Only systems that report positive revenue and
expenses are included. This table includes the same systems as tables 62 and 79, but the average ratio is not the ratio of the
average revenue from table 62 and expenses from table 79. The ratio is calculated for each system and this table reports the
average of that ratio, as well as the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles. (The average of the ratios is not equal to the
ratio of the averages.)
167
-------
Table 82
Ratio of Revenue to Expenses for Systems Reporting
Positive Revenue for Small Privately Owned Systems, By Type
Ownership Type
Ancillary Systems
Average Ratio
Confidence interval
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
50th Percentile
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
Observations
Other Private Systems
Average Ratio
Confidence interval
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
50th Percentile
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
Observations
All Private Systems
Average Ratio
Confidence interval
10th Percentile
25th Percentile
50th Percentile
75th Percentile
90th Percentile
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
1.2
+|- 0.6
0.4
0.6
0.9
1.7
2.5
8
1.7
+\-1.1
0.4
1.0
1.2
1.6
2.3
33
1.6
+|- 0.8
0.4
0.8
1.1
1.6
2.3
41
Data: Q.21.Q.26C
Notes:
101 -
500
1.7
+|- 0.5
1.0
1.1
1.4
2.6
3.0
9
1.4
+|- 0.3
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.3
2.4
46
1.5
+|- 0.3
0.9
1.0
1.2
1.4
2.6
55
Population
501 -
3,300
1.4
+|- 0.4
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
2.5
2
1.8
+|- 0.6
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.7
2.9
35
1.8
+|- 0.6
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.7
2.9
37
Category
3,301-
10,000 All Sizes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.2
+|- 0.2
0.8
0.9
1.2
1.3
1.6
13
1.2
+|- 0.2
0.8
0.9
1.2
1.3
1.6
13
1.4
+|- 0.4
0.5
0.9
1.2
1.8
2.6
19
1.6
+|- 0.4
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.5
2.3
127
1.6
+|- 0.3
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.6
2.4
146
168
-------
Table 83
Average System Revenue and Expenses for Systems That Reported Positive Revenue and Expenses
By Type of Revenue and Expense
(Thousands of Dollars)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Revenue
Water Sales
Connection, Development Fees, and Other
Water Related
Revenue from the Government
Total Revenue
Expenses
General Operations
Depreciation
Interest
Income Taxes
Total Expenses
Net Income
Sales Only
Sales and Fees
Sales, Fees, and Government
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
42,061
646
6,692
49,399
35,812
3,932
48
0
39,791
2,270
2,915
9,608
22
101 -
500
42,533
5,496
9,676
57,705
36,284
8,671
4,585
1,233
50,773
-8,240
-2,744
6,931
69
501 -
3,300
229,714
29,288
9,422
268,423
179,173
20,707
21 ,622
4,498
226,001
3,713
33,001
42,422
167
3,301 -
10,000
758,567
116,580
13,588
888,735
546,258
135,087
74,226
46,644
802,215
-43,648
72,932
86,519
78
10,001 -
50,000
2,537,418
554,302
54,508
3,146,229
1,861,957
374,269
198,061
128,462
2,562,749
-25,331
528,972
583,480
115
50,001 -
100,000
8,197,502
1 ,263,232
794,605
10,255,338
5,499,756
1 ,571 ,869
638,812
393,756
8,104,194
93,308
1 ,356,540
2,151,145
80
100,001-
500,000
21 ,890,502
5,783,524
277,081
27,951,108
16,118,521
4,332,834
2,681 ,573
1,500,383
24,633,310
-2,742,808
3,040,717
3,317,798
153
Over
500,000
118,344,392
23,565,712
2,836,918
144,747,024
82,908,912
23,655,039
24,792,533
2,943,939
134,300,416
-15,956,029
7,609,683
10,446,601
48
All Sizes
1 ,455,670
298,567
45,476
1,799,713
1 ,048,470
261,115
194,666
64,681
1 ,568,933
-113,263
185,304
230,780
732
(Continued)
169
-------
Table 83 (Cont.)
Average System Revenue and Expenses for Systems That Reported Positive Revenue and Expenses
By Type of Revenue and Expense
Ownership Type
Private Systems
Revenue
Water Sales
Connection, Development Fees, and Other
Revenue from the Government
Total Revenue
Expenses
General Operations
Depreciation
Interest
Income Taxes
Total Expenses
Net Income
Sales Only
Sales and Fees
Sales, Fees, and Government
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
10,421
1,272
0
1 1 ,693
9,452
521
999
191
11,163
-742
530
530
41
101 -
500
31,416
1,218
0
32,633
24,784
943
580
98
26,404
5,011
6,229
6,229
55
501 -
3,300
349,383
17,591
3,494
370,469
161,902
15,343
12,892
3,614
193,751
155,632
173,223
176,717
37
3,301 -
10,000
998,870
63,164
18,746
1 ,080,780
623,466
235,61 1
83,915
35,443
978,435
20,435
83,600
102,345
13
10,001 -
50,000
2,397,964
587,218
23,416
3,008,598
1 ,233,603
51 1 ,678
305,736
44,893
2,095,910
302,054
889,272
912,688
11
50,001 -
100,000
11,281,324
460,209
0
11,741,533
7,083,655
935,865
319,861
689,946
9,029,327
2,251,997
2,712,206
2,712,206
6
100,001-
500,000
56,591 ,902
444,726
2,161
57,038,788
33,465,764
7,869,484
6,821 ,033
2,121,944
50,278,224
6,313,679
6,758,404
6,760,565
13
Over
500,000
90,180,297
804,264
0
90,984,560
44,154,836
14,350,468
17,225,662
3,688,922
79,419,888
10,760,408
1 1 ,564,672
1 1 ,564,672
2
All Sizes
431 ,366
18,261
1,851
451 ,478
245,817
56,468
42,541
13,562
358,387
72,978
91 ,240
93,091
178
Q.21,0.26
Excludes systems that did not report positive revenue or expenses.
170
-------
Table 84
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Managers
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.5
+|- 0.3
12
30.0
+|- 13.0
12
23.7
+|- 79.7
11
0.9
+|- 0.2
12
19.4
+|- 6.2
10
7.6
+|- 9.2
12
3.3
+|- 1.4
11
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.5
+|- 0.0
1
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.3
9
21.0
+|- 7.5
8
18.0
+|- 10.6
1
1.1
+|- 0.3
13
11.5
+I-7.7
6
3.0
+\-6.1
12
7.7
+I-3.7
12
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
28.1
+|- 6.5
2
5.8
+|- 8.5
2
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.2
21
26.0
+|- 7.6
20
21.2
+|- 72.0
18
1.0
+|- 0.2
25
16.5
+|- 5.0
16
5.4
+|- 5.6
24
5.5
+|- 2.0
23
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
27.9
+|- 6.5
3
5.7
+|- 8.4
3
501 -
3,300
0.6
+|- 0.2
29
20.3
+|- 3.6
28
25.4
+|- 8.9
23
1.0
+|- 0.0
20
21.3
+|- 3.9
18
25.2
+|- 75.7
17
9.5
+|- 3.5
20
1.0
+|- 0.4
4
18.6
+|- 6.8
4
16.9
+|- 77.2
4
3,301 -
10,000
1.4
+I-0.7
39
28.1
+|- 2.5
35
33.8
+I-9.7
28
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
34.5
+|- 0.0
1
35.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
31.0
+|- 76.8
2
30.0
+|- 78.3
2
10,001 -
50,000
2.0
+|- 0.5
54
29.9
+|- 2.2
53
31.0
+|- 4.2
49
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
119.2
+|- 0.0
1
25.0
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.9
+|- 0.3
2
36.5
+I-3.7
2
65.8
+|- 70.3
2
50,001 -
100,000
3.4
+I-0.7
37
34.9
+|- 3.4
37
31.2
+I-6.7
36
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
27.5
+|- 0.0
1
25.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
27.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
100,001-
500,000
6.8
+|- 7.8
41
38.4
+|- 2.3
38
41.4
+|- 3.5
37
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
45.8
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
42.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Over
500,000
33.9
+I-33.7
5
39.6
+|- 5.9
5
42.6
+I-3.8
5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
1.2
+|- 0.2
226
25.8
+|- 2.6
216
27.1
+I-4.7
196
1.0
+I-0.7
49
20.1
+|- 4.3
38
12.1
+|- 6.6
45
7.1
+|- 7.8
47
1.0
+I-0.7
13
25.1
+I-4.7
12
17.3
+|- 6.3
12
(Continued)
171
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Treatment Plant Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.4
+|- 0.3
16
19.4
+|- 7.6
10
16.7
+|- 73. 7
10
1.1
+|- 0.2
24
15.7
+I-4.7
12
4.8
+|- 5.5
20
5.5
+|- 2.3
23
0.8
+I-0.7
14
34.3
+|- 73.0
16
2.8
+|- 7.4
19
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.3
27
16.8
+|- 3.3
20
18.0
+|- 7.2
15
1.0
+I-0.7
32
14.1
+I-2.7
24
10.2
+|- 6.4
25
9.7
+|- 2.4
31
0.9
+I-0.7
27
39.6
+|- 72.6
25
2.9
+|- 7.4
27
Sub, 500
or less
0.4
+|- 0.2
43
17.6
+|- 3.3
30
17.5
+|- 6.8
25
1.1
+I-0.7
56
14.6
+|- 2.0
36
7.7
+|- 4.4
45
7.9
+|- 7.9
54
0.9
+I-0.7
41
37.6
+|- 9.2
41
2.9
+|- 7.0
46
501 -
3,300
0.8
+|- 0.2
43
15.4
+|- 7.9
39
22.1
+|- 6.9
34
1.2
+|- 0.2
38
15.0
+|- 2.5
37
18.6
+|- 70.0
33
10.0
+|- 2.5
38
1.0
+|- 0.3
12
35.7
+|- 74.9
11
12.4
+|- 8.4
12
3,301 -
10,000
2.4
+I-0.7
34
17.6
+|- 7.6
31
37.1
+|- 9.9
23
1.6
+|- 0.9
4
15.2
+|- 5.3
4
12.3
+|- 74.4
3
16.3
+|- 8.0
4
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
27.4
+|- 7.7
3
15.8
+|- 74. 7
4
10,001 -
50,000
3.7
+I-7.7
45
19.1
+|- 7.5
44
33.7
+|- 5.4
42
1.2
+|- 0.4
5
16.0
+|- 72.6
4
6.7
+|- 6.9
3
22.8
+|- 72.7
4
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
13.4
+|- 0.0
1
25.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
8.0
+I-2.7
36
19.1
+I-2.6
35
31.4
+|- 5.6
33
2.5
+I-2.7
2
15.3
+I-4.0
2
35.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
2
4.0
+|- 0.0
1
ซ
*
*
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
100,001-
500,000
20.3
+|- 7.9
44
23.3
+|- 7.2
42
44.9
+|- 3.9
40
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
15.9
+I-5.7
2
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
25.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Over
500,000
32.1
+I-23.6
4
21.9
+I-2.7
4
41.9
+|- 4.2
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
1.4
+|- 0.2
249
17.1
+|- 7.5
225
24.4
+|- 3.9
201
1.1
+I-0.7
107
14.8
+|- 7.5
85
11.4
+|- 4.5
86
9.0
+|- 7.5
103
0.9
+I-0.7
59
36.9
+|- 7.9
56
4.8
+|- 7.8
64
(Continued)
172
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Distribution System Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.6
+|- 0.2
17
18.3
+|- 6.5
12
20.9
+|- 77.7
13
1.2
+|- 0.4
9
15.1
+|- 2.9
6
0.0
+|- 0.0
14
1.5
+|- 0.9
9
0.8
+|- 0.2
12
34.5
+|- 74.3
9
2.1
+|- 7.8
12
101 -
500
0.5
+|- 0.3
25
15.8
+|- 2.9
21
17.8
+|- 6.5
17
1.2
+|- 0.4
27
14.3
+|- 2.8
22
7.4
+|- 6.6
27
8.0
+|- 2.8
27
0.8
+|- 0.2
12
36.5
+I-20.7
12
5.1
+|- 4.0
12
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.2
42
16.6
+I-2.8
33
19.1
+I-8.7
30
1.2
+|- 0.3
36
14.5
+|- 2.3
28
4.8
+|- 4.5
41
6.2
+I-2.7
36
0.8
+I-0.7
24
35.6
+|- 73.2
21
3.5
+I-2.7
24
501 -
3,300
0.9
+|- 0.3
47
15.0
+|- 7.8
43
31.5
+|- 8.8
37
1.4
+|- 0.2
25
12.1
+|- 7.8
23
13.7
+|- 77.5
23
7.9
+|- 2.4
25
0.7
+|- 0.3
5
30.3
+I-29.7
4
6.3
+|- 3.9
4
3,301 -
10,000
3.4
+|- 0.9
43
16.7
+|- 7.4
40
33.6
+I-8.7
33
1.2
+|- 0.3
4
11.9
+I-4.7
4
22.0
+|- 5.8
3
25.6
+|- 5.8
4
2.0
+|- 0.0
21.0
+|- 7.6
2
30.0
+|- 76.3
2
10,001 -
50,000
5.7
+|- 7.0
52
18.2
+|- 7.5
52
34.9
+I-4.7
49
2.6
+|- 7.2
8
12.2
+|- 4.6
8
13.5
+|- 72.2
6
31.4
+|- 6.5
8
17.0
+|- 0.0
1
18.0
+|- 0.0
1
60.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
13.3
+|- 3.2
33
17.6
+I-2.8
33
33.9
+I-5.7
33
3.3
+|- 2.3
7
14.5
+|- 2.4
7
15.7
+|- 77.2
5
33.9
+|- 5.5
7
4.4
+|- 7.3
3
27.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
2
100,001-
500,000
25.8
+|- 4.3
37
20.6
+|- 7.3
36
44.4
+|- 4.0
34
2.7
+|- 7.5
3
15.8
+|- 5.2
3
24.1
+|- 22.9
3
22.0
+|- 5.2
3
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
48.9
+|- 0.0
1
17.0
+|- 0.0
1
Over
500,000
191.7
+I-38.7
3
22.7
+I-3.6
3
49.7
+I-3.7
3
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
13.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.0
+|- 0.0
1
8.0
+|- 0.0
1
All Sizes
2.1
+|- 0.3
257
16.3
+|- 7.2
240
27.8
+|- 4.4
219
1.3
+|- 0.2
84
13.5
+|- 7.5
74
7.9
+|- 4.5
82
8.3
+|- 7.7
84
1.0
+|- 0.3
37
34.4
+|- 77.6
31
5.2
+|- 2.4
35
(Continued)
173
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Administrative Staff
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.4
+|- 0.4
1
16.0
+|- 3.3
7
12.5
+|- 12.0
5
1.0
+|- 0.0
8
13.3
+I-6.7
5
1.8
+I-3.7
12
5.4
+|- 3.9
8
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.1
+|- 0.0
1
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.2
15
16.6
+|- 10.9
12
18.4
+|- 8.8
12
1.0
+I-0.7
27
11.5
+I-2.7
19
6.0
+|- 5.5
24
7.6
+|- 2.5
27
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
14.2
+|- 10.0
4
7.2
+|- 6.6
4
Sub, 500
or less
0.4
+|- 0.2
22
16.4
+|- 7.2
19
16.8
+|- 7.4
17
1.0
+I-0.7
35
11.8
+I-2.7
24
4.6
+I-3.9
36
7.2
+\-2.1
35
1.0
+|- 0.0
5
13.3
+I-8.7
5
5.7
+|- 5.8
5
501 -
3,300
0.8
+|- 0.2
31
15.9
+|- 4.9
28
21.0
+I-8.7
23
1.1
+I-0.7
41
14.5
+|- 2.8
39
18.4
+|- 9.4
32
12.6
+I-3.7
40
1.0
+|- 0.0
5
27.8
+|- 23.6
5
8.0
+|- 6.0
5
3,301 -
10,000
1.9
+|- 0.5
35
14.7
+|- 1.5
32
35.7
+|- 9.3
27
1.2
+|- 0.4
5
10.3
+|- 2.3
4
7.0
+|- 9.5
4
20.3
+|- 9.4
5
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
2.9
+|- 0.8
48
21.6
+|- 4.6
48
32.3
+I-4.7
44
2.4
+|- 1.4
4
30.4
+\-27.1
4
16.1
+|- 75.6
3
14.4
+|- 4.3
4
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
12.0
+|- 0.0
1
60.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
5.3
+|- 1.9
35
18.3
+I-2.8
35
32.8
+|- 6.0
33
1.3
+|- 0.5
4
14.8
+|- 3.2
4
21.4
+I-75.7
3
30.6
+I-7.7
4
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
27.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
100,001-
500,000
13.2
+|- 5.5
41
21.8
+|- 1.8
38
44.3
+|- 3.8
37
2.0
+|- 0.6
8
12.6
+|- 1.7
8
10.7
+|- 72.0
7
23.4
+|- 4.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
35.2
+|- 74.8
2
17.4
+|- 73.7
3
Over
500,000
55.3
+|- 43.3
5
23.6
+I-3.7
5
42.6
+I-3.9
5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
6.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.0
+|- 0.0
1
8.0
+|- 0.0
1
All Sizes
1.5
+|- 0.2
217
16.9
+|- 2.8
205
25.1
+|- 3.8
186
1.1
+I-0.7
97
13.5
+|- 2.0
83
9.9
+|- 4.4
85
10.1
+|- 7.9
95
1.0
+I-0.7
17
19.0
+|- 77.7
16
9.6
+|- 5.8
17
(Continued)
174
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Managers
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.3
+|- 0.4
4
27.3
+|- 8.3
3
27.7
+|- 2.4
3
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
57.9
+I-45.0
2
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
2.3
+I-17
4
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
8.3
+|- 0.0
1
8.0
+|- 0.0
1
101 -
500
0.6
+|- 0.3
10
24.4
+I-4.7
9
32.8
+|- 6.5
8
1.0
+I-0.7
6
18.2
+I-7.7
5
12.5
+|- 72.7
3
7.3
+|- 4.6
6
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
30.0
+I-27.8
2
7.5
+|- 5.3
2
Sub, 500
or less
0.6
+|- 0.3
14
24.8
+|- 4.3
12
32.1
+|- 5.6
11
1.0
+|- 0.0
10
26.0
+|- 8.6
7
10.0
+I-77.7
4
6.0
+|- 3.4
10
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
26.0
+|- 79. 7
3
7.6
+|- 4.3
3
501 -
3,300
0.6
+I-0.7
27
23.3
+I-2.7
26
30.0
+|- 6.8
22
1.0
+|- 0.0
9
20.7
+|- 4.4
6
24.7
+|- 74.6
6
10.7
+|- 4.9
9
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3,301 -
10,000
1.2
+I-0.7
50
25.9
+I-3.7
45
32.1
+I-4.7
41
1.3
+|- 0.4
4
32.7
+I-70.7
4
36.3
+I-33.7
4
3.8
+|- 0.6
3
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
ซ
*
*
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
1.9
+|- 0.3
63
29.4
+|- 2.4
61
32.2
+|- 3.2
58
1.9
+|- 7.7
4
25.8
+I-6.7
4
33.5
+|- 73.7
4
17.4
+|- 3.9
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
50,001 -
100,000
4.4
+|- 7.8
46
32.5
+|- 7.8
44
35.7
+I-3.9
41
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
35.0
+|- 0.0
1
28.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
100,001-
500,000
10.2
+|- 2.9
112
36.3
+I-7.7
112
41.4
+|- 3.0
109
1.3
+|- 0.4
3
63.6
+|- 26.0
3
24.5
+I-29.7
2
24.0
+|- 4.0
3
1.3
+|- 0.3
7
35.3
+I-33.7
2
36.5
+|- 5.2
5
Over
500,000
30.9
+I-77.6
32
38.6
+I-2.0
32
37.5
+I-3.0
31
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
ซ
*
*
ซ
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
3.1
+|- 0.5
344
28.4
+|- 7.3
332
33.3
+|- 2.2
313
1.2
+|- 0.3
31
27.7
+|- 3.5
25
28.7
+|- 77.0
21
9.1
+|- 2.8
29
1.1
+I-0.7
11
27.6
+|- 77.0
5
24.6
+|- 70.4
9
(Continued)
175
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Treatment Plant Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.9
+|- 0.6
9
24.9
+I-3.7
8
32.9
+|- 717
8
1.0
+I-0.7
23
11.4
+|- 5.8
15
5.0
+|- 8.6
12
9.3
+|- 1.9
22
0.9
+I-0.7
19
68.6
+I-49.7
19
3.6
+\-2.1
19
101 -
500
0.7
+|- 0.4
27
13.2
+I-3.7
24
28.3
+I-9.7
21
1.2
+|- 0.2
27
15.0
+|- 3.8
25
10.2
+|- 9.5
24
8.4
+|- 2.6
26
1.1
+I-0.7
26
23.2
+|- 5.6
24
10.0
+|- 2.4
26
Sub, 500
or less
0.7
+|- 0.3
36
14.4
+|- 4.2
32
29.1
+|- 8.3
29
1.1
+I-0.7
50
13.2
+I-4.5
40
7.6
+|- 7.4
36
8.9
+|- 1.6
48
1.0
+I-0.7
45
39.0
+|- 78.9
43
8.4
+|- 2.2
45
501 -
3,300
1.4
+|- 0.3
57
16.3
+|- 1.2
56
29.7
+|- 5.9
50
1.7
+|- 0.5
15
19.0
+|- 4.4
15
20.8
+|- 73.9
16
11.9
+|- 3.3
16
1.0
+|- 0.0
6
27.0
+|- 70.0
6
15.1
+|- 77.7
7
3,301 -
10,000
2.7
+|- 0.4
58
17.7
+|- 7.4
55
35.7
+I-4.9
49
1.6
+|- 0.4
7
13.3
+I-3.5
7
20.6
+I-75.7
6
14.0
+I-4.7
7
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
27.0
+|- 0.0
1
9.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
5.6
+|- 0.8
72
19.0
+I-7.7
70
34.4
+|- 3.6
65
1.4
+|- 0.4
8
15.2
+I-3.7
7
14.5
+|- 73.8
7
22.4
+|- 7.8
8
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
42.5
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
15.6
+I-9.7
47
19.1
+I-7.7
45
36.4
+I-3.8
42
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
16.0
+|- 8.6
2
28.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.0
+I-5.7
2
5.5
+|- 7.9
2
19.8
+|- 9.2
2
40.0
+|- 0.0
2
100,001-
500,000
22.8
+|- 4.3
107
22.5
+|- 0.8
108
42.2
+|- 3.0
106
1.8
+I-0.7
9
12.7
+|- 7.8
8
3.7
+|- 4.3
7
21.8
+|- 3.3
8
6.1
+I-2.7
9
28.1
+|- 70.4
8
38.6
+|- 3.8
9
Over
500,000
93.8
+I-27.8
32
23.7
+|- 7.5
32
42.1
+I-3.8
32
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
13.7
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
6.6
+|- 7.0
409
17.9
+|- 0.9
398
34.0
+|- 2.4
373
1.4
+|- 0.2
92
14.8
+|- 2.9
80
13.2
+I-6.7
74
12.2
+|- 7.8
90
1.3
+|- 0.2
64
35.5
+|- 73.2
61
11.8
+|- 2.8
65
(Continued)
176
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Distribution System Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.2
+|- 0.3
2
20.6
+|- 10.8
2
28.5
+|- 2.6
2
1.1
+|- 0.3
7
19.5
+|- 6.0
4
8.1
+|- 74.8
3
6.2
+|- 6.5
7
0.5
+|- 0.0
3
19.3
+|- 0.0
3
1.8
+|- 0.0
3
101 -
500
0.6
+|- 0.3
18
15.1
+|- 1.8
15
23.7
+I-7.7
16
1.1
+|- 0.4
11
11.8
+|- 3.3
10
5.0
+|- 6.4
9
6.3
+|- 3.9
11
1.2
+|- 0.4
6
18.1
+|- 9.9
6
5.2
+|- 3.4
6
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.3
20
15.4
+|- 1.9
17
24.0
+I-6.7
18
1.1
+|- 0.3
18
13.1
+|- 3.3
14
5.4
+|- 5.8
12
6.3
+|- 3.4
18
1.1
+|- 0.3
9
18.4
+|- 7.8
9
4.5
+|- 2.9
9
501 -
3,300
1.2
+|- 0.2
40
15.7
+I-17
39
29.2
+|- 5.4
36
1.8
+|- 0.6
13
16.2
+I-3.7
14
20.1
+|- 718
13
11.9
+|- 3.8
14
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
28.3
+I-37.7
2
3.4
+|- 7.0
2
3,301 -
10,000
3.6
+|- 0.6
52
16.2
+|- 7.5
48
37.4
+|- 5.3
45
1.5
+|- 0.5
4
13.3
+|- 5.0
4
16.7
+I-37.6
3
21.8
+|- 72.6
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
10,001 -
50,000
7.9
+|- 7.4
65
16.9
+I-7.7
63
34.2
+|- 3.6
59
1.8
+|- 7.5
5
14.8
+I-5.7
5
8.8
+|- 75.7
4
20.0
+|- 0.0
5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
50,001 -
100,000
16.0
+I-3.0
39
17.3
+|- 0.9
39
35.7
+I-4.7
38
3.0
+I-0.7
4
10.1
+|- 0.2
4
1.8
+I-3.7
4
30.5
+|- 7.2
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
100,001-
500,000
39.0
+|- 9.4
96
20.6
+I-0.7
98
41.4
+|- 3.3
96
3.5
+|- 7.3
9
10.8
+|- 7.3
9
6.4
+I-4.7
9
26.7
+I-5.7
9
4.7
+|- 2.5
3
11.3
+|- 2.6
3
40.0
+|- 0.0
3
Over
500,000
169.8
+I-44.7
31
22.1
+|- 7.3
31
39.4
+I-3.9
30
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
6.6
+|- 0.0
1
15.0
+|- 0.0
1
14.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
10.9
+|- 7.7
343
16.8
+|- 0.6
335
34.1
+|- 2.3
322
1.8
+|- 0.3
54
14.4
+|- 2.0
51
13.4
+|- 6.8
46
14.4
+|- 2.4
55
1.3
+|- 0.3
14
21.1
+|- 72.7
14
6.6
+|- 2.3
14
(Continued)
177
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Administrative Staff
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.2
+|- 0.4
3
33.7
+|- 73. 7
2
35.0
+I-20.5
3
1.0
+|- 0.0
6
12.6
+I-4.5
4
9.3
+|- 70.5
4
6.3
+|- 3.4
6
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
34.5
+I-27.6
2
1.5
+|- 7.0
2
101 -
500
0.8
+|- 0.5
11
15.5
+|- 2.2
11
32.6
+|- 74.0
10
0.9
+I-0.7
14
13.9
+|- 5.2
12
1.9
+|- 3.9
13
12.1
+|- 4.5
12
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
19.6
+|- 4.4
4
14.6
+|- 76.7
4
Sub, 500
or less
0.7
+|- 0.4
14
17.8
+|- 5.0
13
33.0
+|- 72.2
13
1.0
+I-0.7
20
13.8
+I-4.6
16
2.8
+I-3.7
17
11.0
+|- 3.8
18
1.0
+|- 0.0
6
22.3
+|- 5.3
6
12.3
+|- 73.3
6
501 -
3,300
1.0
+|- 0.3
19
16.3
+|- 7.9
20
34.5
+|- 7.8
19
1.3
+|- 0.3
25
14.0
+I-2.7
23
17.4
+|- 6.2
22
14.7
+|- 4. 7
26
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
3,301 -
10,000
2.1
+|- 0.4
41
16.0
+|- 7.8
37
34.7
+I-5.7
33
1.4
+|- 0.3
8
14.7
+|- 3.2
8
35.6
+I-26.7
7
13.9
+I-4.7
8
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
10,001 -
50,000
3.0
+|- 0.6
60
19.0
+|- 2.3
56
33.7
+I-3.7
53
1.3
+|- 0.5
7
22.5
+|- 9.2
6
21.2
+|- 74.3
6
19.1
+I-2.7
7
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
8.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
7.0
+I-2.9
42
18.4
+|- 7.8
40
36.4
+I-3.7
36
1.2
+|- 0.3
5
15.4
+I-4.5
5
19.5
+|- 9.3
4
16.2
+|- 7.3
5
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
ซ
*
*
13.2
+|- 0.0
1
100,001-
500,000
17.7
+I-4.7
110
22.5
+|- 7.0
110
41.0
+I-3.7
108
2.2
+I-7.7
12
15.4
+|- 2.6
12
12.6
+|- 70.6
10
23.3
+I-5.7
11
3.3
+|- 7.5
4
22.9
+|- 72.0
3
18.2
+I-5.7
3
Over
500,000
101.4
+|- 45.2
31
21.6
+|- 7.5
31
39.4
+I-3.8
30
4.0
+|- 7.4
4
23.1
+|- 7.3
5
31.2
+I-77.6
5
23.3
+|- 7.9
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
6.9
+|- 7.3
317
18.3
+|- 7.0
307
35.4
+|- 2.3
292
1.3
+|- 0.2
81
15.2
+|- 7.9
75
17.7
+|- 5.2
71
15.0
+|- 2.3
78
1.3
+|- 0.2
12
21.9
+|- 3.9
10
12.1
+|- 8.6
11
(Continued)
178
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Managers
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.3
+|- 0.0
1
ซ
*
*
ซ
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
0.1
+I-0.7
3
20.1
+|- 4.6
3
29.1
+|- 4.2
3
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
7.5
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Sub, 500
or less
0.1
+I-0.7
4
20.1
+|- 4.6
3
29.1
+|- 4.2
3
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
29.6
+|- 14.2
2
4.8
+I-7.7
2
4.6
+I-3.9
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
501 -
3,300
0.7
+|- 0.3
12
22.8
+|- 5.6
12
35.6
+|- 77.0
10
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
14.3
+|- 5.9
3
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
14.0
+|- 70.9
3
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
15.0
+|- 0.0
1
13.0
+|- 0.0
1
3,301 -
10,000
1.1
+|- 0.2
22
27.5
+|- 4.8
22
21.2
+|- 6.3
20
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
ซ
*
*
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
21.2
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
1.4
+|- 0.3
22
33.9
+|- 3.2
20
32.4
+|- 7.0
20
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
31.4
+|- 8.9
3
39.6
+|- 20.3
3
31.5
+|- 33.4
3
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
28.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
3.1
+|- 0.5
24
42.4
+|- 3.8
24
43.3
+|- 7.4
24
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
30.0
+|- 0.0
1
5.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
50.0
+|- 0.0
1
5.0
+|- 0.0
1
100,001-
500,000
7.5
+I-2.7
41
43.3
+|- 3.0
40
41.7
+|- 3.6
39
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
25.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
53.0
+|- 73.7
2
27.5
+|- 79.3
2
Over
500,000
15.8
+|- 77.2
12
45.5
+|- 5.6
12
52.1
+|- 20.3
12
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
43.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
All Sizes
1.4
+|- 0.3
137
28.1
+|- 2.8
133
30.7
+|- 5.6
128
1.0
+|- 0.0
11
23.0
+|- 7.8
11
10.1
+|- 8.4
8
11.7
+|- 6.8
11
1.1
+|- 0.2
7
20.6
+|- 6.9
7
24.3
+|- 76.8
7
(Continued)
179
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Treatment Plant Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
ซ
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
13.9
+I-0.7
4
17.0
+|- 24.5
4
1.3
+|- 0.5
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
0.2
+I-0.7
3
16.8
+|- 0.3
2
33.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
28.8
+|- 3.0
2
0.0
+|- 0.0
2
5.3
+|- 3.2
2
0.5
+|- 0.0
1
62.5
+|- 0.0
1
3.0
+|- 0.0
1
Sub, 500
or less
0.2
+I-0.7
3
16.8
+|- 0.3
2
33.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
6
18.8
+|- 7.9
6
11.5
+|- 78.7
6
2.6
+|- 7.9
6
0.5
+|- 0.0
1
62.5
+|- 0.0
1
3.0
+|- 0.0
1
501 -
3,300
1.5
+|- 0.9
7
25.2
+|- 73.7
6
24.5
+|- 6.8
5
1.5
+|- 0.5
12
17.4
+|- 4.8
12
19.8
+|- 74.3
10
7.2
+|- 3.6
12
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
39.3
+I-26.7
3
0.9
+|- 0.2
3
3,301 -
10,000
1.5
+I-0.7
8
24.0
+|- 4.4
8
25.0
+|- 6.3
8
1.8
+|- 0.4
3
16.9
+|- 9.8
3
0.0
+|- 0.0
2
12.4
+|- 4.8
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
10,001 -
50,000
3.8
+|- 0.8
5
19.9
+I-3.7
4
11.1
+|- 2.2
4
1.5
+I-0.7
2
10.8
+|- 3.9
2
0.0
+|- 0.0
2
16.0
+|- 0.0
1
4.5
+|- 5.8
2
27.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
6.2
+I-2.7
10
27.1
+|- 2.6
10
42.8
+|- 8.2
10
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.9
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
32.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
100,001-
500,000
15.1
+|- 2.8
25
26.8
+|- 2.3
25
39.2
+|- 4.5
24
3.0
+|- 0.0
1
19.2
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
15.0
+|- 0.0
1
21.0
+|- 0.0
1
43.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
Over
500,000
59.5
+I-35.6
7
28.9
+|- 4.4
7
42.6
+|- 2.4
7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
11.0
+|- 72.2
2
45.1
+|- 2.6
2
36.4
+|- 4.5
2
All Sizes
3.1
+|- 7.2
65
23.5
+|- 5.9
62
26.8
+|- 4.0
59
1.4
+|- 0.4
25
17.6
+|- 3.3
25
16.3
+|- 72.5
22
6.5
+|- 3.3
24
1.2
+|- 0.5
9
45.1
+I-27.7
8
2.9
+|- 2.5
8
(Continued)
180
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Distribution System Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
ซ
*
*
1.3
+|- 0.6
3
12.1
+|- 1.0
3
0.0
+|- 0.0
3
4.5
+|- 4.2
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
0.7
+I-17
5
14.7
+|- 1.4
4
27.3
+|- 715
3
1.1
+|- 0.2
11
16.8
+|- 5.8
11
2.8
+|- 5.2
8
4.6
+|- 4.2
11
0.5
+|- 0.0
1
62.5
+|- 0.0
1
3.0
+|- 0.0
1
Sub, 500
or less
0.7
+I-7.7
5
14.7
+|- 1.4
4
27.3
+|- 77.5
3
1.2
+|- 0.2
14
15.6
+|- 4.5
14
1.9
+I-3.7
11
4.6
+|- 3.3
14
0.5
+|- 0.0
1
62.5
+|- 0.0
1
3.0
+|- 0.0
1
501 -
3,300
1.3
+|- 0.5
19
16.7
+I-2.7
18
34.7
+|- 70.6
17
1.3
+|- 0.4
16
18.7
+|- 3.6
16
17.6
+|- 72.0
10
10.4
+I-3.7
16
1.7
+I-0.7
5
18.1
+I-8.7
5
16.6
+|- 77.7
5
3,301 -
10,000
2.6
+|- 0.8
25
18.3
+I-2.7
25
19.9
+I-5.7
24
1.4
+|- 0.6
3
10.5
+|- 2.6
2
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
19.7
+|- 72.5
3
2.0
+|- 7.6
2
59.5
+|- 67.3
2
30.0
+|- 76.3
2
10,001 -
50,000
8.1
+|- 2.3
22
21.4
+|- 7.9
20
34.9
+I-7.7
20
2.9
+|- 2.2
6
12.9
+|- 3.9
6
13.7
+I-20.7
5
23.4
+|- 74.3
5
12.0
+|- 0.0
1
26.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
17.4
+I-2.6
24
24.0
+|- 7.7
24
46.9
+I-7.7
23
2.3
+|- 7.3
3
16.6
+|- 8.0
3
13.3
+|- 20.5
3
26.7
+|- 73.5
3
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
25.0
+|- 0.0
1
12.0
+|- 0.0
1
100,001-
500,000
31.0
+|- 5.4
38
23.2
+|- 7.6
37
44.1
+|- 3.8
36
2.8
+|- 0.6
4
13.4
+|- 2.3
4
27.0
+|- 29.5
3
41.4
+|- 77.7
4
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
35.0
+|- 24.4
2
29.1
+|- 8.9
2
Over
500,000
51.9
+I-23.3
9
25.3
+|- 4.5
9
60.3
+I-27.0
9
4.0
+|- 0.0
1
11.2
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
29.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
4.2
+|- 0.9
142
18.1
+|- 7.2
137
30.4
+|- 4.8
132
1.3
+|- 0.2
47
16.6
+I-2.7
46
8.4
+|- 6.0
34
9.0
+|- 2.6
46
1.7
+|- 0.8
12
32.2
+|- 79.6
12
16.6
+|- 9.0
12
(Continued)
181
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Administrative Staff
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
11.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
2
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
ซ
*
*
ซ
*
*
101 -
500
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
15.0
+|- 0.0
1
33.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.1
+|- 0.2
11
15.5
+\-6.1
10
3.9
+|- 7.0
7
6.7
+\-4.1
11
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
50.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.5
+|- 0.0
1
Sub, 500
or less
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
15.0
+|- 0.0
1
33.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.1
+|- 0.2
12
14.9
+|- 5.4
11
2.7
+I-5.7
9
6.2
+I-3.7
12
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
50.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.5
+|- 0.0
1
501 -
3,300
0.7
+|- 0.4
13
16.3
+|- 2.2
12
29.1
+|- 8.6
13
1.3
+|- 0.3
16
12.0
+|- 2.3
15
7.8
+|- 10.8
11
12.1
+|- 4. 1
16
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
35.0
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
3,301 -
10,000
1.6
+|- 0.3
19
15.5
+|- 1.9
19
20.5
+|- 4.4
18
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
18.9
+\-9.1
3
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
6.9
+|- 4.8
3
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.6
+|- 0.0
1
35.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
2.5
+|- 0.6
20
21.3
+|- 3.4
19
36.4
+|- 7.8
19
1.4
+|- 0.4
6
18.0
+|- 4.5
6
20.6
+|- 77.9
6
20.6
+|- 70.5
6
4.0
+|- 0.0
1
25.0
+|- 0.0
1
35.0
+|- 0.0
1
50,001 -
100,000
5.4
+|- 7.6
24
23.8
+|- 2.6
24
45.4
+|- 6.2
24
1.5
+I-0.7
2
9.7
+|- 7.6
2
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
22.0
+I-2.7
2
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
35.0
+|- 0.0
1
5.0
+|- 0.0
1
100,001-
500,000
15.8
+|- 4.8
37
24.7
+|- 2.6
36
43.2
+|- 3.8
36
4.9
+I-2.7
9
20.4
+|- 6.0
9
31.3
+|- 72.5
9
27.1
+|- 9.8
9
3.5
+I-7.7
6
38.1
+|- 76.7
6
29.8
+I-6.7
6
Over
500,000
93.8
+|- 83.4
11
22.8
+|- 7.7
11
54.6
+I-20.7
11
63.6
+|- 76.2
3
19.5
+I-4.8
3
15.0
+|- 77.5
2
26.2
+|- 2.6
3
57.7
+I-63.7
3
35.7
+|- 7.7
3
40.0
+|- 0.0
3
All Sizes
3.1
+|- 7.0
125
18.1
+|- 7.5
122
30.3
+|- 4.2
122
1.4
+|- 0.2
51
14.0
+|- 2.6
49
7.0
+|- 5.8
39
10.1
+|- 2.8
51
2.3
+|- 7.8
14
38.4
+|- 73.7
14
12.6
+|- 72.9
14
(Continued)
182
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
All Systems
Managers
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.5
+|- 0.3
17
30.0
+|- 12.9
15
23.8
+|- 19.5
14
0.9
+|- 0.2
17
19.7
+|- 5.6
13
7.0
+|- 8.6
14
3.1
+|- 1.3
16
1.5
+|- 1.0
2
9.2
+|- 1.8
2
4.2
+|- 8.0
2
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.2
22
21.0
+|- 5.8
20
21.2
+|- 7.9
18
1.1
+|- 0.3
20
15.7
+|- 10.2
12
3.6
+I-5.7
16
7.7
+|- 3.3
19
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
28.2
+|- 6.3
4
5.9
+|- 8.0
4
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.2
39
25.4
+|- 6.5
35
22.4
+|- 70.3
32
1.0
+|- 0.2
37
18.1
+|- 5.3
25
5.4
+|- 5.2
30
5.5
+|- 1.8
35
1.0
+|- 0.0
6
27.8
+|- 6.2
6
5.9
+|- 7.8
6
501 -
3,300
0.6
+I-0.7
68
21.3
+|- 2.6
66
28.3
+|- 7.3
55
1.0
+|- 0.0
32
20.4
+|- 3.5
27
23.9
+|- 74.4
24
10.1
+|- 3.3
32
1.0
+|- 0.3
5
17.8
+I-5.7
5
16.0
+|- 8.9
5
3,301 -
10,000
1.3
+|- 0.4
111
27.5
+I-2.0
102
29.6
+|- 5.2
89
1.1
+|- 0.2
6
27.2
+|- 7.2
6
36.1
+I-28.9
5
8.0
+|- 3.9
5
1.0
+|- 0.0
5
27.7
+|- 73.2
3
33.9
+|- 73.0
4
10,001 -
50,000
1.8
+|- 0.3
139
30.7
+|- 7.5
134
31.6
+|- 2.8
127
1.5
+|- 0.5
8
56.1
+|- 37.9
8
33.5
+|- 70.7
8
21.5
+|- 77.7
7
1.9
+|- 0.2
3
34.4
+I-4.7
3
59.5
+|- 77.7
3
50,001 -
100,000
3.7
+I-0.7
107
35.8
+|- 7.9
105
35.7
+I-3.7
101
2.0
+|- 0.0
3
34.1
+|- 6.8
3
27.7
+I-2.7
3
21.7
+|- 78.9
3
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
43.3
+|- 77.9
2
12.5
+|- 72.4
2
100,001-
500,000
8.9
+|- 7.9
194
38.2
+I-7.7
190
41.4
+I-2.7
185
1.4
+|- 0.3
5
52.2
+|- 78.8
5
12.0
+|- 77.4
4
27.1
+|- 5.3
5
1.2
+|- 0.2
9
44.5
+|- 77.7
4
33.8
+|- 6.9
7
Over
500,000
27.4
+|- 9.0
49
40.5
+|- 7.9
49
42.1
+|- 6.6
48
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
43.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
All Sizes
1.6
+|- 0.2
707
26.7
+|- 7.7
681
29.0
+I-3.7
637
1.0
+I-0.7
91
20.9
+I-3.7
74
12.7
+|- 5.9
74
7.8
+|- 7.6
87
1.0
+I-0.7
31
24.3
+I-4.7
24
18.9
+I-5.7
28
(Continued)
183
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
All Systems
Treatment Plant Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.4
+|- 0.3
25
19.6
+|- 7.4
18
17.2
+|- 12.8
18
1.1
+|- 0.2
51
15.0
+I-3.7
31
5.9
+|- 5.5
36
5.4
+|- 2.0
49
0.8
+I-0.7
33
36.1
+|- 72.7
35
2.8
+|- 1.3
38
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.2
57
16.4
+|- 2.9
46
19.0
+|- 6.5
37
1.0
+I-0.7
61
14.7
+|- 2.3
51
9.8
+|- 6.0
51
9.5
+|- 2.3
59
0.9
+I-0.7
54
39.5
+|- 77.6
50
3.5
+|- 1.4
54
Sub, 500
or less
0.4
+|- 0.2
82
17.3
+I-2.9
64
18.3
+|- 6.4
55
1.1
+I-0.7
112
14.8
+|- 7.9
82
8.0
+|- 4.2
87
7.6
+|- 7.7
108
0.9
+I-0.7
87
38.2
+I-8.7
85
3.3
+|- 7.0
92
501 -
3,300
1.0
+|- 0.2
107
16.3
+|- 7.9
101
23.8
+|- 5.3
89
1.3
+|- 0.2
65
15.7
+I-2.7
64
19.0
+|- 7.9
59
9.5
+I-2.7
66
1.0
+|- 0.2
21
36.0
+|- 72.2
20
9.9
+|- 6.9
22
3,301 -
10,000
2.4
+|- 0.4
100
18.1
+|- 7.2
94
35.4
+|- 5.8
80
1.6
+|- 0.5
14
15.2
+|- 3.6
14
13.5
+|- 70.2
11
14.7
+I-4.7
14
1.0
+|- 0.0
5
27.3
+I-7.7
4
15.4
+|- 73.7
5
10,001 -
50,000
4.4
+I-0.7
122
19.1
+|- 7.0
118
33.4
+|- 3.5
111
1.3
+|- 0.3
15
15.2
+|- 7.2
13
8.9
+I-6.7
12
22.3
+|- 7.7
13
2.2
+|- 2.6
4
22.5
+|- 72.0
3
31.4
+|- 7.2
3
50,001 -
100,000
11.2
+|- 4.3
93
19.9
+|- 7.5
90
34.9
+I-3.5
85
1.6
+|- 7.2
5
15.8
+I-3.7
5
21.6
+|- 76.6
3
29.4
+I-6.7
5
5.0
+I-5.7
3
19.8
+|- 9.2
2
40.0
+|- 0.0
3
100,001-
500,000
21.1
+|- 3.3
176
23.3
+|- 0.6
175
42.4
+|- 2.2
170
1.8
+|- 0.6
12
13.5
+I-2.7
11
3.8
+|- 3.8
9
21.5
+|- 2.9
10
7.7
+|- 2.8
10
29.9
+|- 9.4
9
38.8
+|- 3.4
10
Over
500,000
80.3
+|- 78.9
43
24.2
+|- 7.4
43
42.1
+I-2.8
43
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
13.7
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
11.0
+|- 72.2
2
45.1
+|- 2.6
2
36.4
+|- 4.5
2
All Sizes
2.6
+|- 0.3
723
17.7
+I-7.7
685
26.9
+|- 2.9
633
1.2
+I-0.7
224
15.2
+|- 7.3
190
12.1
+|- 4.0
182
8.9
+|- 7.3
217
1.0
+I-0.7
132
37.4
+|- 7.0
125
5.2
+|- 7.6
137
(Continued)
184
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
All Systems
Distribution System Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.6
+|- 0.2
19
18.3
+|- 6.4
14
21.0
+|- 77.6
15
1.2
+|- 0.3
19
14.1
+|- 2.3
13
0.0
+I-0.7
20
2.3
+|- 1.4
19
0.8
+|- 0.2
15
34.4
+|- 14.2
12
2.1
+|- 1.8
15
101 -
500
0.5
+|- 0.3
48
15.6
+|- 2.3
40
19.5
+I-5.7
36
1.2
+|- 0.3
49
15.0
+|- 2.6
43
6.4
+|- 5.2
44
7.1
+|- 2.6
49
0.8
+I-0.7
19
38.0
+|- 19.0
19
5.0
+|- 3.6
19
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.2
67
16.4
+|- 2.4
54
20.0
+|- 7.2
51
1.2
+|- 0.3
68
14.8
+\-2.1
56
4.2
+|- 3.6
64
5.8
+|- 1.9
68
0.8
+I-0.7
34
36.5
+|- 72.6
31
3.5
+|- 2.0
34
501 -
3,300
1.0
+|- 0.3
106
15.5
+|- 1.3
100
32.0
+|- 6.3
90
1.4
+|- 0.2
54
14.9
+|- 2.2
53
15.1
+|- 8.2
46
9.0
+|- 1.7
55
1.2
+|- 0.6
12
23.4
+|- 73.8
11
11.9
+|- 7.9
11
3,301 -
10,000
3.2
+|- 0.5
120
17.1
+|- 7.0
113
30.0
+I-4.6
102
1.3
+|- 0.3
11
11.6
+|- 2.6
10
16.9
+|- 77.4
7
22.8
+|- 6.2
11
2.0
+|- 0.8
4
40.2
+|- 40.3
4
30.0
+|- 77.5
4
10,001 -
50,000
6.9
+|- 0.8
139
18.6
+|- 7.0
135
34.7
+I-3.7
128
2.6
+I-7.7
19
12.8
+|- 2.8
19
12.9
+|- 70.4
15
27.0
+|- 6.4
18
15.6
+I-2.7
2
20.2
+|- 4.4
2
54.5
+|- 77.0
2
50,001 -
100,000
15.3
+|- 7.9
96
19.1
+|- 7.4
96
37.7
+I-3.7
94
3.0
+|- 7.2
14
13.8
+|- 2.2
14
10.8
+|- 9.2
12
31.3
+|- 4.8
14
3.7
+|- 7.6
4
25.6
+|- 7.0
2
28.4
+|- 27.2
3
100,001-
500,000
34.5
+I-5.7
171
21.2
+|- 0.6
171
42.6
+|- 2.2
166
3.2
+|- 0.8
16
12.4
+|- 7.5
16
14.4
+|- 8.2
15
29.6
+|- 5.9
16
2.8
+|- 7.5
6
25.9
+|- 73.9
6
32.3
+|- 6.6
6
Over
500,000
142.6
+|- 35.4
43
23.0
+|- 7.4
43
45.2
+|- 7.6
42
3.9
+I-2.6
3
11.4
+I-2.7
3
2.9
+|- 4.4
3
32.9
+|- 9.0
3
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.0
+|- 0.0
1
8.0
+|- 0.0
1
All Sizes
3.8
+|- 0.3
742
16.8
+|- 0.8
712
29.4
+|- 3.0
673
1.3
+|- 0.2
185
14.6
+|- 7.4
171
8.2
+|- 3.6
162
8.8
+|- 7.2
185
1.1
+|- 0.3
63
33.7
+|- 9.9
57
7.1
+|- 2.4
61
(Continued)
185
-------
Table 84 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source/Employee Category
All Systems
Administrative Staff
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.4
+|- 0.4
10
16.3
+|- 3.3
9
13.3
+|- 11.9
8
1.0
+|- 0.0
15
12.9
+|- 5.6
10
1.6
+I-3.7
18
5.0
+|- 3.4
15
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
11.3
+I-2.7
3
0.2
+I-0.7
3
Data: Q.25
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.2
27
16.6
+|- 10.2
24
19.3
+|- 8.2
23
1.0
+I-0.7
52
12.6
+|- 2.6
41
5.5
+|- 4.5
44
7.5
+\-2.1
50
1.0
+|- 0.0
9
21.5
+|- 76.3
9
6.4
+|- 5.6
9
Sub, 500
or less
0.4
+|- 0.2
37
16.5
+|- 6.8
33
17.7
+|- 7.0
31
1.0
+I-0.7
67
12.7
+|- 2.5
51
4.2
+|- 3.3
62
7.0
+|- 1.8
65
1.0
+|- 0.0
12
19.7
+|- 73.9
12
5.4
+|- 4.9
12
Notes: Labor costs includes wages, salaries
501 -
3,300
0.8
+|- 0.2
63
16.0
+|- 3.4
60
24.4
+|- 6.0
55
1.2
+I-0.7
82
13.9
+I-2.7
77
15.8
+I-7.7
65
12.6
+|- 2.5
82
1.0
+|- 0.0
6
29.0
+|- 79.6
6
8.3
+|- 5.2
6
3,301 -
10,000
1.9
+|- 0.3
95
15.2
+|- 7.0
88
31.3
+|- 5.5
78
1.2
+|- 0.2
16
13.8
+I-4.5
15
16.0
+|- 8.5
12
14.9
+|- 7.3
16
1.5
+|- 7.0
2
18.3
+|- 3.5
2
37.5
+I-5.7
2
10,001 -
50,000
2.9
+|- 0.5
128
20.9
+|- 2.6
123
33.7
+|- 3.2
116
1.7
+|- 0.6
17
23.2
+|- 70.8
16
19.4
+|- 70.6
15
18.2
+|- 5.3
17
2.2
+|- 7.3
3
16.5
+|- 5.6
3
43.5
+|- 22.2
3
50,001 -
100,000
6.0
+|- 7.3
101
19.7
+|- 7.6
99
37.2
+I-3.6
93
1.3
+|- 0.3
11
14.0
+I-2.8
11
17.6
+I-9.7
8
22.3
+|- 4.9
11
1.3
+I-0.7
3
32.7
+|- 3.9
2
12.7
+|- 9.6
3
100,001-
500,000
16.3
+I-3.7
188
22.8
+|- 0.9
184
42.1
+I-2.7
181
2.9
+|- 7.0
29
16.1
+|- 2.3
29
17.7
+|- 8.4
26
24.4
+I-3.7
27
2.8
+|- 0.8
13
33.6
+|- 70.7
11
23.9
+I-5.7
12
Over
500,000
93.1
+I-35.8
47
22.2
+I-7.7
47
43.8
+|- 6.9
46
29.0
+|- 30. 7
7
21.8
+I-4.8
8
26.7
+I-9.7
7
24.8
+|- 7.2
6
45.0
+I-57.7
4
30.8
+|- 8.0
4
32.1
+|- 9.9
4
All Sizes
2.7
+|- 0.3
659
17.4
+|- 7.8
634
28.0
+|- 2.6
600
1.2
+I-0.7
229
13.7
+|- 7.6
207
9.8
+|- 3.5
195
10.4
+|- 7.5
224
1.3
+|- 0.2
43
23.0
+|- 70.6
40
10.3
+|- 4.2
42
, and fringe benefits.
186
-------
Table 85
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
Public Systems
Managers
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.3
+|- 0.4
6
34.4
+|- 12.0
6
28.7
+|- 213
6
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
18.4
+|- 4.5
1
7.9
+|- 16.0
1
3.7
+|- 2.3
7
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
8.3
+|- 0.0
1
8.0
+|- 0.0
1
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.3
14
23.0
+|- 7.3
14
27.4
+|- 5.9
13
1.3
+|- 0.6
9
20.8
+|- 73.3
6
9.3
+|- 13.0
6
7.6
+|- 5.5
8
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
5.0
+|- 0.0
1
Sub, 500
or less
0.4
+|- 0.3
20
26.0
+|- 6.9
20
27.7
+|- 7.5
19
1.1
+|- 0.3
16
19.3
+|- 6.0
13
8.5
+|- 70.7
13
5.6
+I-3.7
15
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
30.1
+I-210
2
5.9
+|- 1.9
2
501 -
3,300
0.6
+I-0.7
55
20.8
+|- 3.0
53
29.3
+|- 8.9
46
1.0
+|- 0.0
23
19.2
+|- 2.2
21
24.0
+|- 75.8
20
8.8
+I-2.7
23
1.0
+|- 0.4
4
17.2
+|- 6.4
4
19.2
+|- 70.8
4
3,301 -
10,000
1.3
+|- 0.5
93
27.5
+|- 2.0
88
31.6
+|- 5.4
78
1.1
+|- 0.2
4
23.4
+I-4.7
4
19.5
+|- 74.4
3
8.3
+I-4.7
4
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
21.6
+I-0.7
2
31.1
+|- 76.3
3
10,001 -
50,000
1.9
+|- 0.3
128
31.0
+|- 7.6
123
32.1
+|- 3.0
116
1.5
+|- 0.6
7
58.3
+|- 38.4
7
33.5
+|- 77.3
7
22.2
+|- 78.3
6
1.9
+|- 0.2
3
34.4
+I-4.7
3
59.5
+|- 77.7
3
50,001 -
100,000
3.4
+|- 0.6
99
35.3
+|- 7.9
97
35.7
+I-3.8
93
2.0
+|- 0.0
2
31.0
+I-4.7
2
26.4
+|- 7.9
2
30.6
+|- 72.5
2
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
43.3
+|- 77.9
2
12.5
+|- 72.4
2
100,001-
500,000
7.5
+|- 7.0
178
38.3
+I-7.7
174
40.2
+|- 7.5
169
1.4
+|- 0.3
5
52.2
+|- 78.8
5
12.0
+|- 77.4
4
27.1
+|- 5.3
5
1.2
+|- 0.2
8
44.5
+|- 77.7
4
32.8
+|- 8.0
6
Over
500,000
30.0
+I-70.7
44
41.2
+I-2.0
44
41.4
+I-7.7
43
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
43.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
All Sizes
1.7
+|- 0.2
617
27.2
+|- 7.5
599
31.2
+|- 3.0
564
1.1
+|- 0.2
57
21.7
+|- 4.2
52
17.1
+|- 9.4
49
8.0
+I-2.7
55
1.1
+|- 0.2
24
21.4
+|- 4.6
18
26.3
+|- 70.2
21
(Continued)
187
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
Public Systems
Treatment Plant Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.7
+|- 0.8
10
22.6
+|- 13.3
10
29.0
+|- 20. 1
9
1.3
+|- 0.6
11
14.3
+|- 2.8
11
17.1
+|- 18.8
9
4.9
+|- 3.5
11
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
7.0
+|- 0.0
1
101 -
500
0.4
+I-0.7
28
15.6
+|- 3.6
27
21.2
+\-9.1
23
1.0
+I-0.7
26
14.9
+|- 2.3
24
17.5
+|- 9.2
22
10.0
+|- 3.2
24
1.0
+|- 0.0
10
31.4
+|- 20.8
10
3.5
+|- 2.2
10
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.3
38
17.5
+I-4.7
37
23.6
+|- 8.9
32
1.1
+|- 0.3
37
14.7
+|- 1.8
35
17.3
+|- 9.5
31
8.0
+I-2.7
35
1.0
+|- 0.0
11
31.2
+|- 20.6
11
3.5
+\-2.1
11
501 -
3,300
1.0
+|- 0.2
87
16.0
+|- 2.3
84
24.1
+|- 5.6
77
1.3
+|- 0.3
50
15.3
+\-2.1
49
23.6
+|- 8.8
48
9.8
+|- 2.5
51
1.2
+|- 0.3
12
33.5
+|- 11.2
12
15.0
+|- 70.2
14
3,301 -
10,000
2.5
+|- 0.5
87
17.8
+|- 1.3
82
34.4
+I-6.7
71
1.5
+|- 0.4
12
14.3
+|- 3.2
12
14.1
+|- 70.8
10
15.1
+|- 4.8
12
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
31.1
+|- 7.8
3
8.5
+I-8.7
4
10,001 -
50,000
4.4
+I-0.7
112
19.3
+|- 7.0
109
33.7
+|- 3.6
102
1.2
+|- 0.2
13
16.6
+I-8.7
11
9.0
+I-8.7
10
23.8
+I-9.7
11
2.2
+|- 2.6
4
22.5
+|- 72.0
3
31.4
+|- 7.2
3
50,001 -
100,000
9.1
+|- 7.3
86
19.8
+|- 7.5
83
34.6
+I-3.6
78
1.6
+|- 7.2
5
15.8
+I-3.7
5
21.6
+|- 76.6
3
29.4
+I-6.7
5
5.0
+I-5.7
3
19.8
+|- 9.2
2
40.0
+|- 0.0
3
100,001-
500,000
17.4
+|- 7.8
160
23.3
+I-0.7
159
40.9
+|- 7.7
154
1.8
+|- 0.6
12
13.5
+I-2.7
11
3.8
+|- 3.8
9
21.5
+|- 2.9
10
8.0
+|- 3.3
8
32.4
+|- 77.7
7
39.4
+|- 4. 1
8
Over
500,000
89.9
+|- 79.7
38
24.5
+|- 7.6
38
41.9
+I-3.7
38
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
13.7
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
11.0
+|- 72.2
2
45.1
+|- 2.6
2
36.4
+|- 4.5
2
All Sizes
3.3
+|- 0.4
608
17.7
+|- 7.3
592
29.1
+|- 3.0
552
1.2
+|- 0.2
130
15.0
+|- 1.4
124
20.5
+I-6.7
112
10.1
+|- 7.8
125
1.3
+|- 0.2
44
31.9
+I-9.7
40
11.8
+|- 6.4
45
(Continued)
188
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
Public Systems
Distribution System Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.3
+|- 0.3
6
27.0
+|- 15.6
6
28.7
+I-213
6
1.6
+|- 0.5
8
15.0
+|- 2.2
8
0.1
+|- 0.3
7
4.4
+|- 2.8
8
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
0.5
+|- 0.3
28
15.6
+|- 3.2
27
22.8
+|- 6.3
23
1.0
+I-0.7
24
16.7
+|- 3.5
23
6.1
+|- 6.3
20
6.8
+|- 2.2
24
1.0
+|- 0.0
7
14.0
+I-6.7
7
8.8
+|- 7.5
7
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.3
34
17.1
+I-3.8
33
23.8
+|- 6.4
29
1.2
+|- 0.2
32
16.2
+I-2.7
31
4.4
+I-4.8
27
6.2
+|- 1.9
32
1.0
+|- 0.0
7
14.0
+I-6.7
7
8.8
+|- 7.5
7
501 -
3,300
1.2
+|- 0.3
87
15.5
+|- 1.5
84
33.3
+|- 6.9
76
1.5
+|- 0.3
37
15.3
+|- 3.0
36
18.3
+|- 10.9
32
9.3
+|- 2.5
38
1.6
+|- 0.6
5
15.8
+|- 7.2
5
20.3
+|- 8.0
5
3,301 -
10,000
3.3
+|- 0.6
101
16.9
+I-17
95
30.9
+I-4.9
87
1.3
+|- 0.3
11
11.6
+I-2.6
10
16.9
+|- 714
7
22.8
+|- 6.2
11
2.0
+I-7.7
3
47.0
+|- 50.6
3
26.7
+|- 72.5
3
10,001 -
50,000
6.8
+|- 0.9
129
18.8
+|- 7.0
126
34.8
+|- 3.2
119
2.7
+I-7.7
17
12.6
+|- 3.0
17
13.0
+|- 70.5
14
28.7
+I-5.7
16
15.6
+I-2.7
2
20.2
+|- 4.4
2
54.5
+|- 77.0
2
50,001 -
100,000
15.3
+I-2.0
92
19.0
+|- 7.5
91
37.4
+I-3.8
89
3.0
+|- 7.4
12
12.2
+|- 7.3
12
5.9
+I-9.7
10
33.8
+I-3.9
12
3.7
+|- 7.6
4
25.6
+|- 7.0
2
28.4
+|- 27.2
3
100,001-
500,000
30.0
+|- 3.2
158
21.1
+I-0.7
157
41.2
+|- 7.7
152
3.2
+|- 0.8
16
12.4
+|- 7.5
16
14.4
+|- 8.2
15
29.6
+|- 5.9
16
3.1
+|- 7.6
5
28.4
+|- 76.7
5
30.8
+|- 7.6
5
Over
500,000
145.6
+I-37.0
41
23.0
+|- 7.4
41
45.8
+|- 7.8
40
7.1
+I-2.5
2
8.8
+|- 7.9
2
7.7
+|- 6.3
2
21.3
+|- 6.3
2
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.0
+|- 0.0
1
8.0
+|- 0.0
1
All Sizes
4.5
+|- 0.5
642
17.0
+|- 7.0
627
31.9
+|- 3.0
592
1.5
+|- 0.2
127
15.2
+|- 7.7
124
11.1
+|- 5.5
107
10.6
+|- 7.7
127
2.0
+I-7.7
27
19.8
+|- 9.4
25
16.9
+|- 6.9
26
(Continued)
189
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
Public Systems
Administrative Staff
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.5
+I-0.7
5
13.9
+|- 6.5
5
31.4
+I-3.7
4
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
12.0
+|- 7.2
3
0.2
+|- 0.4
4
5.8
+|- 5.5
3
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
101 -
500
0.5
+|- 0.3
15
20.5
+|- 16.6
15
26.6
+|- 6.8
15
1.1
+|- 0.2
31
12.5
+|- 3.3
28
10.0
+|- 8.3
24
7.7
+\-2.1
29
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
20.8
+|- 27.5
4
9.4
+|- 7.5
4
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.3
20
19.0
+|- 73.0
20
27.2
+|- 5.9
19
1.1
+I-0.7
34
12.4
+I-3.0
31
8.2
+|- 7.0
28
7.5
+|- 2.0
32
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
20.8
+|- 27.5
4
9.4
+|- 7.5
4
501 -
3,300
0.8
+|- 0.2
53
16.0
+|- 4.2
51
25.7
+|- 6.6
47
1.1
+I-0.7
64
13.2
+|- 2.3
60
18.5
+|- 8.2
52
13.5
+|- 2.8
64
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
37.0
+|- 25.2
3
8.0
+|- 6.8
3
3,301 -
10,000
1.9
+|- 0.3
80
14.9
+|- 1.2
76
31.3
+\-6.1
69
1.1
+|- 0.2
14
13.5
+I-4.8
13
10.2
+|- 7.3
10
15.4
+|- 7.6
14
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.6
+|- 0.0
1
35.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
2.8
+|- 0.5
117
21.0
+I-2.7
113
34.1
+|- 3.4
106
1.7
+|- 0.6
17
23.2
+|- 70.8
16
19.4
+|- 70.6
15
18.2
+|- 5.3
17
2.2
+|- 7.3
3
16.5
+|- 5.6
3
43.5
+|- 22.2
3
50,001 -
100,000
5.6
+|- 7.3
94
19.9
+|- 7.7
92
37.2
+I-3.7
86
1.3
+|- 0.3
11
14.0
+I-2.8
11
17.6
+I-9.7
8
22.3
+I-4.9
11
1.5
+|- 0.9
2
32.7
+|- 3.9
2
12.5
+|- 73.8
2
100,001-
500,000
16.6
+|- 3.5
173
23.1
+|- 0.9
169
40.7
+|- 7.6
166
2.9
+|- 7.0
28
16.0
+|- 2.4
28
17.5
+|- 8.6
25
24.6
+|- 3.8
26
3.4
+|- 0.9
10
34.9
+|- 77.7
10
24.6
+|- 6.6
9
Over
500,000
101.5
+|- 40.2
43
22.3
+I-7.7
43
44.6
+I-7.7
42
29.0
+I-30.7
7
21.8
+I-4.8
8
26.7
+I-9.7
7
24.8
+|- 7.2
6
45.0
+I-57.7
4
30.8
+|- 8.0
4
32.1
+|- 9.9
4
All Sizes
3.1
+|- 0.4
580
17.9
+|- 2.2
564
30.7
+|- 2.6
535
1.2
+I-0.7
175
13.5
+|- 7.8
167
14.3
+|- 5.2
145
12.0
+|- 7.7
170
1.6
+|- 0.5
27
26.2
+|- 78.0
27
13.5
+|- 7.5
26
(Continued)
190
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
Private Systems
Managers
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.6
+|- 0.3
11
28.4
+|- 16.3
9
21.7
+|- 26.2
8
0.9
+|- 0.3
10
21.3
+|- 714
6
6.2
+|- 7.9
7
2.5
+|- 1.2
9
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.5
+|- 0.0
1
101 -
500
0.3
+|- 0.4
8
16.5
+|- 5.5
6
8.2
+|- 7.8
5
1.0
+|- 0.0
11
9.1
+I-6.7
6
0.3
+|- 0.5
10
7.7
+\-4.1
11
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
27.9
+|- 6.4
3
5.9
+|- 8.3
3
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.2
19
24.8
+|- 713
15
17.2
+|- 78.7
13
0.9
+I-0.7
21
16.6
+|- 9.2
12
3.1
+I-4.0
17
5.3
+|- 2.5
20
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
27.7
+|- 6.3
4
5.9
+|- 8.2
4
501 -
3,300
0.7
+|- 0.2
13
22.7
+|- 5.6
13
24.3
+|- 8.8
9
1.0
+|- 0.0
9
23.8
+|- 77.3
6
23.8
+|- 35.0
4
12.8
+I-8.7
9
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
5.0
+|- 0.0
1
3,301 -
10,000
1.1
+|- 0.2
18
27.5
+|- 6.0
14
21.3
+|- 73.2
11
1.5
+|- 0.8
2
50.0
+|- 0.0
2
85.0
+|- 0.0
2
4.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
1.5
+|- 0.4
11
25.5
+|- 3.4
11
25.3
+|- 5.8
11
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.4
+|- 0.0
1
34.0
+|- 0.0
1
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
50,001 -
100,000
7.7
+|- 7.5
8
42.0
+|- 7.0
8
35.1
+|- 76.2
8
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
30.0
+|- 0.0
1
5.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
100,001-
500,000
19.5
+|- 70.2
16
37.4
+|- 4.0
16
50.7
+I-9.7
16
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
ซ
*
*
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
Over
500,000
10.6
+I-4.5
5
36.4
+I-4.7
5
46.2
+|- 6.9
5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
1.1
+|- 0.3
90
25.2
+|- 5.5
82
21.2
+|- 9.3
73
1.0
+I-0.7
34
19.5
+|- 7.4
22
7.1
+|- 6.2
25
7.4
+|- 3.0
32
1.0
+|- 0.0
7
27.6
+|- 6.4
6
10.1
+|- 9.9
7
(Continued)
191
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
Private Systems
Treatment Plant Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.4
+|- 0.3
15
17.3
+|- 7.6
8
11.9
+|- 12. 1
9
1.1
+|- 0.2
40
15.5
+|- 5.9
20
2.7
+|- 3.2
27
5.5
+|- 2.4
38
0.8
+I-0.7
32
36.1
+|- 72.7
34
2.8
+|- 1.3
37
101 -
500
0.5
+|- 0.4
29
17.0
+I-4.7
19
17.2
+|- 8.8
14
1.0
+I-0.7
35
14.6
+|- 3.2
27
6.6
+I-6.7
29
9.3
+|- 3.0
35
0.9
+I-0.7
44
40.9
+|- 73.7
40
3.6
+|- 7.5
44
Sub, 500
or less
0.4
+|- 0.3
44
17.1
+I-3.7
27
14.9
+|- 7.5
23
1.0
+I-0.7
75
14.9
+I-2.8
47
4.7
+I-3.5
56
7.5
+I-2.7
73
0.9
+I-0.7
76
38.9
+|- 9.3
74
3.2
+|- 7.0
81
501 -
3,300
0.8
+|- 0.4
20
17.7
+|- 7.9
17
21.9
+|- 78.7
12
1.2
+|- 0.3
15
17.0
+|- 4.8
15
2.8
+I-4.7
11
8.4
+|- 4.4
15
0.8
+|- 0.2
9
38.6
+I-27.8
8
4.0
+|- 2.6
8
3,301 -
10,000
1.9
+I-0.7
13
19.7
+I-2.6
12
42.3
+I-77.7
9
3.5
+|- 3.3
2
28.5
+I-23.0
2
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
9.1
+I-6.7
2
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
4.6
+|- 7.9
10
16.9
+|- 2.2
9
28.5
+|- 70.3
9
2.0
+|- 0.0
2
9.2
+|- 3.2
2
8.7
+|- 6.5
2
16.0
+|- 0.0
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
50,001 -
100,000
41.8
+I-59.5
7
22.1
+I-3.9
7
38.1
+|- 73.6
7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
100,001-
500,000
46.7
+|- 78.2
16
23.1
+|- 0.6
16
52.4
+|- 8.2
16
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
6.5
+I-4.7
2
21.0
+|- 7.0
2
36.0
+|- 4. 1
2
Over
500,000
30.3
+|- 77.8
5
22.9
+I-2.9
5
43.6
+|- 7.0
5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
1.4
+|- 0.6
115
17.6
+|- 2.3
93
20.2
+|- 6.8
81
1.1
+I-0.7
94
15.5
+|- 2.4
66
4.4
+|- 3.0
70
7.7
+|- 7.9
92
0.9
+I-0.7
88
38.7
+|- 8.5
85
3.6
+I-7.7
92
(Continued)
192
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
Private Systems
Distribution System Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.6
+|- 0.2
13
15.1
+I-3.7
8
18.5
+I-219
9
0.9
+I-0.7
11
13.1
+|- 3.9
5
0.0
+|- 0.0
13
0.8
+|- 0.2
11
0.8
+|- 0.2
15
34.4
+|- 14.2
12
2.1
+|- 1.8
15
101 -
500
0.6
+|- 0.5
20
15.7
+|- 2.5
13
13.3
+|- 8.4
13
1.4
+|- 0.6
25
13.4
+I-3.7
20
6.6
+|- 7.6
24
7.3
+|- 4.3
25
0.6
+I-0.7
12
50.6
+|- 23.8
12
3.0
+I-2.7
12
Sub, 500
or less
0.6
+|- 0.3
33
15.4
+|- 2.2
21
16.1
+|- 72.5
22
1.2
+|- 0.4
36
13.3
+I-3.0
25
4.1
+|- 5.0
37
5.5
+|- 3.3
36
0.8
+I-0.7
27
42.1
+|- 73.9
24
2.4
+|- 7.5
27
501 -
3,300
0.5
+|- 0.2
19
15.2
+|- 0.9
16
24.6
+|- 73.6
14
1.1
+|- 0.2
17
14.1
+I-3.7
17
9.1
+|- 8.2
14
8.5
+|- 3.2
17
1.1
+I-0.7
7
27.3
+|- 79.0
6
7.6
+|- 6.4
6
3,301 -
10,000
3.1
+|- 7.3
19
17.9
+|- 7.8
18
26.1
+|- 72.0
15
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
7.3
+|- 2.8
10
15.4
+|- 2.6
9
33.5
+|- 73.7
9
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
14.8
+|- 0.5
2
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
6.3
+|- 2.9
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
50,001 -
100,000
15.3
+|- 5.4
4
21.1
+|- 4.4
5
42.7
+|- 74.8
5
3.0
+|- 7.3
2
22.7
+|- 5.6
2
34.2
+|- 7.8
2
17.5
+|- 9.9
2
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
100,001-
500,000
69.9
+|- 26.0
13
21.5
+|- 0.9
14
53.2
+I-8.7
14
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
13.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
Over
500,000
79.0
+I-35.6
2
22.2
+|- 4.2
2
34.0
+|- 74.8
2
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
13.0
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
1.8
+I-0.7
100
15.9
+|- 7.3
85
20.8
+|- 8.0
81
1.2
+|- 0.3
58
13.6
+|- 2.3
47
5.2
+|- 4.4
55
6.4
+|- 2.4
58
0.8
+|- 0.2
36
38.8
+|- 77.9
32
3.9
+|- 2.0
35
(Continued)
193
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
Private Systems
Administrative staff
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.4
+|- 0.4
5
17.5
+|- 1.6
4
7.1
+|- 5.9
4
1.0
+|- 0.0
12
13.3
+I-8.7
7
2.0
+|- 4.0
14
4.8
+\-4.1
12
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
11.3
+I-2.7
3
0.2
+I-0.7
3
101 -
500
0.3
+|- 0.3
12
11.0
+|- 1.6
9
6.6
+|- 7.9
8
1.0
+I-0.7
21
12.8
+|- 4.2
13
1.4
+|- 2.6
20
7.4
+I-3.7
21
1.0
+|- 0.0
5
22.5
+I-3.7
5
2.2
+I-0.7
5
Sub, 500
or less
0.4
+|- 0.2
17
13.9
+I-2.5
13
6.8
+|- 5.2
12
1.0
+|- 0.0
33
12.9
+\-4.1
20
1.7
+|- 2.3
34
6.7
+|- 2.8
33
1.0
+|- 0.0
8
18.7
+|- 7.0
8
1.5
+|- 1.0
8
501 -
3,300
0.8
+|- 0.5
10
16.3
+\-2.1
9
17.7
+|- 10.8
8
1.2
+|- 0.3
18
15.9
+|- 3.8
17
8.1
+|- 714
13
9.9
+|- 4.0
18
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
20.0
+|- 74.3
3
8.6
+|- 7.7
3
3,301 -
10,000
1.9
+|- 0.6
15
16.3
+|- 7.8
12
31.5
+|- 73.5
9
2.0
+|- 0.0
2
20.0
+|- 0.0
2
85.0
+|- 0.0
2
7.0
+|- 7.4
2
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
10,001 -
50,000
3.5
+I-7.7
11
18.0
+|- 7.6
10
27.7
+|- 6.9
10
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
50,001 -
100,000
11.9
+|- 8.0
7
16.4
+|- 2.3
7
37.5
+|- 74. 7
7
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
ซ
*
*
13.2
+|- 0.0
1
100,001-
500,000
13.9
+|- 4.0
15
20.3
+|- 7.7
15
52.3
+|- 8.6
15
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
18.1
+|- 0.0
1
22.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
20.3
+|- 0.0
1
21.9
+|- 77.7
3
Over
500,000
33.1
+|- 70.2
4
20.9
+|- 7.8
4
38.0
+|- 5.3
4
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
All Sizes
1.4
+|- 0.4
79
15.3
+|- 7.4
70
17.0
+|- 5.4
65
1.0
+I-0.7
54
14.2
+|- 2.9
40
3.7
+|- 3.3
50
7.6
+|- 2.3
54
1.0
+|- 0.0
16
19.3
+|- 6.4
13
6.8
+|- 6.3
16
(Continued)
194
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
All Systems
Managers
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.5
+|- 0.3
17
30.0
+|- 12.9
15
23.8
+|- 19.5
14
0.9
+|- 0.2
17
19.7
+|- 5.6
13
7.0
+|- 8.6
14
3.1
+|- 1.3
16
1.5
+|- 1.0
2
9.2
+|- 1.8
2
4.2
+|- 8.0
2
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.2
22
21.0
+|- 5.8
20
21.2
+|- 7.9
18
1.1
+|- 0.3
20
15.7
+|- 10.2
12
3.6
+I-5.7
16
7.7
+|- 3.3
19
1.0
+|- 0.0
4
28.2
+|- 6.3
4
5.9
+|- 8.0
4
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.2
39
25.4
+|- 6.5
35
22.4
+|- 10.3
32
1.0
+|- 0.2
37
18.1
+|- 5.3
25
5.4
+|- 5.2
30
5.5
+|- 1.8
35
1.0
+|- 0.0
6
27.8
+|- 6.2
6
5.9
+|- 7.8
6
501 -
3,300
0.6
+I-0.7
68
21.3
+|- 2.6
66
28.3
+|- 7.3
55
1.0
+|- 0.0
32
20.4
+|- 3.5
27
23.9
+|- 74.4
24
10.1
+|- 3.3
32
1.0
+|- 0.3
5
17.8
+I-5.7
5
16.0
+|- 8.9
5
3,301 -
10,000
1.3
+|- 0.4
111
27.5
+I-2.0
102
29.6
+|- 5.2
89
1.1
+|- 0.2
6
27.2
+|- 7.2
6
36.1
+I-28.9
5
8.0
+|- 3.9
5
1.0
+|- 0.0
5
27.7
+|- 73.2
3
33.9
+|- 73.0
4
10,001 -
50,000
1.8
+|- 0.3
139
30.7
+|- 7.5
134
31.6
+|- 2.8
127
1.5
+|- 0.5
8
56.1
+|- 37.9
8
33.5
+|- 70.7
8
21.5
+|- 77.7
7
1.9
+|- 0.2
3
34.4
+I-4.7
3
59.5
+|- 77.7
3
50,001 -
100,000
3.7
+I-0.7
107
35.8
+|- 7.9
105
35.7
+I-3.7
101
2.0
+|- 0.0
3
34.1
+|- 6.8
3
27.7
+I-2.7
3
21.7
+|- 78.9
3
1.0
+|- 0.0
2
43.3
+|- 77.9
2
12.5
+|- 72.4
2
100,001-
500,000
8.9
+|- 7.9
194
38.2
+I-7.7
190
41.4
+I-2.7
185
1.4
+|- 0.3
5
52.2
+|- 78.8
5
12.0
+|- 77.4
4
27.1
+|- 5.3
5
1.2
+|- 0.2
9
44.5
+|- 77.7
4
33.8
+|- 6.9
7
Over
500,000
27.4
+|- 9.0
49
40.5
+|- 7.9
49
42.1
+|- 6.6
48
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1.0
+|- 0.0
1
43.0
+|- 0.0
1
40.0
+|- 0.0
1
All Sizes
1.6
+|- 0.2
707
26.7
+|- 7.7
681
29.0
+I-3.7
637
1.0
+I-0.7
91
20.9
+I-3.7
74
12.7
+|- 5.9
74
7.8
+|- 7.6
87
1.0
+I-0.7
31
24.3
+I-4.7
24
18.9
+I-5.7
28
(Continued)
195
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
All Systems
Treatment Plant Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.4
+|- 0.3
25
19.6
+|- 7.4
18
17.2
+|- 12.8
18
1.1
+|- 0.2
51
15.0
+I-3.7
31
5.9
+|- 5.5
36
5.4
+|- 2.0
49
0.8
+I-0.7
33
36.1
+|- 72.7
35
2.8
+|- 1.3
38
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.2
57
16.4
+|- 2.9
46
19.0
+|- 6.5
37
1.0
+I-0.7
61
14.7
+|- 2.3
51
9.8
+|- 6.0
51
9.5
+|- 2.3
59
0.9
+I-0.7
54
39.5
+|- 77.6
50
3.5
+|- 1.4
54
Sub, 500
or less
0.4
+|- 0.2
82
17.3
+I-2.9
64
18.3
+|- 6.4
55
1.1
+I-0.7
112
14.8
+|- 7.9
82
8.0
+|- 4.2
87
7.6
+|- 7.7
108
0.9
+I-0.7
87
38.2
+I-8.7
85
3.3
+|- 7.0
92
501 -
3,300
1.0
+|- 0.2
107
16.3
+|- 7.9
101
23.8
+|- 5.3
89
1.3
+|- 0.2
65
15.7
+I-2.7
64
19.0
+|- 7.9
59
9.5
+I-2.7
66
1.0
+|- 0.2
21
36.0
+|- 72.2
20
9.9
+|- 6.9
22
3,301 -
10,000
2.4
+|- 0.4
100
18.1
+|- 7.2
94
35.4
+|- 5.8
80
1.6
+|- 0.5
14
15.2
+|- 3.6
14
13.5
+|- 70.2
11
14.7
+I-4.7
14
1.0
+|- 0.0
5
27.3
+I-7.7
4
15.4
+|- 73.7
5
10,001 -
50,000
4.4
+I-0.7
122
19.1
+|- 7.0
118
33.4
+|- 3.5
111
1.3
+|- 0.3
15
15.2
+|- 7.2
13
8.9
+I-6.7
12
22.3
+|- 7.7
13
2.2
+|- 2.6
4
22.5
+|- 72.0
3
31.4
+|- 7.2
3
50,001 -
100,000
11.2
+|- 4.3
93
19.9
+|- 7.5
90
34.9
+I-3.5
85
1.6
+|- 7.2
5
15.8
+I-3.7
5
21.6
+|- 76.6
3
29.4
+I-6.7
5
5.0
+I-5.7
3
19.8
+|- 9.2
2
40.0
+|- 0.0
3
100,001-
500,000
21.1
+|- 3.3
176
23.3
+|- 0.6
175
42.4
+|- 2.2
170
1.8
+|- 0.6
12
13.5
+I-2.7
11
3.8
+|- 3.8
9
21.5
+|- 2.9
10
7.7
+|- 2.8
10
29.9
+|- 9.4
9
38.8
+|- 3.4
10
Over
500,000
80.3
+|- 78.9
43
24.2
+|- 1.4
43
42.1
+I-2.8
43
2.0
+|- 0.0
1
13.7
+|- 0.0
1
0.0
+|- 0.0
1
20.0
+|- 0.0
1
11.0
+|- 72.2
2
45.1
+|- 2.6
2
36.4
+|- 4.5
2
All Sizes
2.6
+|- 0.3
723
17.7
+I-7.7
685
26.9
+|- 2.9
633
1.2
+I-0.7
224
15.2
+|- 7.3
190
12.1
+|- 4.0
182
8.9
+|- 7.3
217
1.0
+I-0.7
132
37.4
+|- 7.0
125
5.2
+|- 7.6
137
(Continued)
196
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
All Systems
Distribution System Operators
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.6
+|- 0.2
19
18.3
+|- 6.4
14
21.0
+|- 77.6
15
1.2
+|- 0.3
19
14.1
+|- 2.3
13
0.0
+I-0.7
20
2.3
+|- 1.4
19
0.8
+|- 0.2
15
34.4
+|- 14.2
12
2.1
+|- 1.8
15
101 -
500
0.5
+|- 0.3
48
15.6
+|- 2.3
40
19.5
+I-5.7
36
1.2
+|- 0.3
49
15.0
+|- 2.6
43
6.4
+|- 5.2
44
7.1
+|- 2.6
49
0.8
+I-0.7
19
38.0
+|- 19.0
19
5.0
+|- 3.6
19
Sub, 500
or less
0.5
+|- 0.2
67
16.4
+|- 2.4
54
20.0
+|- 7.2
51
1.2
+|- 0.3
68
14.8
+\-2.1
56
4.2
+|- 3.6
64
5.8
+|- 1.9
68
0.8
+I-0.7
34
36.5
+|- 72.6
31
3.5
+|- 2.0
34
501 -
3,300
1.0
+|- 0.3
106
15.5
+|- 1.3
100
32.0
+|- 6.3
90
1.4
+|- 0.2
54
14.9
+|- 2.2
53
15.1
+|- 8.2
46
9.0
+|- 1.7
55
1.2
+|- 0.6
12
23.4
+|- 73.8
11
11.9
+|- 7.9
11
3,301 -
10,000
3.2
+|- 0.5
120
17.1
+|- 7.0
113
30.0
+I-4.6
102
1.3
+|- 0.3
11
11.6
+|- 2.6
10
16.9
+|- 77.4
7
22.8
+|- 6.2
11
2.0
+|- 0.8
4
40.2
+|- 40.3
4
30.0
+|- 77.5
4
10,001 -
50,000
6.9
+|- 0.8
139
18.6
+|- 7.0
135
34.7
+I-3.7
128
2.6
+I-7.7
19
12.8
+|- 2.8
19
12.9
+|- 70.4
15
27.0
+|- 6.4
18
15.6
+I-2.7
2
20.2
+|- 4.4
2
54.5
+|- 77.0
2
50,001 -
100,000
15.3
+|- 7.9
96
19.1
+|- 7.4
96
37.7
+I-3.7
94
3.0
+|- 7.2
14
13.8
+|- 2.2
14
10.8
+|- 9.2
12
31.3
+|- 4.8
14
3.7
+|- 7.6
4
25.6
+|- 7.0
2
28.4
+|- 27.2
3
100,001-
500,000
34.5
+I-5.7
171
21.2
+|- 0.6
171
42.6
+|- 2.2
166
3.2
+|- 0.8
16
12.4
+|- 7.5
16
14.4
+|- 8.2
15
29.6
+|- 5.9
16
2.8
+|- 7.5
6
25.9
+|- 73.9
6
32.3
+|- 6.6
6
Over
500,000
142.6
+|- 35.4
43
23.0
+|- 7.4
43
45.2
+|- 7.6
42
3.9
+I-2.6
3
11.4
+I-2.7
3
2.9
+|- 4.4
3
32.9
+|- 9.0
3
10.0
+|- 0.0
1
16.0
+|- 0.0
1
8.0
+|- 0.0
1
All Sizes
3.8
+|- 0.3
742
16.8
+|- 0.8
712
29.4
+|- 3.0
673
1.3
+|- 0.2
185
14.6
+|- 7.4
171
8.2
+|- 3.6
162
8.8
+|- 7.2
185
1.1
+|- 0.3
63
33.7
+|- 9.9
57
7.1
+|- 2.4
61
(Continued)
197
-------
Table 85 (Cont.)
Number of Employees and Annual Labor Costs
By Ownership
System Ownership/Employee Category
All Systems
Administrative Staff
Full-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Part-time Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Salary or Wage (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Benefits as Percentage of Salary or Wage
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
Contract Employees
Mean Number of Employees
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hourly Labor Cost (Dollars)
Confidence interval
Observations
Average Hours Per Employee Per Week
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.4
+|- 0.4
10
16.3
+|- 3.3
9
13.3
+|- 77.9
8
1.0
+|- 0.0
15
12.9
+|- 5.6
10
1.6
+I-3.7
18
5.0
+|- 3.4
15
1.0
+|- 0.0
3
11.3
+I-2.7
3
0.2
+I-0.7
3
Data: Q.25
101 -
500
0.4
+|- 0.2
27
16.6
+|- 70.2
24
19.3
+|- 8.2
23
1.0
+I-0.7
52
12.6
+|- 2.6
41
5.5
+|- 4.5
44
7.5
50
1.0
+|- 0.0
9
21.5
+|- 76.3
9
6.4
+|- 5.6
9
Sub, 500
or less
0.4
+|- 0.2
37
16.5
+|- 6.8
33
17.7
+|- 7.0
31
1.0
+I-0.7
67
12.7
+I-2.5
51
4.2
+|- 3.3
62
7.0
+|- 7.8
65
1.0
+|- 0.0
12
19.7
+|- 73.9
12
5.4
+|- 4.9
12
Notes: Labor costs includes wages, salaries
501 -
3,300
0.8
+|- 0.2
63
16.0
+|- 3.4
60
24.4
+|- 6.0
55
1.2
+I-0.7
82
13.9
+I-2.7
77
15.8
+I-7.7
65
12.6
+|- 2.5
82
1.0
+|- 0.0
6
29.0
+|- 79.6
6
8.3
+|- 5.2
6
3,301 -
10,000
1.9
+|- 0.3
95
15.2
+|- 7.0
88
31.3
+|- 5.5
78
1.2
+|- 0.2
16
13.8
+I-4.5
15
16.0
+|- 8.5
12
14.9
+|- 7.3
16
1.5
+|- 7.0
2
18.3
+|- 3.5
2
37.5
+I-5.7
2
10,001 -
50,000
2.9
+|- 0.5
128
20.9
+|- 2.6
123
33.7
+|- 3.2
116
1.7
+|- 0.6
17
23.2
+|- 70.8
16
19.4
+|- 70.6
15
18.2
+|- 5.3
17
2.2
+|- 7.3
3
16.5
+|- 5.6
3
43.5
+|- 22.2
3
50,001 -
100,000
6.0
+|- 7.3
101
19.7
+|- 7.6
99
37.2
+I-3.6
93
1.3
+|- 0.3
11
14.0
+I-2.8
11
17.6
+I-9.7
8
22.3
+I-4.9
11
1.3
+I-0.7
3
32.7
+|- 3.9
2
12.7
+|- 9.6
3
100,001-
500,000
16.3
+I-3.7
188
22.8
+|- 0.9
184
42.1
+I-2.7
181
2.9
+|- 7.0
29
16.1
+|- 2.3
29
17.7
+|- 8.4
26
24.4
+I-3.7
27
2.8
+|- 0.8
13
33.6
+|- 70.7
11
23.9
+I-5.7
12
Over
500,000
93.1
+I-35.8
47
22.2
+I-7.7
47
43.8
+|- 6.9
46
29.0
+I-30.7
7
21.8
+I-4.8
8
26.7
+I-9.7
7
24.8
+|- 7.2
6
45.0
+I-57.7
4
30.8
+|- 8.0
4
32.1
+|- 9.9
4
All Sizes
2.7
+|- 0.3
659
17.4
+|- 7.8
634
28.0
+|- 2.6
600
1.2
+I-0.7
229
13.7
+|- 7.6
207
9.8
+|- 3.5
195
10.4
+|- 7.5
224
1.3
+|- 0.2
43
23.0
+|- 70.6
40
10.3
+|- 4.2
42
, and fringe benefits.
198
-------
Table 86
Percentage of Systems Making Major Capital Investments in the Past 5 Years
By Primary Water Source
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Percentage of Systems
Confidence interval
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Percentage of Systems
Confidence interval
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Percentage of Systems
Confidence interval
Observations
All Systems
Percentage of Systems
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
35.6
+|- 11.2
88
36.4
+|- 27.2
49
0.4
+|- 0.9
8
33.3
+|- 10.3
145
Data: Q.27
Notes:
101 -
500
35.0
+|- 9.6
105
45.0
+|- 20.2
67
32.9
+|- 216
23
35.1
+|- 8.5
195
501 -
3,300
56.8
+|- 10.0
111
64.7
+|- 10.4
78
44.5
+|- 13.1
48
54.1
+|- 7.8
237
3,301 -
10,000
43.1
+|- 12.8
62
50.9
+|- 72.9
65
51.9
+\-21.1
26
46.6
+|- 9.2
153
10,001 -
50,000
58.8
+|- 72.7
66
57.0
+|- 10.5
84
72.2
+|- 18.6
25
61.0
+|- 8.2
175
50,001 -
100,000
55.6
+|- 17.5
40
70.5
+|- 11.1
54
76.0
+|- 14.0
30
66.4
+I-8.-7
124
100,001-
500,000
64.1
+I-9.7
56
77.1
+|- 6.0
124
77.3
+|- 10.8
45
74.0
+|- 4.6
225
Over
500,000
35.9
+|- 30.5
6
87.2
+|- 6.6
39
80.3
+|- 14.1
13
78.9
+|- 9.3
58
All Sizes
42.4
+|- 5.4
534
56.8
+|- 6.4
560
41.6
+|- 9.2
218
43.5
+|- 4.3
1,312
199
-------
Table 87
Percentage of Systems Making Major Capital Investments in the Past 5 Years
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Observations
Private Systems
Mean
Confidence interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
40.9
+|- 24.0
27
32.1
+|- 11.2
118
Data: Q.27
Notes:
101 -
500
45.4
+|- 13.8
84
28.6
+I-9.7
111
501 -
3,300
54.1
+|- 8.5
181
54.2
+|- 13.5
56
3,301 -
10,000
48.5
+|- 10.3
127
39.3
+|- 210
26
10,001 -
50,000
62.0
+|- 8.6
155
50.5
+|- 25.9
20
50,001 -
100,000
69.1
+|- 8.3
111
41.5
+|- 24.4
13
100,001-
500,000
77.0
+|- 4.2
204
51.9
+|- 24.3
21
Over
500,000
87.3
+|- 5.4
52
24.4
+|- 23.9
6
All Sizes
52.2
+|- 5.3
941
34.6
+|- 6.4
371
200
-------
Table 88
Amount of Major Capital Investment in the Past 5 Years
By Primary Water Source
(Thousands of Dollars)
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Mean Invested in the Past 5 Years
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Mean Invested in the Past 5 Years
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Mean Invested in the Past 5 Years
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
All Systems
Mean Invested in the Past 5 Years
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
75
+I-67
6
16
24
+I-20
9
11
*
*
*
*
74
+I-65
6
27
Data: Q.27A
101 -
500
180
+|- 193
23
23
455
+|- 307
240
22
1,008
+|- 774
681
9
375
+|- 260
46
54
501 -
3,300
598
+|- 305
113
54
756
+|- 313
210
46
593
+|- 366
181
20
612
+|- 210
161
120
3,301 -
10,000
982
+|- 595
400
20
2,358
+\- 1,128
971
23
997
+|- 575
922
11
1,221
+I-474
542
54
10,001 -
50,000
3,382
+|- 7,307
2,385
35
5,244
+|- 7,543
3,500
42
6,520
+1-9,706
645
15
4,609
+|- 2,346
2,382
92
50,001 -
100,000
14,420
+|- 3,477
17,500
15
17,576
+|- 5,306
13,050
33
7,243
+|- 2,376
4,401
20
13,616
+|- 2,624
12,500
68
100,001-
500,000
45,405
+|- 23,488
1 1 ,800
26
54,344
+|- 70,723
43,635
86
40,921
+|- 77,726
26,609
31
50,003
+1-8,797
32,327
143
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements in the past five
Excludes systems that did
not report positive
Over
500,000
134,434
+1-777,730
134,434
2
392,845
+1-92,720
273,640
31
154,008
+|- 705,378
61 ,802
9
322,231
+|- 80,497
171,900
42
years.
All Sizes
1,089
+|- 269
99
191
18,122
+|- 3,397
1,300
294
3,260
+|- 7,424
380
115
3,724
+|- 572
180
600
revenue or expenses.
201
-------
Table 89
Amount of Major Capital Investment in the Past 5 Years
By Ownership
(Thousands of Dollars)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Mean Invested in the Past 5 Years
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
Private Systems
Mean Invested in the Past 5 Years
Confidence interval
Median
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
217
+|- 159
99
8
33
+I-49
5
19
Data: Q.27
101 -
500
545
+|- 375
92
34
49
+I-26
15
20
Notes: Excludes systems that
501 -
3,300
722
+|- 282
189
96
284
+|- 241
31
24
3,301 -
10,000
1,193
+|- 458
486
46
1,344
+|- 925
922
8
have not made major
10,001 -
50,000
4,703
+1-2,473
2,382
85
2,983
+|- 2, 736
2,581
7
50,001 -
100,000
13,680
+|- 2, 756
12,908
62
12,803
+|- 8,672
3,171
6
100,001-
500,000
47,126
+|- 7,875
31 ,926
133
76,798
+|- 22,085
102,373
10
capital improvements in the past five
Over
500,000
331 ,084
+1-84,367
171,900
40
137,250
+1-36,407
137,250
2
years.
All Sizes
4,847
+|- 792
361
504
954
+|- 580
30
96
Excludes systems that did not report positive revenue or expenses.
202
-------
Table 90
Percentage of Systems Making Major Capital Investments in the Past 5 Years
By Type of Investment and Primary Water Source
(Percentage of Systems Funding Each Investment Category)
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
All Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.1
59.8
30.5
30.8
29.5
14.0
3.6
35
0.0
24.9
40.1
72.3
27.5
0.0
5.5
28
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.1
58.6
30.8
32.1
29.5
13.5
3.7
64
Data: Q.27A
101 -
500
2.7
50.5
49.0
25.5
24.7
3.0
5.7
38
0.0
34.8
52.7
51.8
17.0
5.3
7.9
36
0.0
31.7
98.7
17.2
33.2
0.0
1.0
9
2.2
47.1
56.1
25.7
25.5
2.7
5.2
83
501 -
3,300
8.1
50.8
54.7
24.7
35.2
4.7
11.5
62
3.5
20.3
61.7
39.6
34.4
5.8
9.8
49
9.6
9.5
90.5
5.8
19.2
0.0
4.8
21
8.0
38.7
63.4
21.9
31.6
3.8
9.9
132
3,301 -
10,000
1.1
45.7
88.8
33.2
33.3
40.0
17.9
26
16.7
25.0
80.6
69.4
50.0
50.0
25.0
36
17.0
2.2
100.0
10.7
39.3
17.0
17.0
13
8.5
30.0
90.1
34.7
38.3
36.0
19.1
75
10,001 -
50,000
25.3
58.3
84.1
50.8
55.7
42.1
45.0
40
26.7
26.2
90.1
60.9
37.6
26.2
46.2
49
29.2
16.2
84.7
16.1
45.3
44.5
22.6
19
26.6
39.9
85.8
45.0
48.5
38.6
39.9
108
50,001 -
100,000
48.0
71.1
87.7
81.2
77.5
63.1
67.8
21
17.9
34.7
93.2
81.7
65.3
30.3
45.4
39
9.2
5.9
95.4
27.2
26.4
41.5
36.9
23
24.6
37.6
92.2
66.1
58.0
43.5
49.9
83
100,001-
500,000
41.4
57.9
83.0
68.8
69.0
44.9
49.4
36
50.6
59.3
95.3
90.5
68.4
34.1
64.6
94
35.7
50.0
97.4
54.8
71.9
47.1
61.2
36
45.5
57.0
93.1
78.5
69.3
39.1
60.7
166
Over
500,000
66.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
33.3
66.7
66.7
3
52.9
67.6
97.1
97.1
73.5
23.5
91.2
34
49.0
24.5
100.0
49.0
49.0
40.5
41.0
10
52.8
59.0
97.9
85.5
65.2
30.2
77.5
47
All Sizes
5.8
53.2
52.2
29.4
32.6
12.2
11.3
261
16.1
29.5
74.6
60.7
41.3
22.0
28.4
365
12.1
14.6
93.1
12.2
30.3
11.1
10.6
132
8.1
43.9
61.7
30.1
33.2
13.2
13.2
758
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements in the past five years.
Table reports the percentage of systems that funded each investment type.
It is not the percentage of funds invested in each category.
Table 94 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system.
Table 96 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally.
203
-------
Table 91
Percentage of Systems Making Major Capital Investments in the Past 5 Years
By Type of Investment and Ownership
(Percentage of Systems Funding Each Investment Category)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Private Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.6
62.0
22.8
23.9
15.8
0.3
0.9
13
0.0
57.9
32.3
33.7
32.1
16.1
4.2
51
Data: Q.27A
101 -
500
0.0
46.9
56.2
26.5
31.8
0.3
5.1
43
4.4
47.3
56.0
24.9
19.3
5.1
5.2
40
Notes: Excludes systems that
501 -
3,300
8.1
35.1
63.1
16.8
33.5
3.7
7.7
103
7.9
48.5
64.1
35.7
26.5
3.9
15.7
29
3,301 -
10,000
10.3
29.5
89.7
37.4
41.5
39.7
21.9
64
0.0
32.3
91.7
22.2
23.7
19.0
6.4
11
10,001 -
50,000
23.8
38.9
84.7
42.9
47.5
40.7
40.2
99
63.7
53.7
100.0
74.4
62.2
10.0
36.3
9
50,001 -
100,000
25.7
38.1
93.0
66.7
56.7
46.3
51.2
77
8.1
29.7
78.4
56.9
78.4
0.0
29.7
6
100,001-
500,000
42.3
54.9
92.5
77.1
67.1
37.2
62.6
156
80.4
80.4
100.0
93.5
93.5
60.8
39.2
10
have not made major capital improvements in the past five
Over
500,000
52.9
57.3
97.9
84.9
65.9
31.5
76.6
45
50.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
100.0
2
years.
All Sizes
10.3
39.3
68.3
29.0
37.1
15.3
16.5
600
4.6
51.1
51.5
31.8
27.2
9.9
8.1
158
Table reports the percentage of systems that funded each investment type.
It is not the percentage of funds invested in each category.
Table 95 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system.
Table 97 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally.
204
-------
Table 92
Average Amount of Major Capital Investment Allocated in the Past 5 Years
By Type of Investment and Primary Water Source
(Thousands of Dollars)
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
All Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0
17
20
13
15
1
0
35
0
31
183
240
6
0
0
28
0
0
0
0
15
0
0
1
0
18
25
20
15
1
0
64
Data: Q.27A
101 -
500
0
50
75
23
13
0
1
38
0
40
97
235
34
0
1
36
0
8
908
1
83
0
7
9
0
44
192
31
24
0
2
83
501 -
3,300
5
151
219
54
140
0
3
62
1
34
378
239
129
1
8
49
12
32
455
12
57
0
18
21
6
113
287
62
120
0
7
132
3,301 -
10,000
3
91
423
310
62
11
52
26
6
88
982
1,585
433
11
25
36
2
8
983
2
175
30
15
13
3
69
685
492
168
16
37
75
10,001 -
50,000
22
356
2,033
437
656
10
173
40
53
270
1,776
2,455
587
10
287
49
19
290
4,409
618
512
35
355
19
29
318
2,540
999
604
16
246
108
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
441
2,556
3,569
3,204
1,249
65
1,902
21
201
895
8,219
4,522
1,839
80
1,494
39
44
59
4,110
284
1,290
65
716
23
229
1,165
5,633
2,917
1,503
71
1,398
83
500,000
555
2,379
12,499
15,268
2,115
60
5,163
36
1,203
3,460
23,526
15,058
2,828
560
7,694
94
622
5,036
23,794
8,833
4,822
235
4,928
36
944
3,562
21,256
13,799
3,095
386
6,581
166
Over
500,000
500
16,213
37,767
11,142
3,717
767
32,284
3
4,537
35,060
156,023
108,680
12,660
1,317
54,836
34
2,700
2,802
96,312
12,702
37,024
1,055
12,645
10
3,854
26,112
134,579
79,628
18,062
1,221
43,255
47
All Sizes
10
134
364
182
122
3
67
261
226
1,212
6,629
4,863
877
85
2,021
365
37
176
2,262
346
473
22
250
132
39
266
1,409
751
269
16
323
758
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements in the past five years.
205
-------
Table 93
Average Amount of Major Capital Investment Allocated in the Past 5 Years
By Type of Investment and Ownership
(Thousands of Dollars)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Private Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0
89
57
86
11
1
0
13
0
4
19
8
15
0
0
51
Data: Q.27A
101 -
500
0
68
351
53
40
0
3
43
0
20
36
9
8
0
0
40
Notes: Excludes systems that
501 -
3,300
8
129
339
72
154
0
8
103
2
70
147
35
30
1
4
29
3,301 -
10,000
4
48
637
479
183
15
43
64
0
165
908
555
102
20
10
11
10,001 -
50,000
30
331
2,600
1,049
592
17
251
99
19
130
1,731
324
762
1
177
9
50,001 -
100,000
240
1,043
5,494
3,072
1,555
76
1,443
77
61
3,063
7,797
501
688
0
693
6
100,001-
500,000
990
3,729
18,582
13,748
3,072
137
6,873
156
446
1,739
50,410
14,349
3,347
3,108
3,400
10
have not made major capital improvements in the past five
Over
500,000
3,990
26,438
138,314
81 ,591
18,807
1,273
43,556
45
662
18,497
47,381
33,813
664
0
36,233
2
years.
All Sizes
63
402
2,103
1,168
413
18
512
600
3
56
341
109
47
12
32
158
206
-------
Table 94
Allocation of Major Capital Investments of Average Systems In the Past 5 Years
By Type of Investment and Primary Water Source
(Percentage of Funds Allocated to Each Investment Category)
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
All Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
43.2
14.5
17.3
15.7
9.0
0.4
35
0.0
12.5
26.9
53.0
4.8
0.0
2.8
28
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
42.2
14.9
18.4
15.4
8.7
0.4
64
Data: Q.27A
101 -
500
0.0
36.1
34.7
13.8
12.2
0.3
2.9
38
0.0
16.6
35.9
33.9
8.8
0.0
4.8
36
0.0
4.4
80.1
1.5
13.3
0.0
0.7
9
0.0
30.7
41.1
13.1
12.2
0.2
2.7
83
501 -
3,300
2.0
31.1
35.4
11.0
15.6
0.5
4.4
62
0.1
14.1
41.4
25.6
14.8
2.4
1.7
49
0.4
5.5
83.2
0.6
9.5
0.0
0.8
21
1.4
23.8
46.6
10.0
14.2
0.6
3.3
132
3,301 -
10,000
0.1
14.3
52.2
13.7
8.4
5.0
6.4
26
1.2
7.7
36.9
34.0
17.7
0.9
1.7
36
0.1
1.2
80.2
0.2
13.6
2.3
2.5
13
0.3
9.5
56.4
14.3
11.7
3.4
4.4
75
10,001 -
50,000
1.8
16.4
43.8
10.0
12.4
6.7
8.9
40
2.4
3.4
48.9
26.1
9.4
2.5
7.2
49
14.1
0.5
56.8
8.0
15.2
1.4
4.0
19
5.0
9.2
48.2
13.7
12.3
4.3
7.3
108
50,001 -
100,000
2.6
16.5
27.9
22.1
12.7
4.9
13.3
21
0.7
3.0
49.7
25.2
11.4
0.8
9.2
39
0.2
1.4
71.5
3.5
14.5
0.6
8.3
23
1.1
6.6
49.2
18.1
12.7
2.0
10.2
83
100,001-
500,000
1.5
9.8
41.0
23.5
10.4
3.4
10.4
36
2.1
7.2
42.3
29.6
5.5
0.9
12.4
94
1.1
10.2
56.6
11.9
7.8
0.9
11.4
36
1.8
8.4
45.0
24.6
7.0
1.4
11.8
166
Over
500,000
0.6
9.2
38.2
26.0
1.4
0.5
24.1
3
1.1
6.4
43.6
29.2
3.6
0.4
15.7
34
1.2
1.0
68.8
12.7
11.5
0.7
4.1
10
1.1
5.3
49.4
25.0
5.4
0.5
13.3
47
All Sizes
0.8
33.0
32.0
13.6
13.9
3.3
3.5
261
1.0
9.4
41.5
29.9
11.8
1.5
4.9
365
2.1
3.9
77.5
2.1
11.9
0.6
2.0
132
1.0
25.3
40.8
13.5
13.3
2.6
3.4
758
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements in the past five years.
Table reports the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system.
It is not the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally or the percentage of systems
that funded each investment category.
Table 90 reports the percentage of systems that funded each investment category.
Table 96 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally.
207
-------
Table 95
Allocation of Major Capital Investments of Average Systems in the Past 5 Years
By Type of Investment and Ownership
(Percentage of Funds Allocated to Each Investment Category)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Private Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
All Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
58.2
4.0
22.6
15.0
0.0
0.2
13
0.0
39.0
17.0
17.6
15.5
10.4
0.5
51
0.0
42.2
14.9
18.4
15.4
8.7
0.4
64
Data: Q.27A
101 -
500
0.0
32.3
38.4
14.5
14.3
0.0
0.5
43
0.0
29.1
43.8
11.7
10.1
0.4
4.9
40
0.0
30.7
41.1
13.1
12.2
0.2
2.7
83
Notes: Excludes systems that
501 -
3,300
0.7
23.5
45.8
9.9
15.6
0.8
3.7
103
3.4
24.5
48.9
10.3
10.3
0.1
2.5
29
1.4
23.8
46.6
10.0
14.2
0.6
3.3
132
Population Category
3,301 - 10,001 -
10,000
0.4
8.3
54.7
14.7
12.9
4.0
5.0
64
0.0
14.9
64.3
12.7
6.2
0.6
1.4
11
0.3
9.5
56.4
14.3
11.7
3.4
4.4
75
50,000
5.1
9.6
48.0
13.7
11.6
4.7
7.4
99
3.3
4.3
51.0
13.3
21.5
0.1
6.4
9
5.0
9.2
48.2
13.7
12.3
4.3
7.3
108
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
1.2
6.7
48.7
18.7
11.9
2.1
10.7
77
0.1
6.6
57.5
8.3
24.9
0.0
2.6
6
1.1
6.6
49.2
18.1
12.7
2.0
10.2
83
500,000
1.9
8.9
43.4
25.2
7.2
1.3
12.2
156
0.5
2.6
62.7
18.4
5.1
3.1
7.5
10
1.8
8.4
45.0
24.6
7.0
1.4
11.8
166
have not made major capital improvements in the past five
Over
500,000
1.1
5.0
49.9
25.2
5.6
0.5
12.7
45
0.4
12.3
37.8
20.2
0.7
0.0
28.7
2
1.1
5.3
49.4
25.0
5.4
0.5
13.3
47
years.
All Sizes
1.2
21.9
43.9
13.4
14.0
1.6
4.0
600
0.9
30.6
36.0
13.7
12.2
4.1
2.5
158
1.0
25.3
40.8
13.5
13.3
2.6
3.4
758
208
-------
Table 96
Allocation of Major Capital Investments Nationally In the Past 5 Years
By Type of Investment and Primary Water Source
(Percentage of Funds Allocated to Each Investment Category)
Primary Water Source
Primarily Ground Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Primarily Surface Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Primarily Purchased Water Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
All Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
0.0
26.2
29.9
20.0
22.8
0.9
0.1
35
0.0
6.7
39.8
52.2
1.3
0.0
0.0
28
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
1
0.0
22.5
31.8
26.1
18.7
0.8
0.1
64
Data: Q.27A
101 -
500
0.0
30.8
46.2
14.3
8.0
0.2
0.5
38
0.0
9.8
23.8
57.7
8.4
0.0
0.3
36
0.0
0.8
90.1
0.1
8.2
0.0
0.7
9
0.0
14.9
65.6
10.6
8.2
0.1
0.6
83
501 -
3,300
0.9
26.4
38.2
9.4
24.4
0.1
0.5
62
0.1
4.3
47.9
30.3
16.3
0.1
1.0
49
2.1
5.4
77.6
2.1
9.7
0.0
3.1
21
1.1
19.0
48.1
10.5
20.2
0.1
1.2
132
3,301 -
10,000
0.3
9.6
44.4
32.6
6.5
1.1
5.5
26
0.2
2.8
31.4
50.6
13.8
0.4
0.8
36
0.2
0.7
80.8
0.2
14.4
2.5
1.3
13
0.2
4.7
46.6
33.5
11.5
1.1
2.5
75
10,001 -
50,000
0.6
9.6
55.2
11.9
17.8
0.3
4.7
40
1.0
5.0
32.7
45.1
10.8
0.2
5.3
49
0.3
4.6
70.7
9.9
8.2
0.6
5.7
19
0.6
6.7
53.5
21.0
12.7
0.3
5.2
108
50,001 -
100,000
3.4
19.7
27.5
24.7
9.6
0.5
14.6
21
1.2
5.2
47.6
26.2
10.7
0.5
8.7
39
0.7
0.9
62.6
4.3
19.6
1.0
10.9
23
1.8
9.0
43.6
22.6
11.6
0.6
10.8
83
100,001-
500,000
1.5
6.3
32.9
40.1
5.6
0.2
13.6
36
2.2
6.4
43.3
27.7
5.2
1.0
14.2
94
1.3
10.4
49.3
18.3
10.0
0.5
10.2
36
1.9
7.2
42.8
27.8
6.2
0.8
13.3
166
Over
500,000
0.5
15.8
36.9
10.9
3.6
0.7
31.5
3
1.2
9.4
41.8
29.1
3.4
0.4
14.7
34
1.6
1.7
58.3
7.7
22.4
0.6
7.7
10
1.3
8.5
43.9
26.0
5.9
0.4
14.1
47
All Sizes
1.1
15.2
41.3
20.7
13.9
0.3
7.5
261
1.4
7.6
41.7
30.6
5.5
0.5
12.7
365
1.0
4.9
63.4
9.7
13.3
0.6
7.0
132
1.3
8.7
45.9
24.4
8.7
0.5
10.5
758
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements in the past five years.
Table reports the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally.
It is not the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system or the percentage
of systems that funded each investment category.
Table 90 reports the percentage of systems that funded each investment category.
Table 94 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system.
209
-------
Table 97
Allocation of Major Capital Investments Nationally in the Past 5 Years
By Type of Investment and Ownership
(Percentage of Funds Allocated to Each Investment Category)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
Private Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
All Systems
Land
Water Source
Transmission and Distribution System
Treatment
Storage
Security
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
0.0
36.3
23.2
35.1
4.6
0.5
0.2
13
0.0
8.2
40.6
16.9
33.2
1.1
0.0
51
0.0
22.5
31.8
26.1
18.7
0.8
0.1
64
Data: Q.27A
Notes: Excludes sysl
101 -
500
0.0
13.2
68.1
10.4
7.7
0.0
0.6
43
0.1
26.7
48.5
12.4
11.4
0.6
0.2
40
0.0
14.9
65.6
10.6
8.2
0.1
0.6
83
501 -
3,300
1.1
18.2
47.6
10.2
21.7
0.0
1.1
103
0.7
24.4
50.9
12.2
10.3
0.2
1.3
29
1.1
19.0
48.1
10.5
20.2
0.1
1.2
132
Population Category
3,301 - 10,001 -
10,000
0.3
3.4
45.2
34.0
13.0
1.1
3.0
64
0.0
9.4
51.6
31.5
5.8
1.1
0.6
11
0.2
4.7
46.6
33.5
11.5
1.1
2.5
75
50,000
0.6
6.8
53.4
21.5
12.2
0.3
5.2
99
0.6
4.1
55.1
10.3
24.2
0.0
5.6
9
0.6
6.7
53.5
21.0
12.7
0.3
5.2
108
ems that have not made major capital impro
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000 500,000
1.9
8.1
42.5
23.8
12.0
0.6
11.2
77
0.5
23.9
60.9
3.9
5.4
0.0
5.4
6
1.8
9.0
43.6
22.6
11.6
0.6
10.8
83
vements in the
2.1
7.9
39.4
29.2
6.5
0.3
14.6
156
0.6
2.3
65.6
18.7
4.4
4.0
4.4
10
1.9
7.2
42.8
27.8
6.2
0.8
13.3
166
oast five
Over
500,000
1.3
8.4
44.1
26.0
6.0
0.4
13.9
45
0.5
13.5
34.5
24.6
0.5
0.0
26.4
2
1.3
8.5
43.9
26.0
5.9
0.4
14.1
47
years.
All Sizes
1.3
8.6
44.9
25.0
8.8
0.4
11.0
600
0.5
9.3
56.8
18.3
7.8
2.1
5.4
158
1.3
8.7
45.9
24.4
8.7
0.5
10.5
758
Table reports the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally.
It is not the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system or the percentage
of systems that funded each investment category.
Table 91 reports the percentage of systems that funded each investment category.
Table 95 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system.
210
-------
Table 98
Percentage of Systems Making Major Capital Investments in the Past 5 Years
By Investment Purpose and Ownership
(Percentage of Systems Funding Each Investment Category)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
Private Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
All Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
62.4
57.3
1.6
12
27.5
76.9
11.1
51
32.9
74.0
9.7
63
Data: Q.27B
Notes: Excludes sysl
101 -
500
8.9
77.0
36.8
44
44.4
56.3
24.6
39
26.0
67.1
30.9
83
501 -
3,300
22.8
64.9
44.5
102
14.8
74.3
43.1
30
20.7
67.4
44.1
132
3,301 -
10,000
36.9
78.6
76.3
66
50.9
51.3
64.9
11
39.3
74.1
74.4
77
10,001 -
50,000
51.5
83.7
77.4
91
23.9
21.9
100.0
8
49.9
80.1
78.7
99
ems that have not made major capital impro
50,001 -
100,000
49.7
82.0
78.1
64
0.0
70.4
100.0
4
47.1
81.4
79.3
68
100,001-
500,000
49.3
87.3
83.8
97
50.0
100.0
50.0
2
49.3
87.6
83.2
99
Over
500,000
61.4
96.9
80.5
29
*
*
*
*
61.4
96.9
80.5
29
All Sizes
28.9
72.6
51.5
505
30.7
68.2
26.4
145
29.6
70.9
41.5
650
vements in the past five years.
Table reports the percentage of systems that funded each investment category.
It is not the percentage of funds invested in each category.
Table 100 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system.
Table 101 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally.
211
-------
Table 99
Amount of Major Capital Investment Allocated in the Past 5 Years
By Investment Purpose and Ownership
(Thousands of Dollars)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
Private Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
All Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
46
96
76
12
4
16
26
49
11
29
34
61
Data: Q.27
101 -
500
10
178
327
43
37
23
23
37
23
105
185
80
Notes: Excludes systems that
501 -
3,300
91
190
436
100
21
134
120
28
72
176
352
128
3,301 -
10,000
175
371
750
61
743
168
862
10
275
335
770
71
10,001 -
50,000
451
1,661
3,060
89
38
218
3,052
8
426
1,574
3,059
97
50,001 -
100,000
2,481
4,910
5,055
63
0
6,229
8,118
4
2,348
4,981
5,220
67
100,001-
500,000
4,439
15,812
25,376
95
9,536
10,527
4,059
2
4,535
15,713
24,976
97
have not made major capital improvements in the past five
Over
500,000
20,880
136,720
134,942
29
*
*
*
*
20,880
136,720
134,942
29
years.
All Sizes
346
1,330
1,860
492
58
75
148
138
234
843
1,195
630
212
-------
Table 100
Allocation of Major Capital Investments of Average Systems in the Past 5 Years
By Investment Purpose and Ownership
(Percentage of Funds Allocated to Each Investment Category)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
Private Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
All Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.4
56.3
42.3
12
7.8
72.2
19.9
49
6.8
69.6
23.6
61
Data: Q.27B
Notes: Excludes syst
101 -
500
28.5
70.3
1.2
43
17.8
52.1
30.2
37
23.5
61.8
14.8
80
sms that
501 -
3,300
38.1
51.3
10.7
100
34.8
57.7
7.5
28
37.2
53.0
9.8
128
have not made
3,301 -
10,000
50.5
41.6
8.0
61
41.0
25.9
33.1
10
48.8
38.8
12.4
71
10,001 -
50,000
48.1
42.5
9.4
89
89.5
9.2
1.3
8
50.6
40.5
8.9
97
50,001 -
100,000
41.9
44.3
13.8
63
50.9
49.1
0.0
4
42.4
44.6
13.1
67
100,001-
500,000
44.4
43.6
12.0
95
25.5
45.0
29.5
2
44.1
43.6
12.4
97
Over
500,000
41.1
47.3
11.6
29
*
*
*
*
41.1
47.3
11.6
29
All Sizes
37.5
52.7
9.8
492
19.9
59.7
20.3
138
30.7
55.5
13.9
630
major capital improvements in the past five years.
Table reports the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system.
It is not the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally or the percentage of systems
that funded each investment category.
Table 98 reports the percentage of systems that funded each investment category.
Table 101 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally.
213
-------
Table 101
Allocation of Major Capital Investments Nationally in the Past 5 Years
By Investment Purpose and Ownership
(Percentage of Funds Allocated to Each Investment Category)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
Private Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
All Systems
Compliance with Regulations
Replacement or Major Repair
System Expansion
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
21.2
44.1
34.7
12
8.4
34.9
56.7
49
14.5
39.3
46.2
61
101 -
500
1.9
34.6
63.5
43
44.8
27.2
28.0
37
7.2
33.7
59.1
80
501 -
3,300
12.6
26.5
60.8
100
7.7
48.7
43.6
28
12.0
29.2
58.7
128
3,301 -
10,000
13.5
28.6
57.9
61
41.9
9.5
48.6
10
19.9
24.3
55.8
71
10,001 -
50,000
8.7
32.1
59.2
89
1.2
6.6
92.3
8
8.4
31.1
60.5
97
50,001 -
100,000
19.9
39.5
40.6
63
0.0
43.4
56.6
4
18.7
39.7
41.6
67
100,001-
500,000
9.7
34.7
55.6
95
39.5
43.6
16.8
2
10.0
34.7
55.2
97
Over
500,000
7.1
46.7
46.1
29
*
*
*
7.1
46.7
46.1
29
All Sizes
9.8
37.6
52.6
492
20.6
26.7
52.8
138
10.3
37.1
52.6
630
Data: Q.27B
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements in the past five years.
Table reports the percentage of funds invested in each category nationally.
It is not the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system or the
percentage of systems that funded each investment category.
Table 98 reports the percentage of systems that funded each investment category.
Table 100 reports the percentage of funds invested in each category for the average system.
214
-------
Table 102
Percentage of Systems Acquiring Capital Funds from Each Source in the Past 5 Years
By Source of Funds and Ownership
(Percentage of Systems Using Each Source of Funds)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
Private Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
All Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
100
or Less
58.5
0.5
0.3
0.0
39.9
0.0
0.6
19.1
0.0
13
59.7
11.5
3.6
0.0
4.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
16.7
51
59.5
9.7
3.1
0.0
9.9
0.0
0.1
3.2
14.0
64
Data: Q.27C
101 -
500
64.9
0.3
15.0
0.0
34.8
0.3
20.0
9.1
5.5
43
83.8
13.4
1.4
0.0
9.3
0.0
0.0
4.4
6.4
40
74.4
6.9
8.1
0.0
22.0
0.1
10.0
6.8
6.0
83
System
501 - 3
Service Population Category
301 -
3,300 10,000
48.3
3.4
12.0
1.5
29.9
3.9
24.6
7.2
4.1
103
73.1
23.7
21.7
0.0
3.9
0.0
0.8
7.9
8.6
29
55.0
9.0
14.6
1.1
22.8
2.8
18.1
7.4
5.3
132
74.5
8.8
23.9
2.8
28.5
0.0
19.2
7.5
10.7
64
72.8
3.2
29.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
39.5
12.5
0.0
11
74.2
7.8
24.9
2.3
23.5
0.0
22.8
8.4
8.8
75
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements in the past five years.
10,001 -
50,000
77.1
2.5
22.2
5.4
15.2
0.0
9.5
8.6
5.2
99
53.3
0.0
10.0
0.0
24.1
0.0
10.0
22.6
0.0
9
75.4
2.4
21.4
5.1
15.8
0.0
9.6
9.6
4.8
108
50,001 -
100,000
75.1
3.8
28.6
5.9
23.7
0.0
15.5
18.0
14.9
77
51.3
21.6
21.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.1
8.1
21.6
6
73.7
4.9
28.1
5.6
22.2
0.0
15.1
17.5
15.3
83
100,001-
500,000
63.6
3.1
41.4
5.1
15.0
0.0
12.9
11.6
8.6
156
13.1
13.1
13.1
6.5
0.0
0.0
60.8
0.0
54.3
10
59.3
3.9
39.1
5.2
13.8
0.0
16.9
10.6
12.4
166
Over
500,000
55.3
0.0
35.7
8.6
21.5
0.0
19.1
8.6
4.2
45
0.0
50.0
50.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2
53.1
2.1
36.3
8.2
20.6
0.0
18.3
8.2
4.0
47
All Sizes
61.1
3.2
16.5
2.1
28.5
1.6
19.0
8.9
5.7
600
70.8
14.5
8.5
0.0
5.9
0.0
2.4
4.2
10.6
158
64.9
7.7
13.4
1.3
19.6
1.0
12.5
7.0
7.6
758
Systems can fund by more than one source,
therefore column totals may be greater than or less than 100.
A small number of privately owned systems serving populations of 3,301-10,000 and 100,001-500,000 relied heavily on the DWSRF. They
have a large impact on the results; therefore, they are not included in the analysis in volume I.
215
-------
Table 103
Amount of Capital Funds Acquired from Each Source in the Past 5 Years
By Source of Funds and Ownership
(Thousands of Dollars)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
Private Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
All Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
System Service
100
or Less
93
76
20
0
19
0
0
37
0
13
4
29
1
0
11
0
0
0
5
48
19
37
4
0
12
0
0
6
4
61
Data: Q.27C
101 -
500
44
0
109
0
201
2
114
40
5
43
17
5
3
0
36
0
0
6
6
39
30
3
56
0
118
1
57
23
5
82
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements
501 - 3,301 -
3,300
45
121
48
1
124
21
214
136
23
97
74
71
33
0
42
0
0
64
5
29
53
107
43
0
101
15
154
116
18
126
in the past five
10,000
372
13
225
1
380
0
296
94
69
61
336
14
540
0
0
0
797
87
0
10
366
13
283
1
310
0
388
93
56
71
years.
Population Category
10,001 -
50,000
3,009
12
764
17
339
0
533
300
25
86
1,567
0
261
0
161
0
169
1,150
0
8
2,922
12
734
16
328
0
511
351
23
94
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
5,001
190
2,479
72
1,775
0
884
1,101
1,035
63
2,603
845
1,763
0
0
0
1,524
3,919
2,330
5
4,860
229
2,436
68
1,670
0
922
1,268
1,112
68
500,000
20,300
110
15,962
22
844
0
2,033
3,168
3,024
108
3,022
2,823
2,233
1
0
0
37,700
0
41 ,358
6
18,792
347
1 4,764
20
770
0
5,145
2,892
6,369
114
Over
500,000
62,674
0
172,373
374
4,599
0
25,075
35,836
204
29
0
55,003
40,356
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
60,700
1,733
168,214
362
4,454
0
24,285
34,707
197
30
All Sizes
1,258
64
1,245
7
273
9
389
354
107
500
75
51
56
0
28
0
144
46
123
146
786
59
770
4
175
6
291
231
113
646
A small number of privately owned systems serving populations of 3,301-10,000 and 100,001-500,000 relied heavily on the DWSRF. They
have a large impact on the results; therefore, they are not included in the analysis in volume I.
216
-------
Table 104
Allocation of Sources of Funds for Major Capital Investments of the Average System in the Past 5 Years
By Source of Funds and Ownership
(Percentage of Funds from Each Source)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
Private Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
All Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
42.5
0.5
0.3
0.0
39.9
0.0
0.6
16.3
0.0
13
64.8
10.5
2.0
0.0
4.5
0.0
0.0
0.1
18.1
48
60.9
8.8
1.7
0.0
10.6
0.0
0.1
2.9
15.0
61
Data: Q.27C
101 -
500
50.7
0.2
11.8
0.0
22.4
0.1
11.5
1.8
1.4
43
71.6
13.3
1.3
0.0
7.3
0.0
0.0
0.7
5.9
39
61.2
6.8
6.5
0.0
14.8
0.1
5.7
1.3
3.7
82
501 -
3,300
36.9
3.0
11.3
0.5
18.6
0.7
19.6
7.2
2.2
97
50.4
17.6
17.5
0.0
1.6
0.0
0.2
5.3
7.4
29
40.7
7.1
13.0
0.4
13.8
0.5
14.1
6.6
3.7
126
3,301 -
10,000
54.5
1.0
13.2
0.0
13.5
0.0
7.8
3.6
6.2
61
37.3
1.0
23.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
32.1
6.5
0.0
10
51.4
1.0
15.0
0.0
11.0
0.0
12.3
4.1
5.0
71
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements in the past five years
10,001 -
50,000
67.4
0.3
16.2
0.2
4.3
0.0
7.3
3.8
0.4
86
52.1
0.0
8.4
0.0
3.6
0.0
10.2
25.7
0.0
8
66.4
0.3
15.8
0.2
4.3
0.0
7.5
5.2
0.4
94
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
49.3
1.9
20.3
0.5
11.4
0.0
6.8
6.1
3.6
63
46.0
26.6
7.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.8
7.2
9.9
5
49.1
3.3
19.6
0.5
10.7
0.0
6.5
6.2
4.0
68
500,000
54.1
0.6
27.8
1.0
1.7
0.0
5.3
5.3
4.1
108
5.4
8.7
6.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
38.5
0.0
40.4
6
49.9
1.3
26.0
1.0
1.6
0.0
8.2
4.8
7.2
114
Over
500,000 All
43.6
0.0
38.7
0.1
6.4
0.0
6.1
4.8
0.2
29
0.0
57.7
42.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
42.2
1.8
38.9
0.1
6.2
0.0
6.0
4.6
0.2
30
Sizes
47.4
1.6
12.4
0.3
17.3
0.3
13.0
5.5
2.3
500
61.9
12.6
6.6
0.0
4.5
0.0
1.7
2.2
10.5
146
53.2
6.0
10.1
0.2
12.2
0.2
8.5
4.2
5.5
646
Table reports the percentage of funds acquired
from each source on average by each system. It is not the percentage of funds acquired from each category for the nation and the
aggregate. That number is reported in Table 105.
A small number of privately owned systems serving populations of 3,301-10,000 and 100,001-500,000 relied heavily on the DWSRF. They
have a large impact on the results; therefore, they are not included in the analysis in volume I.
217
-------
Table 105
Allocation of Sources of Funds for Major Capital Investments Nationally in the Past 5 Years
By Source of Funds and Ownership
(Percentage of Funds from Each Source)
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
Private Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
All Systems
Current Revenues
Equity or other funds from private investors
Borrowing from private sector sources
Department of Homeland Security grants
Other government grants
DWSRF principal repayment forgiveness
DWSRF Loans
Other borrowing from public sector sources
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
38.0
30.9
8.2
0.0
7.9
0.0
0.0
15.0
0.0
13
7.3
58.6
1.2
0.0
22.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.3
48
23.0
44.4
4.8
0.0
15.1
0.0
0.0
7.7
5.0
61
Data: Q.27
101 -
500
8.6
0.1
21.2
0.0
38.9
0.4
22.1
7.7
1.0
43
22.9
7.4
4.5
0.0
49.1
0.0
0.0
7.8
8.3
39
10.4
1.0
19.1
0.0
40.2
0.4
19.3
7.7
1.9
82
501 -
3,300
6.1
16.6
6.5
0.1
17.0
2.9
29.3
18.5
3.1
97
25.4
24.4
11.3
0.0
14.7
0.0
0.1
22.2
1.8
29
8.7
17.6
7.1
0.1
16.6
2.5
25.4
19.0
2.9
126
3,301 -
10,000
25.6
0.9
15.5
0.1
26.2
0.0
20.4
6.5
4.8
61
19.0
0.8
30.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
44.9
4.9
0.0
10
24.2
0.9
18.7
0.1
20.6
0.0
25.7
6.2
3.7
71
Notes: Excludes systems that have not made major capital improvements in the past five years
10,001 -
50,000
60.2
0.2
15.3
0.3
6.8
0.0
10.7
6.0
0.5
86
47.4
0.0
7.9
0.0
4.9
0.0
5.1
34.8
0.0
8
59.7
0.2
15.0
0.3
6.7
0.0
10.4
7.2
0.5
94
50,001 - 100,001-
100,000
39.9
1.5
19.8
0.6
14.2
0.0
7.1
8.8
8.3
63
20.0
6.5
13.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
11.7
30.2
17.9
5
38.7
1.8
19.4
0.5
13.3
0.0
7.3
10.1
8.8
68
500,000
44.7
0.2
35.1
0.0
1.9
0.0
4.5
7.0
6.7
108
3.5
3.2
2.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
43.3
0.0
47.5
6
38.3
0.7
30.1
0.0
1.6
0.0
10.5
5.9
13.0
114
Over
500,000 All
20.8
0.0
57.2
0.1
1.5
0.0
8.3
11.9
0.1
29
0.0
57.7
42.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
20.6
0.6
57.1
0.1
1.5
0.0
8.2
11.8
0.1
30
Sizes
34.0
1.7
33.6
0.2
7.4
0.2
10.5
9.5
2.9
500
14.4
9.7
10.6
0.0
5.4
0.0
27.6
8.8
23.5
146
32.3
2.4
31.6
0.2
7.2
0.2
12.0
9.5
4.7
646
Table reports the percentage of funds acquired
from each source for the nation and the aggregate. It is not the percentage of funds acquired from each category on average by each
system. That number is reported in Table 104.
A small number of privately owned systems serving populations of 3,301-10,000 and 100,001-500,000 relied heavily on the DWSRF. They
have a large impact on the results; therefore, they are not included in the analysis in volume I.
218
-------
Table 106
Average Interest Rates for Capital Funds
By Ownership and Lender
Ownership Type
Public Systems
DWSRF
Other Public Sector
Private Sector
Other
Observations
Private Systems
DWSRF
Other Public Sector
Private Sector
Other
Observations
All Systems
DWSRF
Other Public Sector
Private Sector
Other
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
1.0
0.5
5.0
*
4
*
3.1
*
6.0
3
1.0
1.9
5.0
6.0
7
Data: Q.27
Notes:
101 -
500
2.4
4.4
4.2
*
12
*
4.5
7.7
10.0
6
2.4
4.4
4.8
10.0
18
501 -
3,300
1.8
3.8
4.7
0.0
37
1.5
5.5
6.7
*
8
1.8
4.5
5.5
0.0
45
3,301 -
10,000
3.3
3.1
4.9
4.5
25
6.0
4.6
6.0
*
8
4.3
3.6
5.3
4.5
33
10,001 -
50,000
3.5
3.9
4.5
4.8
39
6.4
5.3
4.3
*
3
3.5
3.9
4.5
4.8
42
50,001 -
100,000
2.9
4.3
4.4
4.9
31
0.8
4.8
7.5
0.0
2
2.8
4.4
4.6
2.3
33
100,001-
500,000
3.2
3.3
4.3
1.4
61
6.2
4.6
5.8
0.0
6
4.2
3.3
4.3
1.4
67
Over
500,000
3.1
4.0
4.6
1.0
19
*
*
6.2
*
1
3.1
4.0
4.7
20
All Sizes
2.3
3.5
4.6
3.9
228
5.6
4.4
6.5
5.9
37
2.6
3.8
5.2
4.3
265
219
-------
Table 107
Percentage of Systems with Asset Management Plans or other Formal Written Strategy for Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Replacement
By Ownership
Ownership Type
Public Systems
Percentage of Systems
Confidence Interval
Observations
Private Systems
Percentage of Systems
Confidence Interval
Observations
All Systems
Percentage of Systems
Confidence Interval
Observations
System Service Population Category
100
or Less
24.6
+|- 23.6
27
9.8
+|- 6.9
118
11.7
+|- 6.6
145
Data: Q.28
Notes:
101 -
500
38.5
+|- 13.5
84
17.2
+|- 8.6
111
25.4
+|- 7.7
195
501 -
3,300
31.1
+|- 9.2
181
13.6
+|- -72.6
56
26.3
+|- 8.0
237
3,301 -
10,000
24.0
+|- 8.4
127
26.5
+|- -77.9
27
24.6
+|- 7.6
154
10,001 -
50,000
33.2
+|- 8.6
156
14.8
+|- 20.3
20
31.7
+|- 8. 1
176
50,001 -
100,000
39.1
+|- -70.3
111
17.9
+|- 20.0
13
37.1
+|- 9.6
124
100,001-
500,000
32.0
+|- 4.9
204
10.5
+I-9.-7
21
29.4
+I-4.7
225
Over
500,000
38.7
+|- 8.9
52
12.2
+|- -76.0
6
35.2
+|- 8.4
58
All Sizes
31.9
+|- 5.4
942
14.0
+I-4.8
372
23.0
+I-3.7
1,314
220
-------
Part 2:
Methodology Report
221
-------
-------
1. Introduction
1.1 Study Background
In compliance with Executive Order 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
(OGWDW), Standards and Risk Management Division (SRMD) conducts periodic surveys of the
financial and operating characteristics of community water systems. These Community Water System
(CWS) Surveys supply information that is essential to support economic analyses of the costs and benefits
of new regulations and changes to existing regulations on consumers, the water supply industry, and the
nation. The information also will be used to measure the financial burden of EPA's regulations on
consumers and the industry. Furthermore, data from the survey will help EPA evaluate program and
policy initiatives and develop guidance on Best Management Practices used in water treatment and
distribution systems. Previous CWS Surveys captured information for the years 1976, 1982, 1986, 1995,
and 2000. This survey gathered information for the year 2006.
1.2 Survey Overview
This section is intended to provide the reader with an overview of the design and conduct of the CWS
Survey. The topics presented in this section will then be discussed at greater length in the following
chapters.
According to the latest inventory data, nearly 156,000 public water systems provide water to over 300
million persons throughout the United States. (Factoids: Drinking Water and Ground Water Statistics for
2007, EPA 816-K-07-004.) Public water systems are both community and non-community water systems.
Community water systems are public water systems that supply water to the same population year-round.
They serve approximately 280 million persons. The CWS Survey was designed to collect operating and
financial information from a representative sample of community water systems.
In order to reduce the burden of the survey on small systems, the data were collected from systems
serving 3,300 or fewer people through site visits by water system professionals. Systems serving over
3,300 people received a letter informing them of their selection in the survey and instructions on how to
obtain the questionnaire form either electronically or through the mail. Water system professionals were
assigned to the systems that received the mailed questionnaire to help them respond to the survey's
questions. A toll-free telephone number and an e-mail address also were sent to the systems to provide
technical support.
The CWS Survey was based on a nationally representative sample of CWSs. The sample was drawn from
a list of approximately 50,000 systems in the 50 states and the District of Columbia in the federal version
of the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS/FED). The survey used a stratified random
sample design to ensure the sample is representative. The sample was stratified by several characteristics
of water systems to increase the efficiency of estimates based on the sample. To limit the travel costs
involved in visiting each small system in the sample, they were selected in geographic clusters in a two-
stage design. A sample of 2,210 systems was selected, including a census of all systems serving
populations of 100,000 or more.
A separate version of the questionnaire was developed for three categories of systems: systems serving 25
to 100,000 people, those serving more than 100,000 and up to 500,000 people, and those serving more
than 500,000 people. Some targeted questions were asked of systems in each size categories. E.g.,
additional questions were asked of very large systems serving more than 500,000 people regarding
223
-------
concentrations of several contaminants in raw and finished water. Similarly, questions that would not
apply to very large systems were excluded from their version of the questionnaire.
Water system professionals contacted the small systems in the sample to schedule appointments for the
site visits. Upon mail out, each medium and large system was notified by telephone that they would
receive a letter with information about the survey in the mail. The letter described the survey goals and a
number of methods to complete the survey. All medium and large systems were given the option to
complete a paper version or an electronic version of the questionnaire. With the toll-free number, a
system could request a paper version or an Excel spreadsheet version of the questionnaire to be mailed
directly to them with return instructions and a postage paid envelope. An alternative to obtain the survey
was through the CWS Survey Web site where a system could download the spreadsheet or hardcopy
version of the questionnaire. Or, if desired, the water system could complete the survey through a Web-
based version of the questionnaire. The electronic formats of the survey were new to the survey in 2006.
The spreadsheet questionnaire matched the layout of the hardcopy questionnaire identically, but most
water systems preferred this method because of the ease of completing a survey in Excel and its near
universal availability at a water system. Respondents could send the questionnaire to numerous
departments for verification via email quickly and easily. The Web-based version maintained a similar
layout, but structured as an online form. Phone calls were made throughout the data collection period to
encourage non-respondents to participate and to provide technical support when needed. Requests to
send completion instructions or the questionnaire were received through the toll-free support line and
during the phone calls to the system; the information was sent as the requests were received.
As completed questionnaires were returned, they were logged into a receipt control system using an on-
line data tracking system. The completed questionnaires went through an extensive data quality review.
The electronic versions of the questionnaire included automated validation checks. Water system analysts
reviewed each questionnaire and contacted the systems to clarify answers, correct anomalous items, or
collect missing responses. The questionnaires were then reviewed by senior staff. The senior staff also
reviewed the site visits reports for each small system. Paper versions of the questionnaires were then key-
entered using independent double-key entry. Finally, the electronic form of the data was run through
automated cleaning and editing programs.
A series of sample weights, non-response adjustments, and other statistical techniques were created and
applied to the final set of sampled respondents. These weights allow for extrapolation from the sampled
systems to the universe of CWSs in the nation. The sample design and weights also allow for the
calculation of confidence intervals for each estimate.
Planning and design of the survey began in February of 2006. A pre-test of the questionnaire was
conducted in May of 2006. The pilot test was conducted in February 2007, and the final design was
developed in March 2007. Data collection took place from March through December, 2007. Data
processing and analysis continued through April 2008.
EPA determined the information to be gathered and the scope of the survey. While providing overall
management of this effort, EPA secured the services of several contractors who performed a variety of
tasks in support of the survey design, survey administration, data processing, and analysis. The Cadmus
Group, Inc., was the prime contractor. The site visits were conducted through subcontracts with several
experienced water system professionals. Cadmus' primary responsibilities were for overall project
management; design of the questionnaire; sample design; selection of the sample; design, administration,
and management of the data collection; development and maintenance of the on-line data tracking system,
technical support to water systems in the sample; editing and preparation of the data for data entry;
calculation of sample weights; expert quality assurance review of the survey data; data tabulations; and
report preparation.
224
-------
EPA also requested comments on the survey from several independent reviewers. Barry Nussbaum of
EPA's Office of Environmental Information, A. Richard Bolstein of George Mason University, and John
Gaughan of Temple University reviewed the sampling plan. Bimal Sinha from the University of
Maryland also provided comments. Barry L. Liner, PE and David Binning, PE Scott J. Rubin, JD, and
Janice Beecher, Ph.D. reviewed the final report.
225
-------
-------
2. Sample Design and Weighting
2.1 Sample Design and Selection
This section describes the sample design for the 2006 CWS Survey. It includes a description of the
sampling frame, target sample size, stratification variables, and sampling methods.
The survey relied on a probability sample of CWSs. For small systems (those serving populations of
3,300 or less), a two-stage cluster sample was used. A stratified random sample was used for systems
serving populations of between 3,301 and 100,000. Systems serving populations of over 100,000 were
selected with certainty. The strata were defined by the combinations of the size of the residential
population served by the water systems and the source of water (ground or surface).
2.1.1 SDWIS Sampling Frame and Coverage
The sampling frame was developed from the federal Safe Drinking Water Information System
(SDWIS/FED. The system has been revised and is now known as SDWIS/ODS). SDWIS is a centralized
database of information on public water systems, including their compliance with monitoring
requirements, maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), and other requirements of the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SOWA) Amendments of 1996. The following information was extracted from SDWIS for the
statistical survey:
Name of system
Address of system
Populatio n served
Primary source (surface water or ground water)
Public water system identification number (PWSID)
Ownership type
Consecutive systems (i.e., does system purchase or sell water)
From these data, EPA developed a sample list from which it (1) calculated summary statistics for use in
calculating sample size, and (2) randomly chose systems within the design strata which will take part in
the survey.
SDWIS/FED was the appropriate sampling frame because:
It fully covered the target population.
It contains no duplication.
It contains no foreign elements (i.e., elements that are not members of the population).
It contains information for identifying and contacting the units selected in the sample.
It contains other information that will improve the efficiency of the sample design.
SDWIS/FED was the best choice for a sample frame because of its inclusive coverage of all units of
observation for this survey. In addition, SDWIS/FED has two other advantages: it contains information
that will facilitate contacting the respondents, and it contains other information that is useful in stratifying
the sample, thereby improving the efficiency of the sample design. However, SDWIS/FED was not
designed to be such a sample frame; many properties of SDWIS/FED, and some lingering problems of
227
-------
system classification in SDWIS/FED, can result in many inaccuracies for such sample frame applications
and sample selection.
The extracted data outlined above was sent to each state for review and verification. States verified the
information for their systems so that the census and sample were drawn from a valid universe of systems.
EPA updated the list based on the revisions provided by the states. A typical revision may consist of
adjusting population served to include the population served by all consecutive connections. This revised
list serves as the frame for the survey. The frame included 50,465 community water systems in the 50
states and the District of Columbia.
2.1.2 Sample Design and Selection
Sample Eligibility
To be eligible for the CWS Survey, a water system must meet several criteria. First, it must meet the
CFR definition of a community water system; principally, a water system providing drinking water to 25
or more permanent residents or to 15 permanent connections. (See 40 CFR 141.2 for the complete
definition.) In addition, the CWS Survey excluded federal- and state-owned or operated systems because
these are not affected by regulatory and economic forces in the same way as other systems. The survey
also excluded systems in Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, and the Pacific Islands. To the extent possible, all
ineligible systems were identified in SDWIS/FED and removed from the frame; however, many ineligible
systems could not be identified and were therefore left in the frame. If systems were clearly identified as
ineligible during data collection (e.g., they are no longer an active water system, they no longer meet the
CFR definition of a Community Water System, or they are owned by the federal or a state government),
the data were excluded from analyses based on the sample.
Sample Design
The CWS Survey analytical plan specified precision level targets for subpopulations of systems, which
required minimum sample sizes be achieved for each subpopulation. The precision targets for each
subpopulation were 95 percent confidence intervals of + 10 percentage points for estimated proportions.
The 2006 CWS Survey used site visitors to collect data from systems serving 3,300 or fewer people. The
2006 CWS Survey was fielded at the same time as the 2007 Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey
and Assessment (DWINSA), which also relied on site visitors to collect its data. To minimize costs and
to reduce the burden on systems serving 3,300 or fewer people, the two surveys combined their site visits
of small systems. The DWINSA data quality objective for systems serving 3,300 of fewer people is to
estimate a 95 percent confidence interval of the need for each stratum with a margin of error plus or
minus 30 percent of the need of systems in each stratum. The sample sizes required for each stratum for
the CWS Survey was compared to that of the DWINSA. The larger of the two samples was used in each
stratum to ensure the data quality objectives of both surveys were met.
The domains of the population of interest for EPA are based on two characteristics of the systems:
1. The source of water. Using the SDWIS source classifications, systems that rely on any
surface water were distinguished from systems that rely completely on ground water.
2. The size of the population served by the system. Eight size categories were used: systems
that serve less than 100 people; systems that serve 101 to 500 people; systems that serve from
501 to 3,300 people; systems that serve from 3,301 to 10,000 people, systems that serve from
10,001 to 50,000 people; systems that serve 50,001 to 100,000 people; systems that serve
from 100,001 to 500,000 people; and systems serving more than 500,000 people.
228
-------
The two water sources and the eight system sizes produce sixteen strata.
A system is classified as a surface water system in SDWIS if any of its water is surface water. Ground
water under the direct influence of surface water is classified as surface water. Systems that rely on
purchased water are included in the ground water strata because we assume the characteristics of the
water and the treatment requirements will be more similar to ground water than to surface water. (While
some untreated surface water is purchased, the majority is treated and therefore more similar to ground
water than surface water.)
The sample is stratified to achieve two goals. First, stratifying the data allows us to draw inferences about
specific population domains. For example, EPA may wish to draw conclusions about systems serving
populations 10,000 or less. We can ensure that estimates of the sub-populations will meet the required
levels of precision by drawing the necessary number of observations for each stratum.
The second goal achieved by stratifying the data is that we can increase the efficiency of our estimates by
grouping systems into relatively homogeneous strata. The strata were chosen to minimize the differences
among systems within strata, and to maximize the differences among strata. The results of previous
surveys indicate there are important differences in the way systems are operated and in their finances
across the strata selected. The operating characteristics and treatment requirements of ground water
systems tend to be different from surface water systems. The operating and financial characteristics of
large systems tend to be more complex than small systems. System management, and the resources
available to it, also may vary by system size. The regulatory impact models require reasonably precise
parameter estimates from each of these domains. The sample size in each domain should be large enough
to provide a sufficient number of completed questionnaires to obtain estimates with reasonable precision.
Table 2-1 shows the number of systems in the sample frame and the minimum sample size required to
obtain an estimate for a proportion of 50 percent with an error not exceeding + 10 percentage points
(except for a 1 in 20 chance) in each domain. (A 50 percent statistic was used because the standard error
is largest when the population percentage is 50 percent. The error will be smaller for other population
percentages.) Systems with populations served of over 100,000 were selected with certainty.
Sample Selection
For CWSs serving 3,300 or fewer people (small CWSs), a two-stage sampling design was used to reduce
field data collection costs. Field data collectors were sent to the clusters of five systems at a time to
collect data. The primary sampling unit (PSU) was a county or a group of counties. (Each county with
fewer than five small systems was combined with geographically adjacent counties to form the primary
sampling units.) At the first stage of sampling, a sample of 120 PSUs was selected with probabilities
proportional to size. The measure of size was the number of small systems in the PSU. States were
provided with a list of small CWSs in the counties selected, and EPA asked sates to verify that the
systems on the list are active and serve populations of 3,300 or fewer.
To select the second stage sample of small systems, the overall selection rate for each small system
stratum was calculated as the target initial sample size in the stratum divided by number of systems in the
stratum. The expected frequency of selection was calculated for each PSU in the first stage sample. For
each PSU selected, the second stage selection rate for a stratum equaled the overall selection rate for the
stratum divided by the first-stage expected frequency of selection. That second stage selection rate for a
stratum was applied to the count of systems in that county to determine the fractional sample size. The
fractional sample sizes was converted to integer sample sizes using stochastic rounding and with the
constraint that the total integer sample size for a county hit equals six systems. To measure composite
sample size in selecting counties or PSUs, an overall stratum selection rate was multiplied by the number
229
-------
Table 2-1. Frame and Sample Sizes by Strata
Source of Water
Ground
Surface
Population Served
1 00 or less
101-500
501 - 3,300
3,301 -10,000
10,001-50,000
50,001 - 100,000
100,001 -500,000
More than 500,000
1 00 or less
101-500
501 -3,300
3,301 -10,000
10,001-50,000
50,001 - 100,000
100,001 -500,000
More than 500,000
All
Frame Size
12,487
14,800
12,049
3,665
2,325
350
184
23
256
525
1,146
954
1,038
295
297
71
50,465
Required
Sample
96
103
158
94
93
76
184
23
70
82
89
88
88
73
297
71
1,685
of systems in the stratum in that PSU, and summed over all strata in each primary sampling unit (county
or group of counties).
For systems serving populations of 3,301 to 100,000, the sample was obtained by drawing a random
sample of systems from the cleaned frame, within each sampling stratum serving populations of this size.
Systems in these strata were over-sampled to account for non-response. The over-sampling rate was
based on EPA's experience with the 1995 and 2000 CWS Surveys. Systems serving populations of more
than 100,000 were selected with certainty. The resulting increase in sample size is warranted for the
following reasons:
Each of the larger systems has a more significant impact on the total costs and benefits of
regulations.
Because of the small numbers of systems in many of the larger strata, precision can be
increased at comparatively lower cost than it can be for smaller systems. Other things being
equal, doubling precision will quadruple sample size in strata with 5,000 systems or more.
Many of the larger strata, however, have only hundreds of systems. In a stratum of 750
systems, one could double precision by only tripling sample size. In a stratum of 200
systems, one could double precision by doubling sample size.
A total of 2,210 systems were selected. This is a larger number of systems than required (and shown in
table 2-1) because of the need for over-sampling discussed above. The sample size by strata and the
sampling rate are shown in table 2-2. The 2006 sample also is larger than the 2000 sample despite the
reduction in the number of systems in the country. While the overall number of community water
systems declined, the number of systems serving more than 100,000 people increased. Because these
systems are selected with certainty, the total sample size increased in 2006.
230
-------
Table 2-2. Sample Size and Sampling Rate by Strata
Source of
Water
Ground
Surface
Population Served
100 or less
101-500
501 -3,300
3,301 -10,000
10,001-50,000
50,001 -100,000
100,001 -500,000
More than 500,000
100 or less
101-500
501 -3,300
3,301 -10,000
10,001-50,000
50,001 -100,000
100,001 -500,000
More than 500,000
All
Sample
Size
101
124
154
206
211
151
184
23
62
75
84
183
165
119
297
71
2,210
Sampling
Rate (%)
0.8
0.8
1.3
5.6
9.0
43.0
100.0
100.0
21.5
12.7
7.0
18.7
15.3
39.0
100.0
100.0
4.3
2.1.3 Stratum Migration
Errors in the frame classification of the water systems by population served and water source introduces
inefficiency in the sample design through a loss of sample size and/or by introducing unequal sampling
rates. Among the respondents, 91 percent reported the same population served category as indicated by
the frame. Over 95 percent reported the same source as the frame.
Population Served by the System
Table 2-3 compares the classification of systems by their population served using the population data
from the frame and from the systems' responses to the survey. In all size categories, 91 percent of
systems confirmed their original size category. Within each size category, over 96 percent of systems
were either in their original size category or in the adjacent class.
Source of Water
Table 2-4 shows the cross-tabulation of the frame-based and response-based water source classifications.
Approximately 94 percent of the systems classified as ground water systems in the frame confirmed that
status in the sample. Ninety-four percent of surface water systems in the frame were also classified as
surface water systems in the sample.
231
-------
Table 2-3. Survey Respondents by the Frame-Based and Sample-Based Size
Categories
Sample-Based Population
Served Categories
25-100
101-500
501-3,300
3,301-10,000
10,001-50,000
50,001-100,000
100,001-500,000
Over 500, 000
Count
Percent
Count
Percent
Count
Percent
Count
Percent
Count
Percent
Count
Percent
Count
Percent
Count
Percent
Frame-Based Population Served Categ
25-
100
133
87
9
5
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
101-
500
20
13
168
90
6
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
501-
3,300
0
0
9
5
219
95
7
5
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
3,301-
10,000
0
0
0
0
4
2
137
89
11
7
1
1
1
0
0
0
10,001-
50,000
0
0
1
1
0
0
8
5
147
91
12
9
8
3
0
0
50,001-
100,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
112
86
11
5
0
0
ory
100,001-
500,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
3
2
218
91
2
3
Over
500,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
56
97
Table 2-4. Survey Respondents by the Frame-Based and the Sample-Based
Source Categories
Sample-Based
Water Source
Ground
Surface
Percent
Count
Percent
Count
Frame-Based Water Source
Small
Ground
364
95
4
2
Surface
19
5
189
98
Medium
Ground
209
93
12
5
Surface
15
7
217
95
Large
Ground
89
92
5
3
Surface
8
8
183
97
All
Ground
662
94
21
6
Surface
42
6
589
94
Impact of Strata Migration on the Accuracy of Domain Estimates
The sample was designed to estimate a 50 percent statistic with a 95 percent confidence interval of +10
percentage points. One measure of the impact of the strata migration on the efficiency estimates is to
calculate the size of the confidence interval given the number of observations in each stratum for the
sample collected. Table 2-5 shows the minimum sample required to estimate a 50 percent statistic with a
95 percent confidence interval of +10 percentage points under two scenarios.1 First, it shows the sample
size needed given the inaccuracies in the frame. In other words, it accounts for the migration across strata
1. The sample of systems serving 3,301 or fewer persons was designed to estimate a 50 percent statistic with a
confidence interval of ฑ 10 percent. It also was designed to estimate the national future investment need of these
systems with a margin of error of ฑ 10 percent of their need. Therefore, the planned sample produces a confidence
interval for a proportion that is smaller than ฑ10 percent. See section 2.1.2 for the description of the sampling plan.
232
-------
that occurred. Second, it shows the sample selected. (It is the same as the sample shown in table 2.1.)
The table also shows the half-width of the 95 percent confidence interval that results from the actual
sample selected, given the sample's estimate of the number of systems in each sub domain. The impact of
strata migration on the confidence interval for small ground water systems was negligible. Strata
migration resulted in a slight increase in the size of the confidence interval for small surface water
systems. Because the sample was designed to collect data on all systems with populations of more than
100,000, the width of the confidence interval for these systems would have been zero. Strata migration
substantially increased the width of the confidence interval for ground water systems serving more than
500,000 persons and slightly for surface water systems serving greater than 100,001 to 500,000 persons
because the number of systems in these strata is larger than expected.
Table 2.5. Sample Sizes and the Impact on Precision of Estimates
of Strata Migration
Source
Ground
50,001
100,00
Over
Surface
50,001
100,00
Over
Population Served
100 or less
101 -500
501 -3,300
3,301 - 10,000
10,001 -50,000
-100,000
1-500,000
500,000
100 or less
101 -500
501 -3,300
3,301 -10,000
10,001 -50,000
-100,000
1-500,000
500,000
Sample
Needed
Given
Strata
Migration
96
103
158
94
92
75
173
32
75
83
89
88
89
70
305
68
Sample
Selected
96
103
158
94
93
76
184
23
70
82
89
88
88
73
297
71
Half width of 95%
Confidence
Interval
0.100
0.096
0.077
0.100
0.099
0.099
0.000
0.109
0.105
0.101
0.100
0.100
0.101
0.097
0.009
0.000
2.2 Weighting and Estimation
A sampling weight is attached to each responding water system record to (1) account for differential
selection probabilities, and (2) reduce the potential bias resulting from non-response. The sampling
weights are necessary for estimation of the population characteristics of interest. The sample variance is
then used to calculate 95 percent confidence intervals for the estimates.
2.2.1 Derivation of Base Weight and Non-response Adjustment
The calculation of the sample weight reflects the complex nature of the sampling design. The community
water system sample consists of a stratified element sample of medium and large water systems. Systems
were stratified by water source and their population served. For small water systems a two-stage cluster
sample design was used.
233
-------
1. At the first stage geographic clusters (counties or county groupings) were sampled using
probability proportional to size sampling. The measure of size was a function of the
number of small systems in the cluster.
2. Within clusters a stratified element sample of small systems was drawn.
The response rate for systems serving 3,301 to 100,000 was below the target after an initial round of data
collection. An additional 162 systems were selected in a second round of sampling to increase the sample
size in these strata.
Sixteen sampling strata were defined based on systems' population served and source of water; all weight
calculations use this sample stratum variable.
Base weights
The first step was the calculation of a base sampling weight for each sample system. The medium and
large system samples are simple random samples within each stratum. The two-stage small system sample
is designed to be self-weighting within each stratum. Therefore, for all systems the base sampling weight
equals the number of systems in the stratum divided by the number sampled from that stratum. In other
words the base weight for the hth stratum, Bh, is:
(1) Bh=^JL
where Nh represents the number of systems in the stratum in SDWIS, and nh represents the number of
systems sampled from the stratum.
Non-response adjustment
The second step in the weighting methodology was to make a unit non-response adjustment to the base
sampling weights. For each medium and large system stratum, the non-response adjustment factor is
equal to the ratio of the number of systems that completed the survey plus the number of non-respondents
to the number of systems that completed the survey (i.e., the reciprocal of the stratum response rate).
Ineligible systems are not incorporated into the unit non-response adjustment. The adjustment factor for
the hth stratum is given by 5h:
/T\ ฃ h h
(2) ฐh =
where rh is the number of refusals and other non-respondents in the h* stratum.
For the small system sample the unit non-response adjustment was not implemented within each cluster
because the sample sizes were too small. Rather the adjustment was carried out within each small system
stratum at the total sample (i.e., national) level.
Final weights
The non-response adjustment factor 5h was multiplied by the base sampling weight, Bh, to obtain the non-
response adjusted base sampling weight. The non-response adjusted base sampling weight for the
234
-------
medium and large systems that completed the survey is the final weight for use in analysis. The non-
response adjusted weights can be written as:
(3) Whf = BhSh
for medium and large systems, and
(4) Wmh = BmhSh
for small systems.
The final step in the weight calculations for small systems was a ratio adjustment to the frame count of
small systems in each small stratum at the national level. This step was carried out because the two-stage
sample of small systems, drawn from 120 sample clusters, may not have the same stratum distribution as
the entire frame of small systems. For each small system stratum, the sum of the non-response adjusted
base sampling weights for systems with a completed survey was added to the sum of the base sampling
weights for the ineligible systems. The count of small systems in the frame was then divided by this sum.
This yielded a ratio adjustment factor for each small system stratum, p^:
Twh. + yBh.
/ i mhj / i mh/
where: Rh is the set of systems that responded to the survey, and
Ih is the set of systems sampled that were ineligible.
j designates the j* sample system.
For the small systems with a completed survey their non-response adjusted base sampling weight was
multiplied by the ratio adjustment factor to yield a final weight for use in analysis:
(6) W^ = WmhPh
2.2.2 Variance Estimation
The estimate of the variance must account for the sampling design. Weights are used to produce
estimates for the population as a wholeor example, the proportion of treatment facilities that use a
particular treatment practice, or the mean water-sales revenue of a system. Weights also affect the
standard error of the estimates, and therefore the confidence intervals.
The 2006 CWS Survey sampling design was relatively complex; medium and large systems were selected
by strata; small systems were selected in clusters of counties (or, in some cases, groups of counties) using
a probability proportional to size sampling. This sampling design also affects the estimate of the standard
error. The stratification of the systems by water source and population served will tend to reduce the
overall sample variance, as systems within a stratum tend to be similar to each other and different from
systems in other strata. The clustering will likely increase the sampling variance, as systems within a
cluster may be similar to each other. This effect of clustering may not be large; while systems within a
county share some characteristics, the often are a diverse group in terms of population served and water
source, as well as revenue, expenses, and operating characteristics. But ignoring the clustering may lead
to an underestimate of the sampling variance, so it must be taken into account.
235
-------
The treatment facilities in the sample were not selected independently; rather, they were selected in
clusters in a two-stage process. For medium and large systems, the stratified random sample of systems
was selected in the first stage; every treatment facility in each system was selected in the second stage.
Facilities in small systems were selected in a three-stage process: counties (or groups of counties) were
selected in the first stage; a sample of systems within each county was selected in the second stage; every
facility within each system was selected in the third stage. The calculation of the sample variance of
estimates regarding treatment facilities also must take into account this sampling design.
Variance Estimator
The variance is estimated using a first-order Taylor expansion. The variance is calculated in Stata. The
variance estimator is given by:
V(R) = -^ ^(f)- 2RCdv(f, x)+ R2v(x)}
(7)
L
where R = */*. ; the ratio of estimates of two population totals. Y is equal to
' X 'h=l i=l j=l
L mh "gu
X is equal to ^ ^ ^ wHj xhj]. . L is the number of strata, mh is the number of primary sampling units in
h=l i=l j=l
strata h, and nhl is the number of elements in the ith primary sampling unit in the hth strata.
Most of the estimates produced in this volume are either means or proportions. A mean is simply a ratio
in which xhlj is equal 1. A proportion is simply a mean in which yhlj is equal to a 0/1 variable.2
Finite Population Correction
A finite population correction factor was derived for medium and large systems in the sample. The factor
is the ratio of systems in the sample to the number of systems in each stratum. Because the primary
sampling units for small systems were selected with replacement, the finite population correction factor is
set equal to zero for small systems.
To estimate the variance, we first define the following ratio residual:
(8)
We then define the weighted total of the ratio residual as
(9)
and the weighted average of the residual as:
2See Cochran, W.G. 1977, Sampling Techniques, New York: John Wiley & Sons for amore
information about variance estimates.
236
-------
mh t=l
We can then define the variance estimate as:
where ^ is the finite population correction.
The estimate of the variance is used to estimate 95 percent confidence intervals in the detailed tables of
this report. An implicit assumption is that the average values presented in each table are normally
distributed. When the estimate is based on a large number of systems, this will generally be true; in cases
where the estimate is based on a small number of systems, the assumption may not hold. The confidence
interval in these cases may be larger than the mean itself. The confidence interval is not adjusted in these
cases; to compute the correct confidence interval requires examination of the empirical distributions for
each variable in the calculation and is beyond the scope of this study.
237
-------
-------
3. Survey Design and Response
The survey was administered through site visits to small systems (those serving populations of 3,300 or
less), and through a mail survey to medium and large systems (those serving more than 3,300 people).
This chapter discusses the survey instrument, the processes for conducting the site visits and distributing
the questionnaires, as well as the process to assure sufficient response rates and the handling of returned
questionnaires.
3.1 Questionnaire Design
EPA staff responsible for regulatory development developed the questionnaire with the assistance of the
Cadmus Group, Inc. The process began with a meeting of EPA staff to discuss their data needs,
distinguishing core needs required for regulatory development from other data needs. Based on these
discussions, some of the questions that were in the 2000 CWS Survey were eliminated from the 2006
questionnaire. Other questionsespecially those focusing on treatmentwere further developed. A
slightly modified version of the questionnaire was developed for systems that serve populations of over
500,000; this version of the questionnaire included additional questions on source and finished water
contaminant concentrations, and excluded questions that only would apply to small systems. The
questionnaire in the Appendix is a composite of the three questionnaires used; the questions that are asked
of systems serving up to 100,000 people, more than 100,000 and up to 500,000 people, and over 500,000
people are noted.
EPA worked with Cadmus on the wording and organization of the questionnaire. Cadmus was
responsible for the design and layout of the questionnaire form, and for documenting and incorporating all
revisions to the several design and test versions of the questionnaire. Throughout the design process, the
EPA project officer consulted with the full range of EPA regulatory and analytical staff, representing
expert advisors and future users of the data, to identify and correctly present the broad survey topics and
specific survey questions to be included in the survey instrument. These covered such areas as water
production, storage, distribution, treatment, and treatment system security, as well as financial
information regarding water sales revenue, customer data, operating expenses, and capital investment.
EPA went to great lengths to attempt to reduce the burden to respondents while collecting complete,
accurate, detailed data. EPA decided to conduct site visits to small systems because of the difficulties
they faced in responding to past Community Water System Surveys prior to 2000. Data for the 2007
Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment were collected at the same site visit,
minimizing the impact of the two surveys on small systems. EPA also coordinated its data collection
efforts with that of the Water Treatment Plant Questionnaire, another survey conducted by the Agency.
Both surveys required systems to report basic financial information; systems that responded to the Water
Treatment Plant Questionnaire did not need to respond to the financial section of the CWS Survey. EPA
also established a process to provide extensive technical assistance and guidance to medium and large
systems. As discussed in chapter 4, EPA conducted a pre-test of the questionnaire to identify questions
that posed potential problems for respondents. EPA also conducted a pilot test of the data collection
methods. In response to both tests, EPA made several changes to the questionnaire, reducing the scope of
several questions. For example, as a result of the pre-test, the number of age and diameter categories was
reduced in the question regarding the length of the distribution system.
3.2 Data Verification
EPA forwarded the list of water systems selected in the sample to the states. The states were asked to
verify that the systems were active systems, as well as the address, telephone, and the contact information.
239
-------
3.3 The Pilot Test
Approximately 50 systems were selected from the sample for a pilot test. Two clusters of small systems
were selected for site visits by senior Cadmus water system professionals. Ten small systems participated
in the pilot test. Approximately 40 systems serving more than 3,300 people received the questionnaire by
mail. The pilot tested the site visit and mail-out process, and the technical support system. The pilot
systems were included in the full sample.
3.4 Site Visit Operations.
Contractors with extensive water system experience conducted the site visits. In addition to Cadmus, the
contractors were:
Southwest Environmental Engineering, and
McNenny Environmental Engineering and Consulting.
Abel
CH2M Hill
Schott Engineering
South Hills Consulting
Suarez Engineering
Sunrise
TCB, Inc.
Cadmus trained the site visit staff. The training covered the survey, the information required from the
systems, and the data collection protocol. The training included on-site inspections with Cadmus staff of
a cluster of systems in the sample, as well as detailed instructions on the conduct of the visit.
The states were contacted ahead of time to confirm the systems in the sample and to review information
on the system contacts. Site visitors were told to let state contacts know they were in their area and what
they were doing, as a courtesy. The surveyor extended the opportunity to the states to attend the survey.
Otherwise, the surveyors were told to not burden the states with requests for assistance.
As part of the training, site visitors were instructed as follows:
The survey is voluntary and not to be misrepresented as mandatory. It is an opportunity to
provide information to be used by EPA to make sound, informed decisions and regulations.
Obtain the operating and financial information for the same time period of time, if at all
possible
If information is not available for the separate classes of system (for example, water
deliveries by customer class), then collect the totals (e.g., total deliveries).
Indicate the system has a treatment objective only if the facility was "designed" for that
purpose. For example, if the facility was designed for particulate removal and removed
arsenic in the process, the surveyors were to only check particulate removal.
Complete the sequence of treatment after a walk-through of the treatment plant. If available,
collect a schematic.
240
-------
Related questions should be checked for consistency. For example, questions on water
produced should be consistent with deliveries and unaccounted for water. Water delivered
should be consistent with the number of customers and connections.
The importance of the financial data was emphasized. Again, if the information was not
available in a manner that it could be broken down into components, get totals.
Collect financial reports if they are available and if the system will not break down the costs
as requested.
Collect data on municipal tax and other non-water system revenue of publicly owned
municipal water systems.
Several issues arose during the site visits that required consistent responses. They included:
If the system indicated that it merged with another system, the site survey was conducted.
If a system decreased in size so it was no longer a community water system, the site visit was
conducted to confirm the status.
If the system grew so it was no longer a small system, the site visit was conducted and data
collected.
Each site visitor was given a list of systems to visit. The site visitors contacted the systems to schedule
the on-site interviews; the site visitors were required at times to contact the state to confirm contact
information. Once on-site or in some cases prior to the site visit, the systems were provided with a letter
introducing the site visitor and explaining the survey. The site visitor toured the system, interviewed the
staff, photographed the system (from source to delivery), and filled out the questionnaire. The completed
questionnaire, inclusive of the pictures, site map, and collected information and reports, was then
submitted to Cadmus. Senior staff at Cadmus reviewed all surveys submitted by the site visitors to ensure
the site visitors were filling out the questionnaire correctly and to ensure consistent responses from the
site surveyors. The questionnaires were then logged into the tracking system as received and completed.
During the site visits, Cadmus senior staff communicated with the site visitors via telephone and e-mail to
ensure consistent and complete results. Group email was used to provide answers and clarification to the
site visitors' questions. All site visitors received the same information.
3.5 Self-administered Survey Administration
In an effort to minimize respondent burden and maximize the response rate, systems had three options for
responding to the survey. A system could complete an electronic spreadsheet version, a Web-based
version, or a paper version of the questionnaire. Each was available through a secured Web site. Also,
systems could request that copies of the spreadsheet or paper questionnaire be sent to them directly.
Cadmus sent each system a packet that included a letter from the EPA WAM and flier that explained how
to respond to the survey. The flier included instructions on how to access the Web site and a toll-free
telephone number the system could use if it had any questions. The fliers included unique log-in
identifiers and passwords for each system. Information for the mailing label was extracted from the
sample frame and attached to the envelope for mailing.
The packets were mailed to approximately 1,400 community water systems over a 2 day period. Each
system then received a telephone call from the analyst at Cadmus responsible for that system. The call
241
-------
informed the system of the survey, told them they would receive the packet (if they had not already done
so), and gave the systems a name and telephone number to call with any questions. If a system did not
receive the packet, the analyst responsible for that system sent them another copy via FedEx or by e-mail.
The analyst continued to follow-up with each system until the system either responded to the survey or
refused to participate. The analysts provided technical assistance as necessary, and in some cases filled-
out the questionnaire through a telephone interview.
As systems uploaded questionnaires, the tracking system automatically logged them in as received. As
questionnaires were received from the water systems by mail or e-mail, Cadmus logged them into the on-
line tracking system. The analyst responsible for the questionnaire reviewed it for data quality and to
identify potential problems. Questionnaires submitted electronically were printed for the analysts to
review. When necessary, senior engineering or financial staff was consulted regarding potential
problems. If a problem or question could not be resolved by Cadmus staff, the analyst contacted the
water system itself. When this initial review was completed, the questionnaire was forwarded to senior
staff for additional review. All changes to the questionnaires were recorded in a permanent log. After the
senior review was completed, revisions to the electronic data were made by the analysts. For paper
questionnaires, the completed questionnaire was entered into an electronic spreadsheet version by two
Cadmus analysts. A process was developed to ensure every response field was entered identically. Once
the results were confirmed, the questionnaire was uploaded to the Web site.
3.6 Data Entry
Upon review by the senior staff, all questionnaires were logged as completed. If systems filled-out paper
questionnaires, the questionnaires were key-entered using 100 percent verified double-key entry. After
entry, the data were run through automated cleaning and editing programs that checked each variable for
proper values and ranges. Items failing these checks were examined and either confirmed or corrected.
Questionnaires that reached this stage were considered to be entered and cleaned. (The data were subject
to further intensive checks as part of the quality assurance process, discussed in chapter 4.)
Status reports were sent to the EPA project manager every two weeks during the data collection effort.
The report showed the number of questionnaires with each of the following status codes:
Site visit appointments scheduled or questionnaires mailed
Questionnaires re-mailed
Inactive systems
Questionnaires undeliverable
Refusals
Site visits completed/questionnaire returned
Questionnaires reviewed and ready to enter into database
Completed questionnaires entered into database
Table 3-1 presents an example of the information provided to EPA.
242
-------
Exhibit 2: 2006 Community Water System Survey Status by Sampling Stratum
Status
Small Systems
25-
100
101 -
500
501 -
3,300
Sub-
total
Medium and Large Systems
3,301 -
10,000
10,001 -
50,000
50,001 -
100,000
100,001 -
500,000
Over
500,000
Sub-
total
Total
Ground Water Systems
Mail out
Sample Needed to Meet
Precision Targets
Initial contact
Inactive
Undeliverable
Refusal
Received from System
Completed Analyst
Review
Completed Senior QA
Sent for Data Entry
Received from Data Entry
Completed Questionnaire
101
96
101
3
3
95
77
52
42
42
42
124
103
124
2
1
121
102
59
51
51
51
154
158
154
1
2
151
119
63
59
59
59
380
357
380
6
6
368
299
174
152
152
152
206
94
170
1
28
60
50
21
14
12
6
211
93
167
2
33
61
48
12
15
15
4
151
76
133
1
11
54
48
17
11
11
4
184
184
174
24
82
70
32
13
12
17
23
23
20
1
1
12
11
4
1
774
470
663
5
97
268
226
86
53
50
32
1,154
827
1,043
11
103
636
525
260
205
202
184
Surface Water Systems
Mail out
Sample Needed to Meet
Precision Targets
Initial contact
Inactive
Undeliverable
Refusal
Received from System
Completed Analyst
Review
Completed Senior QA
Sent for Data Entry
Received from Data Entry
Completed Questionnaire
62
70
62
1
2
59
44
20
14
14
14
75
82
75
1
7
67
59
22
20
20
20
84
89
84
2
3
81
66
31
25
25
25
221
241
221
12
207
169
73
59
59
59
183
88
162
1
19
67
54
30
12
10
16
165
88
157
17
81
63
22
19
18
12
119
73
113
1
13
58
48
18
11
11
7
297
297
283
1
27
144
122
50
16
15
18
71
71
69
10
42
36
10
4
3
8
835
617
784
3
86
392
323
130
62
57
61
1,056
858
1,005
5
98
599
492
203
121
116
120
243
-------
Exhibit 2: 2006 Community Water System Survey Status by Sampling Stratum
Status
Small Systems
25-
100
101 -
500
501 -
3,300
Sub-
total
Medium and Large Systems
3,301 -
10,000
10,001 -
50,000
50,001 -
100,000
100,001 -
500,000
Over
500,000
Sub-
total
Total
Surface and Ground Water Systems
Mail out
Sample Needed to Meet
Precision Targets
Initial contact
Inactive
Undeliverable
Refusal
Received from System
Completed Analyst
Review
Completed Senior QA
Sent for Data Entry
Received from Data Entry
Completed Questionnaire
163
166
163
4
5
154
121
72
56
56
56
199
185
200
3
8
189
162
81
71
71
71
238
247
238
1
5
232
185
94
84
84
84
600
598
601
8
18
575
468
247
211
211
211
389
182
332
1
47
127
104
51
26
22
22
376
181
324
3
50
142
111
34
34
33
16
370
149
245
2
24
111
95
35
22
22
11
481
481
457
1
51
226
192
82
29
27
35
94
94
89
1
11
54
47
14
4
3
9
1610
1,087
1,447
8
183
660
549
216
115
107
93
2,210
1,685
2,048
16
201
1,235
1,017
463
326
318
304
244
-------
3.7 Survey Response
The data collection effort was closed out December 31, 2007. Of the 2,210 systems sampled, 1,314
responded to the survey. The overall response rate was 59.5 percent. Table 3.2 shows the response rate
by strata.
Table 3-2. CWS Survey Responses and Response
Rate by Strata
Source of
Water
Ground
Surface
Population Served
100 or less
101-500
501 -3,300
3,301 -10,000
10,001-50,000
50,001 -100,000
100,001 -500,000
More than 500,000
100 or less
101-500
501 -3,300
3,301 -10,000
10,001-50,000
50,001 -100,000
100,001 -500,000
More than 500,000
All
Completed
Question-
naires
94
120
150
77
74
67
87
14
59
67
81
77
87
64
152
44
1,314
Response
Rate (%)
93.1
96.8
97.4
37.4
35.1
44.4
47.3
60.9
95.2
89.3
96.4
42.1
52.7
53.8
51.2
62.0
59.5
Non-response may introduce a source of bias into estimates based on the survey. Non-respondents may be
different than respondents; in some cases, these differences may be the reason for their refusal to
participate in the survey. Non-response may have an impact on the survey's estimates. Two areas of
potential concern are systems' estimates of system finance and systems' treatment practices.
The potential impact on system finances of non-response bias can be positive or negative. On the one
hand, systems that are not doing well financially may not want to report their finances to the survey. On
the other hand, systems reporting significant profits may not want to report their revenue and expenses.
Therefore, both the sign (whether the bias is positive or negative) and relative magnitude of non-response
bias on net revenue, for example, is uncertain.
However, there is reason to believe that such bias as might exist is minimal. For one reason, the finances
of many water systems are already public information. Most systems are publicly owned. In fact, the
overwhelming majority of systems serving over 3,300 people are publicly owned, and it is these larger
systems where the response rate has been problematic in the current survey. Public ownership means that
their revenue and expenses are matters of public record. In addition, many privately owned systems are
regulated by state public utility commissions, and their finances also are matters of public record. Most
systems cannot hide unusual profits or losses simply by refusing to respond to the survey; therefore, the
potential impact of non-response on the estimates of system finance likely is small.
245
-------
Another reason to suspect that the impact of the non-response bias on the financial estimates is relatively
small has to do with previous response rates among small systems. In 1995, EPA assumed that many
small systems were having financial difficulty. The response rate among these systems was relatively low,
below 40 percent in some categories. If non-respondents had poorer financial performances than
respondents, the 1995 survey would overstate the financial well being of small systems. In part due to this
concern, EPA conducted site visits to small systems in 2000 and response rates increased dramatically,
exceeding 90 percent. The overall financial performance of these systems did not change between the two
surveys. In fact, the success of the site visitors indicated that the low response rate of small systems was
due to the difficulty they faced in filling out the questionnaire, not an attempt to hide possible financial
problems.
The survey also collects detailed information about systems treatment practices. Systems that are out of
compliance with primary drinking water regulations may be reluctant to report their treatment practices.
The magnitude of bias is uncertain. Further analysis could indicate the potential impact of the bias. For
example, we could assume that some or all non-respondents do not treat their water to determine the
potential impact of non-response bias. (Some of the non-respondents are large systems that almost
certainly provide treatment. These systems could be excluded from this analysis.) This analysis could be
used to estimate the upper bound of the impact of non-response bias and its impact on the 95 percent
confidence interval. Further analysis may be warranted.
246
-------
4. Quality Assurance and Peer Review
All work under this contract was conducted in accordance with an approved Quality Assurance Project
Plan. In addition, a Supplemental Quality Assurance Project Plan was developed specifically for this
survey and was approved prior to the start of data collection. The supplemental plan for the CWS Survey
encompassed specific measures to check and ensure the validity of the survey data from data collection
through data processing and analysis, as well as measures to assure the quality of other survey
components. The report results and statistical methods also were peer reviewed by subject matter experts.
Section 4.1 discusses the questionnaire pre-test and the survey pilot test. Section 4.2 presents the
measures taken to assure the quality of the statistical sample. Section 4.3 discusses the quality assurance
procedures used during the data collection effort. Section 4.4 describes the expert review of questionnaire
responses. Section 4.5 describes data processing quality assurance procedures. Section 4.6 describes the
quality assurance steps taken during the preparation of this report. Section 4.7 describes the peer review
process.
4.1 Draft Questionnaire Pre-test and Survey Pilot Test
A significant component of the survey quality assurance plan was to thoroughly test the questionnaire
design, the survey design, and data collection procedures prior to implementing the full study. Efforts to
confirm the validity and effectiveness of these designs and revising them when the tests reveal problems,
errors, or difficulties, led to design and process improvements in such areas as data reliability, data
completeness, accuracy of the sample frame, and response rates.
4.1.1 Pre-test
When the initial data collection objectives had been identified and the questionnaire shaped into a
working draft instrument, EPA conducted a pre-test of this draft with seven water systems in New
England of various sizes, including ground and surface water systems. The pre-test participants were
recruited with the assistance of Ray Raposa of the New England Water Works Association. The main
objective of the pre-test was to gauge the respondents' reactions to the questionnaire itself. The test did
not address any of the actual survey operations and response rate issues that would later be tested in the
full-scale pilot test.
The recruited systems received the questionnaire in June, 2006. EPA then convened a focus group
meeting of the seven water systems, facilitated by survey research staff from Cadmus. The focus group
explored questions regarding comprehensibility, use of clear and appropriate terminology, provision of
suitable response categories, and questionnaire layout. The focus group also discussed respondents' ease
or difficulty in providing answers, their immediate knowledge of or access to information requested by
the questionnaire, and their overall reaction to the survey.
Overall, the focus group felt the questionnaire was clear and relatively easy to follow. As a result of the
pre-test, some questions were re-worded, and others were shortened. Otherwise, the pre-test found no
systematic problems in the respondents' ability to provide answers to the questions.
4.1.2 Pilot Test
A full scale pilot test was conducted in February and March 2007. The pilot tested the questionnaire and
the major operational components of the survey design. The results of the pilot, along with the final
version of the questionnaires were delivered to EPA in March 2007. The full on-line tracking system was
developed during the pilot, and the mail-out and receipt logging procedures were finalized.
247
-------
Ten small systems and 40 medium and large systems were selected from the full sample for use in the
pilot. All of the small systems and 15 of the medium and large systems responded by the end of March.
As a result of the pilot, modest changes were made to the mail-out process and the instructions for
systems. The pilot also resulted in changes to several questions in the questionnaires. Questions 12
(length of distribution mains) and 27 (capital improvements) were simplified. Modest changes were made
to several other questions to clarify the question. The pilot also finalized the site visit protocols, and
identified issues that needed to be addressed when training the site visitors.
4.2 Sampling Quality Assurance
Quality assurance of the sampling process for the CWS Survey involved three principal areas:
Development of the sample frame
Sampling specifications, and
Use of software designed to draw complex samples.
Development of the Sample Frame. EPA conducted an extensive review of the data used for the sample
frame. By starting with the data used for the 2007 DWINSA frame, the 2006 CWS Survey was able to
take advantage of the extensive data verification effort undertaken for the 2007 DWINSA. The 2007
DWINSA frame was developed with SDWIS data from the third quarter of 2005. State representatives
working on the DWINSA were sent their respective lists of systems from the data freeze and asked to
make changes to population and source categories. The sample frame was then built using the data from
the states. The development of the frame is discussed in detail in section 2.1.
Sampling Specifications. In order to carry out the sampling processes, the survey statisticians prepared
detailed specifications that served as directions for performing the sampling and as a permanent
documentation of the process. The sampling plan was documented in both the supporting materials for
the Information Collection Request submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, and in the
Quality Assurance Project Plan. The specifications ensured the sample was drawn in conformity with the
sample design and in a statistically valid manner. Barry Nussbaum of EPA's Office of Environmental
Information, A. Richard Bolstein of George Mason University, and John Gaughan of Temple University
reviewed the sampling plan. Bimal Sinha from the University of Maryland also provided comments on
the sampling plan.
Sampling Software. The CWS Survey sample of systems serving up to 3,300 people was drawn using a
SAS program designed to draw two-stage cluster samples of this type. The sample of systems serving
populations of 3,301 to 100,000 was a stratified random sample and was drawn using a Stata-based
program to select random samples.
4.3 Data Collection Quality Assurance
Each component of the CWS Survey was implemented with precision and quality assurance.
Questionnaire Design
The various drafts of the questionnaires were the product of close review and comments by
EPA, Cadmus, and outside reviewers. Improvements also were made as a result of the pre-
test and pilot test.
248
-------
Questionnaire version control was maintained through the various drafts by allowing for one
master copy and strictly enforcing version-control procedures. After changes were made to
each version of the questionnaire, a new electronic folder with the date of the changes made
was created. The most recent dated folder was used to add create any future changes. One
Cadmus employee was responsible for making all changes and could track back previous
versions of the questionnaire.
The questionnaire form was designed to clarify and simplify for respondents the provision of
the highly detailed and complex data required for the survey. Graphic devices were used to
make the form clearer and simpler to use. The devices included type fonts and sizes, borders,
and text boxes.
Because of the difficulties many small systems have with filling out complex questionnaires
like the CWS Survey, site visitors were sent to small systems to ensure the questionnaires
were filled out correctly.
Mail Data Collection
Analysts preparing the material for mailing were provided with specifications for the job and
were supervised by a senior staff involved in a number of previous mailings.
Analysts worked to produce the letter and envelope to be mailed to each respondent. All
labels were printed with verified SDWIS address information. All letters were tailored to
each water system with their identification information using the mail merge function in
Microsoft Word and a database of address information as well login information to the Web
site. Consistency checks between the information printed on the letter and the label were
constantly ongoing throughout the mail out.
Each recipient of the mailed questionnaire was assigned an analyst who maintained contact
with the water system throughout the survey. The analysts provided reminder calls and
technical support to the systems. They also reviewed the data as it was received, following
up with the system if there were any questions.
Senior survey managers reviewed all surveys to ensure analysts were using consistent
procedures for each survey.
The online tracking system ensured proper tracking and control of all questionnaires from the
point of sampling until the data were entered and cleaned. In addition to supporting overall
management of the project, the periodic status reports identified response rate problem areas
which enabled Cadmus to take appropriate follow-up measures.
Site Visits
Extensive training was provided to the site visitors, including a two day training session in
Boulder, Colorado that included example site visits.
Detailed instructions were provided to each site visitor regarding the conduct of the on-site
surveys.
249
-------
Regular contact was maintained with all site visitors. Site visitor questions and Cadmus
responses were sent to all site visitors to ensure each site visitor received complete and
consistent information.
Each completed survey was reviewed by Cadmus staff as it was received. Follow-up
instructions were provided as needed.
4.4 Expert Review of Responses
As was done with responses to the 2000 CWS Survey, each questionnaire was subjected to a multi-level,
detailed review by Cadmus staff as it was returned by the systems. Cadmus reviewed the questionnaire
for completeness and internal consistency. Systems were called if key questions were not answered or if
answers were inconsistent or unclear.
Upon receipt of the completed questionnaire, the Cadmus analyst responsible for the system reviewed the
survey. They identified missing information and questions or potential problems with responses. The
analysts were provided training on how to evaluate a completed questionnaire, as well as written guidance
for reviewing the responses. The written guidance included rules-of-thumb for internal consistency
checks; these guidelines helped the analyst compare questions and identify inconsistent answers. For
example, guidelines were provided on average annual water consumption per household, which were used
to compare annual water production with the number of connections reported.
Guidelines were provided regarding follow-up questions for the system. If essential data on system
finance, treatment, and production were missing, or if inconsistencies could not be resolved, analysts
contacted the system. If detailed information was not available (e.g., revenue by customer class), analysts
attempted to collect more aggregate-level data (e.g., total water sales revenue.) Analysts worked with the
systems to resolve inconsistencies. Senior staff contacted systems when difficult issues arose. Changes to
the questionnaire were documented and logged.
The analysts' review of the surveys was itself reviewed by senior survey staff. Senior staff evaluated the
reviews and provided feedback to the analysts. Senior staff and water system experts provided
information and answered questions throughout the data collection period.
Upon the completion of an analyst's review of a questionnaire, the completed questionnaire was then
reviewed by Cadmus water system experts. Each question in the survey was subject to review. The
expert review focused on the validity of the responses to each question (e.g., checking that the treatment
sequence is logical), consistency across questions (e.g., the treatment practice is consistent with the
treatment objectives), and that questions were answered and reviewed consistently across by water
systems. Any further changes were documented and logged.
4.5 Data Processing Quality Assurance
The completed surveys were edited and entered into an electronic database. The electronic data were then
imported into a hierarchical database for distribution, and a statistical package for detailed analysis.
Procedures were in place at every step to maintain the integrity and quality of the data.
4.5.1 Data Entry
Most water systems chose to fill out the questionnaire using the Excel spreadsheet. After completing the
survey, the water system then uploaded it directly into the database. Throughout the entire process,
validations checks were established to assure the highest quality responses. Automatic checks were in
250
-------
built into the spreadsheet to make sure water systems input valid information. For example, water
systems were asked to input percentages as a whole number, 25 percent was entered as 25, not .25. If a
water system entered in the number .25, a message would appear asking the water system to verify the
accuracy of the inputted number. In this manner the responses were controlled as the water system
entered data.
When a completed questionnaire was uploaded into the database by the water system, the data were
subjected to a second set of automated checks. A report was created for the water system about any data
issues. They were then given the option to change data before submitting the questionnaire.
A paper copy of the completed questionnaire was printed out after the data were uploaded by the water
system. The paper copy was reviewed by an analyst and changes were tracked directly on the paper.
After senior staff approved the changes through an additional round of quality assurance, then the changes
were made to the online database. This process allows for the database to maintain the most recent
dataset and all responses can be tracked back to the original survey response.
4.5.2 Automated Data Validation Checks
In preparing the final database, EPA and Cadmus designed, produced, and analyzed a series of computer
validation checks. These checks were run on the full survey database after the data were entered and
passed the standard computer edits for values and ranges on a variable-by-variable basis. The checks
included the following:
Distribution frequencies for all categorical variables;
Distribution frequencies for all continuous numerical variables formatted into four categories
(non-zero responses, zero responses, legitimately skipped, and missing);
Univariates for each continuous variable;
Item-specific cross-tabulations of categorical variables;
Item-specific cross-univariates of continuous data; and
Item-specific advanced logic edits.
4.5.3 Database Quality Assurance
The final, clean survey database represented the product of the various review, editing, data entry, and
data validation steps described above. Once the database was prepared, there were a number of
subsequent data processing steps required to create a variety of files suitable for analyses and tabulations
for the final delivery of a permanent database to EPA. The principal steps included:
Appending needed variables from external files, including sample and contact information
from SDWIS.
Analyzing the hard copy questionnaires and the frequency distributions of continuous and
categorical variables to devise rules for handling missing data.
Zero-filling blank responses. A detailed series of rules was developed for assessing blank
responses and determining whether to regard these as zeros or missing values. In general,
251
-------
blank quantity fields were treated as zero, except when there was external evidence in a
logically related item that the response should not be zero. A detailed set of programming
specifications was designed to implement these rules.
Creating new derived variables from the survey data to categorize systems into strata
comparable to the original sampling strata but based on the final survey responses rather than
the SDWIS data.
Attaching the sample weights to the analytical file.
For the final delivery of the database to EPA, deriving and attaching the numerous composite
variables created for the production of the analytical tables in this report.
Each step was planned in advance. Detailed specifications were written to guide the programming and
data processing needed to perform each step. These documents are crucial quality assurance tools to help
ensure that systems analysts have a clear and common understanding of the entire process of data
management, that the processing stages fit together in a logical order and accomplish the intended
objectives, and that there is an unambiguous audit trail of the condition of the data at each stage.
Version control was maintained for all computer programs, and interim stages of all data files were
permanently archived. This meant that when changes were made to a program or process, it was clear
which the current version was and the sequential changes that had been made from one version to the next
were apparent. It was always possible to restore any earlier version in full or to merge selected data from
the old version to the new version.
The combination of the processing specifications, version control, and data archiving ensured that no
process was irreversible, that it was always possible to recover from any deliberate or inadvertent changes
to the data, and that the characteristics of the survey data were fully known at each processing stage.
4.5.4 Tabulation Quality Assurance
The tabulations of the results presented in the tables in this report are varied and complex. Rather than
being a simple presentation of individual survey variables, each table usually presents the results of
multiple calculations involving several survey variables. Many tables present several such results in a
single table. There often were several different ways of defining or calculating an item of interest, and
sometimes there were different direct or derived sources of data for the calculation available on the survey
database. Hence, the following steps were taken to help assure that each table accurately summarized and
presented the data contained in the final survey database.
Identify important, relevant, and useful information that could be developed from analyses of
the survey data;
Design each table to effectively present the results or to juxtapose related results in the same
table;
Clearly describe the contents of each table;
Define in detail the variables, values, formulas, and derivations that went into each
calculation;
252
-------
Prepare clear and detailed data processing specifications for carrying out the tabulations
according to the calculation definitions;
Develop computer programs to process the data pursuant to the tabulation specifications;
Review the initial tabular output for:
-D Consistency with the design of the table of contents;
-D Conformity with the definitional and programming specifications; and
-D Reasonable agreement with expected values-based on external measures and expert
knowledge of water system operations and finance;
Review definitions, specifications, programs, and underlying data for tabulations exhibiting
data anomalies or outliers;
Review any definitions, specifications, or programs if the review process identifies errors or
the need for modifications to previous decisions; and
Repeat previous tabulation quality assurance steps and re-run tabulations until no further
unacceptable data anomalies are found.
The tabulation process was fully automated, from the underlying source data through all processing stages
to the final formatted tables. There were no intermediate stages requiring manual transfer or entry of data
from one stage to the next. This eliminated human transcription error. Of equal importance, it also
expedited the process of successive iterations of the tabulations during the quality review process, as each
time a table was produced the output data automatically were transferred into the same final table form as
on the previous iteration. This ensured that any new anomalies identified in later iterations did not result
from transcription errors, and allowed the review staff to focus their investigations on the table data,
specifications, and programs.
4.6 Quality Assurance during Report Preparation
The Survey's quality assurance plan was followed throughout report preparation. Estimates in the report
were produced in the statistical package Stata using a series of programs (called "do files"). The
programs were reviewed by at least two analysts and all changes were tracked and documented.
Estimates were internally reviewed and revisions were tracked. Decisions to exclude outliers or other
data from analyses were documented. The reports were reviewed internally by Cadmus and by EPA.
They also were reviewed by external experts, as discussed in the next section.
4.7 Peer Review
The sampling plan was reviewed by two independent external reviewers, A. Richard Bolstein of George
Mason University and John Gaughan of the Temple University School of Medicine. Barry Nussbaum of
EPA's Office for Environmental Information also reviewed the sampling plan. Bimal Sinha from the
University of Maryland also provided comments. The peer reviewers were asked to assess the September
7, 2006 draft of the Sampling Plan for the 2006 Community Water System Survey. The peer reviewers
were also provided with a copy of the survey instrument as background. The reviewers made
recommended some minor changes to the sampling plan for small systems. The plan's approach for
dealing with primary sampling units whose composite measure of size exceed five was modified based on
253
-------
reviewers' comments. The reviewers also recommended revisions to the sampling plan description to
clarify the survey's approach. The final report was reviewed by the following: Barry L. Liner, PE and
David Binning, PE of AEM Corporation, Scott J. Rubin, JD, and Janice Beecher, Ph.D., Michigan State
University.
254
-------
Appendix:
Community Water System Survey Questionnaire
255
-------
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
SURVEY OF COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEMS
OMB No. 2040-0273
Expiration date: 1/31/2010
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
When you complete the survey, please upload it to our Web site at:
www. CWSS urvev .com
Follow the instructions to upload your completed questionnaire. Please have your login ID available. This information was sent with your introductory letter
from the Cadmus Group, Inc.
If you are missing your introductory letter and need your login ID or prefer to return this questionnaire by e-mail as an attachment please email:
CWS Survey (gicadmus group. com
You also may print a copy of the completed questionnaire and send it to us in the pre-paid Federal Express envelope provided.
(Please call the toll free number sent with your introductory letter if you need a Federal Express envelope.)
Or you may mail your printed copy of the completed questionnaire to:
EPA Community Water System Survey
c/o The Cadmus Group, Inc.
57 Water Street
Watertown, MA 02472
Participation in the survey is voluntary. However, as a matter of policy, EPA will not disclose the identity of any respondent to this questionnaire, nor thi
identity of any participating water system. While no respondent has ever claimed that the information asked for in this survey contains confidential busines
information (CBI), EPA will offer you the opportunity of claiming CBI in the event that we receive a Freedom of Information Act request for any data tha
would identify you or your system. It should be noted, however, that EPA has never received a Freedom of Information Act request for such informatioi
in prior surveys.
The public reporting and record-keeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 3.58 hours per response, or from 1 hour ti
5 hours per respondent annually. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose o
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology am
systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providinj
information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to ;
collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. A
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB contro
number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15. The OMB Control Number for the survey i
2040-0273 and the expiration date is 1/31/2010. The agency is required to display the OMB Control Number and inform respondents of its legal significance i:
accordance with 5 CFR 1320.5 (b).
If you wish, you may send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested method
for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S
Environmental Protection Agency (2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460; and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Include the control number in an;
correspondence. Do not send the completed survey to this address
UMB INO. 2040-0273
Expiration date: 1/31/2010
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
Dear Owners and Operators of Community Water Systems:
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is conducting a national survey of drinking water systems, and yours is one of about 2,000 systems that
have been randomly selected to participate. According to your state's database, you have been identified as the most appropriate person to provide information about
your water system. Participation in the survey is voluntary.
What sort of information are we seeking? Information on a range of operating and financial characteristics, from the current treatment processes being used at your
system, to your annual revenue and expenses. There are even a few questions that address security considerations.
Conducted about every five years, this survey represents the first time we've been able to offer a variety of ways to participate. A hard copy of the questionnaire will
be available, as always. But you will also be able to download a spreadsheet version of the questionnaire, or complete the questionnaire at a specially designed web
site. You will be contacted soon to determine which approach suits you best. If you would like to get started before you are contacted, detailed instructions about the
questionnaire are included from the Cadmus Group, Inc., the contractor administering the survey for EPA.
This survey will accomplish a number of important objectives. It will give EPA current data to let us better consider the costs and benefits to water systems when we
develop new national drinking water regulations. It also will allow us to measure the impact of drinking water regulations put in place since the last survey. This, in
turn, will help us determine more affordable approaches to drinking water treatment. Furthermore, the answers you provide will help us develop more effective
programs to safeguard our nation's drinking water, provide guidance to the states, and measure the effectiveness of existing federal programs, such as the IDrinking
Water State Revolving Fund. This survey is part of a larger data collection effort by EPA. You also may be asked to provide information about your future investment
needs through the Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment. You will be contacted separately regarding the Needs Survey and Assessment.
As we have done in the past, EPA will only make use of the information you provide when it has been aggregated with the responses of many other water systems in
the same size category as yours. We will never disclose your name or the name of your water system in any public documents. The questionnaire has more details on
how your privacy will be protected. The agency is required to display the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number and inform respondents of its
legal significance in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.5 (b). The OMB Control Number for the survey is 2040-0273. The expiration date for Control Number is January
31,2010.
Answers to this questionnaire will help EPA understand your circumstances better than any other tool we have. If you have ever wanted to have a larger say in the
development of national rules that could directly affect you and your water system, providing answers to this questionnaire is an important contribution. Because
only 2,000 of you are being asked to speak for over 50,000 other systems, your voice is that much more important and will carry that much more weight. If you have
ever felt that federal regulators don't understand your situation, then please take this opportunity to tell us, in detail, just what your situation is. It will make a
difference.
Sincerely,
Brian C. Rourke
Program Analyst
Standards and Risk Management Division
Office of Water, US Environmental Protection Agency
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
This questionnaire asks about your system's operational and financial characteristics.
Questions 1 through 4 ask for general information about your system.
Questions 5 through 20 ask about your system's operational characteristics, including its water sources, treatment practices, storage and distribution system.
Questions 20 through 28 ask about your system's financial characteristics, including number of connections, revenue, expenses, and capital investment.
If you received and completed EPA's Water Treatment Plant Questionnaire AND and you are willing to give EPA access that information for purposes of this
survey, you do not need to complete questions 21 to 24, and questions 26 to 28. You will be contacted to confirm that you are willing to share the results.
Please complete the questionnaire. Save your file early and often!
Additional copies of the questionnaire are available at www.CWSSurvey.com. To access the Web site, you will need to have your login ID and password
available. The login ID and password were mailed to separately in an introductory letter from the Cadmus Group, Inc. This letter also contained a toll-free
help-line for you to call if you needed any assistance. If you do not have this information, please contact The Cadmus Group, Inc. through e-mail at
C WS Survey @cadmusgroup. com.
You may upload the completed questionnaire to our Web site at www.CWSSurvey.com or send it to us via e-mail at CWSSurvey@cadmusgroup.com.
You also may print a copy and send it to us by FedEx or U.S. mail. We recommend uploading it to the Web site because you will be able to view and confirm
your responses. See below for upload instructions.
You are also encouraged to send schematics, diagrams, financial reports, or other information that will help provide a complete picture of your water system.
If you have electronic copies of the documents, you may upload them to www.CWSSurvey.com. Please have your login ID available to upload files.
If you only have paper copies, you may request a pre-paid FedEx envelope by e-mailing us at CWSSurvey@cadmusgroup.com, or by the calling toll-free
number on your introductory letter from the Cadmus Group, Inc.
To upload the survey to the Web site after completion:
Please save your file often! And before uploading the questionnaire, please save the file one additional time. The upload process will upload only the most
recently saved file. If you make changes before saving and attempting the upload, the new information will not be uploaded. After using your login ID and
password to access your water system's account at www.CWSSurvey.com, you will seen an option to upload your survey to the Web site. Follow the
instructions once you have logged in to upload the file from your computer.
After the upload you will have an opportunity to review any inconsistencies found in the questionnaire during the upload process. A report will be created
that explains these inconsistencies. You may print out the report, correct any issues you agree with in the file on your computer, save the file, and upload the
corrected questionnaire. If you make any changes, be sure to save this report before you upload the questionnaire again! Once you agree to all of your
responses, you can finalize your responses by clicking the "Submit" button.
The upload process will automatically fill out the online questionnaire at the website. The report that highlights inconsistencies in the responses
iii
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
will have hyperlinks to where this response appears in the online form. You will have the option to change your responses online. (Please note that the
layout of the online form is different than that of the spreadsheet.)
To e-mail your survey as an attachment:
You may e-mail the questionnaire as an attachment to CWSSurvey@cadmusgroup.com. If you choose this method, please save your file before sending it!
Your e-mail program will attach only the most recently saved version of the file. If you make any changes but do not save the file before sending, then
incorrect information will be submitted. Please save early and often!
You may also e-mail copies of any your documents to the same e-mail address.
Note on printing and mailing the questionnaire:
Only the first page of every sheet is currently set to print. Any information you add outside of this print range will not print unless you adjust the print
settings. Please ensure that you print out all information. If you need any help, please call the toll free number sent with your introductory letter from
the Cadmus Group, Inc.. Someone will assist you in changing the print ranges. If you decide to print out the questionnaire before starting the questions,
please call toll-free and we will send you a paper version of the questionnaire via FedEx to ensure that all questions are returned in the postage-paid envelope.
Other versions of the questionnaire:
If you prefer to have your work stored online, you may complete the questionnaire through the online form at www.CWSSurvey.com.
There is a paper version of the questionnaire available. It can be sent to you via FedEx, along with a postage-paid envelope for easy return.
Questions? Comments? Concerns? If you have any questions, please call The Cadmus Group, Inc., toll-free using the number on your introductory letter from
Cadmus or e-mail Cadmus at CWSSurvey@cadmusgroup.com
111
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
1 Please provide the name, title, and telephone number of the most knowledgeable person to contact for
information.
A. Part I - Operating Characteristics B. Part II - Financial Characteristics
(Write "SAME" if same as A)
Name:
Title:
Tel. No.
Fax No.
E-mail:
2 This survey will ask you to provide operating and financial information for your public water system for
the most recent 12-month period for which data are available. Please specify below the end dates for which
data are provided. For part B, you may use data from the most recently completed fiscal year or the most
recent year for which audited financial reoprts are available.
A Operating information (end date): / /
mm / dd / yy
B Financial information (end date):
mm
-/=-/-
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
3 A Please classify your water system using the following criteria. (Please check only one)
Owned and operated by a government or public agency (not including government-owned systems that hire a private O
company to operate the system)
Owned by a government or public agency and operated by a private contractor O
Owned privately and operated for profit primarily as a water business (e.g., American Water Company) O
Owned privately and not operated for profit (e.g., a homeowners association or a non-profit cooperative) O
Owned privately and operated as a necessary part of another business (e.g., a mobile home park) Please specify Q
your primary business in part B.
B If the system is owned privately and operated as a necessary part of another business, please specify the
type of business:
4 A Do you have regular access to a computer for sending and receiving information?
O Yes
O No (Skip to question 5)
B Do any of your computers have the following software or peripherals? (Please check all that apply)
Microsoft Excel
Microsoft Access
CD drive
DVD player
C What access do you have to the Internet? (Please check only one)
High-speed Internet access (e.g., cable, DSL, wireless, or Tl)
Dial-up modem access
No access
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
The following definitions of water system components are used in this survey. Figure 1 is an example of a schematic of a water system showing water sources, treatment
plants, transmission lines, and the distribution system.
Please refer to these definitions and the schematic for an explanation of the terms used in questions 6 through 11. Please submit diagrams or schematics, using figure 1
as a guide.
Please note that the identifier numbers used in the questions do not refer to specific items in figure 1. For example, use 'SI' to refer to your first surface water source,
regardless of whether it is a flowing stream, as depicted in the schematic, or another surface water source.
Term
Surface
water intake
Ground
water source
Purchased
water
connection
Water
treatment
plant
Buyer
Entry point
Example
Code
SI, S2
Gl, G2,
G3, G4
PI, P2
WTP 1,
WTP2
B1,B2,B3
E1,E2, E3,
E4
Definition
Surface water intake refers to the structure at the surface
water source (flowing stream, lake, reservoir, or ground
water under the direct influence of surface water
[GWUDI]) that permits the withdrawal of the water from that
source.
Ground water source refers to the connection of untreated
water from one or more wells to a water treatment plant or
directly into the distribution system. Where the water from
multiple wells flows through a common pipe prior to entry to
the treatment plant or distribution system, the combined flow
is considered one ground water source. Do not include
GWUDI.
A purchased water connection refers to the transmission of
water from the seller's water system to a water treatment plant
or directly to the distribution system of the purchaser's water
system.
Figure 1: Sample diagram of intakes, treatment plants, and entry points
msx\ \w
EffiSL XT
^pi =3tF B^\
ri ^\ (WelT) P2 ,
Flowing \. ~r^ HEV
^Stream N^ 1 02 y
^ \\^ * WTP 1 -__ ' /
\si ^"~-- -^ / /
^___- x ./ G1 -(We?) diltl / /
rsLTeir?^ ^i^) ;/>
^ -""X (WelT)
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
5 Please provide a copy of the schematic of your system. (Remember: you may send an existing schematic if available)
Figure 1 is an example of the type of schematic requested. This information can be transmitted two ways.
1. If your files are stored on your computer:
A. Upload the schematic at the Web site www.CWSSurvev.com or,
B. E-mail the schematic as an attachment to CWSSurvev(@,cadmusgroup.com
To access the Web site you need to have your login ID and password available. The login ID and password were
mailed to you separately. If you do not have your login information, please e-mail: C WS Survev(@.cadmusgroup. com
2. If you prefer to send a hard copy through the mail, please call the toll-free number from your introductory letter from
the Cadmus Group, Inc to request a pre-paid FedEx envelope to return this information.
Figure 1 is an example of the type of schematic requested.
Please note that this can be e-mailed or uploaded at the same time as the financial information requested later in the survey.
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
Provide the following information for the ground water sources, surface water intakes, or purchased water connections for this water system.
MG is millions of gallons of water.
MOD is millions of gallons per day.
If the source is used on a seasonal or emergency basis, the average daily amount is for the days the source is used.
6A Ground water sources.
(Click here to go to the definition on tab Fig 1.)
How many ground water sources (i.e., treatment plants or groups of wells tied directly to the distribution system) are in your water system?
Number of sources:
Please list each well or group of wells feeding into a single ground water entry point separately by line.
Notes for the table:
1. Treatment includes any process that alone or in combination with other processes has an objective of producing or maintaining potable water.
2. If you do not know the limit of your source, please leave this column blank.
Limits on the availability of water include source capacity, water quality requirements, state and local water resource plans, local economic development and growth
projections, contractual obligations, permits, water rights, and legal constraints. Limits also include current equipment constraints imposed by system components,
pumps, and water treatment plant capacity.
Ground water
sources
Gl
G2
G3
G4
G5
G6
G7
G8
G9
G10
How many
individual wells
supply this ground
water source?
Is this a
seasonal
source?
(Yes or No)
Is this an
emergency
source?
(Yes or No)
If this is a seasonal
or emergency
source, how many
months was it used
in the 12-month
period reported in
question 2A?
Is the water from
this source treated
by your system?1
(Yes or No)
What is the total
amount of water
drawn from this
source in the 12-
month period
reported in question
2A?
(MG)
On average, how
much water was
drawn from this
source on a typical
day when it was
used during the
reporting period in
question 2A?
(MOD)
Estimate the
maximum daily
amount of water that
can be drawn from
this source that
supplies each
ground water entry
point.2
(MOD)
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
6B Surface water intake identifiers. (Click here to go to the definition on tab Fig 1.)
1 How many surface water intakes are in your water system?
Number of intakes:
2 Please list each surface water intake separately by line.
Notes for the table:
1. GWUDI is ground water under the direct influence of surface water.
2. Treatment includes any process that alone or in combination with other processes has an objective of producing or maintaining potable water.
3. If you do not know the limit of your source, please leave this column blank.
Limits on the availability of water include source capacity, water quality requirements, state and local water resource plans, local economic development
and growth projections, contractual obligations, permits, water rights, and legal constraints. Limits also include constraints imposed by system
components, pumps, and water treatment plant capacity.
Surface water
intake identifiers
SI
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8
S9
S10
What is the source for
this surface water
intake?
(Please select one)
1) Flowing stream,
2) Reservoir or lake,
3) GWUDI1
Is this a
seasonal
source?
(Yes or No)
Is this an
emergency
source?
(Yes or No)
If this is a seasonal
or emergency
source, how many
months was it used
in the 12-month
period reported in
question 2A?
Is the water from
this intake treated
by your system?2
(Yes or No)
What is the total
amount of water
drawn from this
source in the 12-
month period
reported in
question 2A?
(MG)
On average, how
much water was
drawn from this
source on a typical
day when it was
used during the
reporting period in
question 2A?
(MOD)
Estimate the
maximum daily
amount of water
that can be drawn
from each surface
water intake.3
(MOD)
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
6C Purchased water connections. (Click here to go to the definition on tab Fig 1.)
1 How many purchased water connections are in your water system?
Number of connections:
2 If your system purchases water from one source but has multiple connections or turnouts, please list each connection or turnout separately by line.
Notes for the table:
1. Treatment includes any process that alone or in combination with other processes has an objective of producing or maintaining potable water.
2. GWUDI is ground water under the direct influence of surface water.
3. If you do not know the limit of your source, please leave this column blank.
Limits on the availability of water include source capacity, water quality issues, state and local water resource plans, local economic development and growth
projections, contractual obligations, permits, water rights, and legal constraints. Limits also include constraints imposed by system components, pipeline carrying
capacity, and water treatment plant capacity.
Purchased
water con-
nections
PI
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
P10
Provide the
PWSIDs or name
of the sellers for
each connection.
A seller can appear
more than once.
Is this a
seasonal
source?
(Yes or No)
Is this an
emergency
source?
(Yes or No)
If this is a
seasonal or
emergency
source, how
many months
was it used in
the 12-month
period
reported in
question 2A?
When you
purchase this
water, is it one of
the following'?
(Please select
1) Finished,
2) Partially
treated1,
3) Untreated,
4) Unknown
What is the
source of the
purchased
water1?
(Please select
1) Ground,
2) Surface,
3) GWUDI,2
4) Unknown
Do you
boost
disinfection
of water
from this
source after
it enters the
distribution
system?
(Yes or No)
Do you
provide any
other
treatment1 to
this water
besides
booster dis-
infection?
(Yes or No )
What is the
total amount
of water
drawn from
this source in
the 12-month
period
reported in
question 2A?
(MG)
On average,
water was
drawn from this
connection on a
typical day
when it was
used during the
reporting
period in
question 2A?
(MOD)
Estimate the
maximum
daily amount
of water that
can be drawn
from each
purchased
water
connection.3
(MOD)
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
7 Provide the following information for each water treatment plant in this water system. A wafer treatment plant is any facility that treats or otherwise improves
the quality of the water prior to its entry to the distribution system. Large-scale filtration plants, chemical feeds on wells for disinfection, and facilities that
adjust pH prior to entry to the distribution system are included. Facilities within the distribution system that boost disinfection are not included.
A How many water treatment plants are in your water system?
Number of plants:
B Please provide the following information for each water treatment plant in this water system.
Notes for the table:
Average daily production is the total amount of water produced by the plant divided by the number of days the plant was in use during the 12-month reporting
period in question 2A. Mathematically, it is the sum of all the daily flows divided by the number of daily flows. Design capacity refers to the maximum
amount of water the plant can produce in a single 24-hour period with all treatment trains operating at capacity. Peak daily production refers to the maximum
amount produced in a single day over the 12-month reporting period in question 2A.
Water
treatment
plant
identifier
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
WTP6
WTP7
WTP8
WTP9
WTP10
List all of the surface, ground, and purchased
water sources from question 6 that feed into each
water treatment plant.
What was the average daily
production of each water
treatment plant for the 12-month
period reported in question 2A?
(MOD)
What was the design capacity for
each water treatment plant?
(MOD)
What was the peak daily
production for each water
treatment plant for the 12-month
period reported in question 2A?
(MOD)
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
Use the treatment process codes in table 1 and the objective codes in table 2 to describe the treatment processes used by each plant in question 8.
Table 1: Treatment Processes Codes
Treatment
Disinfection
Chlorine
Chlorine dioxide
Chloramines only
Chloramine with a free chlorine
period (based on need in the
distribution system and not
routinely done)
Chloramine with seasonal
(routine) free chlorine use
Ozone
Ultraviolet light
Mixed oxidant
Filtration Processes
Coagulant addition/rapid mix
Polymer addition
Flocculation
Settling/sedimentation
Lime/soda ash softening
Recarbonation
Filtration
Micro strainer
Slow sand filter
Bag or cartridge
Diatomaceous earth
Pressure filtration
Green sand
Code
Tl
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
T9
T10
Til
T12
T13
T14
T15
T16
T17
T18
T19
T20
Treatment
Filtration (continued)
Rapid sand filter
Deep bed mono-media
Dual/multi media
Membranes
Reverse osmosis
Microfiltration
Ultrafiltration
Nanofiltration
Other
Aeration
Potassium permanganate
Corrosion control
Ion exchange
Activated alumina
Iron-based adsorptive media
Sequestration
Fluoride addition
Dissolved air flotation
Granular activated carbon
Centrally managed POU/POE
Clearwell and/or contact vessel
(e.g., basin, pipeline)
Other (1) see question 8
Other (2) see question 8
Other (3) see question 8
Code
T21
T22
T23
T24
T25
T26
T27
T28
T29
T30
T31
T32
T33
T34
T35
T36
T37
T38
T39
T40
T41
T42
Table 2: Treatment Objectives Codes
Treatment
Code
Algae control Ol
Corrosion control O2
Primary disinfection O3
Secondary disinfection O4
Disinfectant byproduct control O5
Dechlorination O6
Oxidation O7
Iron removal O8
Manganese removal O9
Taste/odor control 010
TOC removal Oil
Particulate/turbidity removal O12
Softening (hardness removal) O13
Recarbonation O14
Organic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., VOCs, pesticides) O15
Inorganic chemical contaminant removal (e.g., arsenic) O16
Radionuclides contaminant removal O17
Security O18
Mussel control O19
Fluoridation O20
Other (1) see question 8 O21
Other (2) see question 8 O22
Other (3) see question 8 O23
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
8A Using the water treatment plant identifiers from question 7, characterize the treatment practices used in each of your system's treatment plants.
- Please enter the treatment process and objective for each step of the treatment practice. Use the codes from tables 1 and 2 above.
- You may enter up to 30 steps. Each step may have up to three processes and six objectives.
- Do not include disinfection booster stations that are within the distribution system.
Two examples are provided. The first example is conventional filtration. The second is iron/manganese removal.
Roll your mouse here in order to see a list of processes and their codes
Roll your mouse here in order to see a list of objectives and their codes
WTP
Ex. 1
Ex.2
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
WTP6
WTP7
WTP8
WTP9
WTP10
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Process
Objective
Stepl
T10
O12
T29
O7 O8 O9
Step 2
Til
O12
T20
OS O9
Step 3
T12
O12
Tl
O3
Step 4
T23
O12
Step 5
Tl
O3
Step 6
T39
O3
Step?
StepS
Step 9
Step 10
Step 11
Step 12
Step 13
Step 14
Step 15
10
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
8B Specify the other treatment practices from the water treatment plant identifiers from question 7.
If, in the last table, you have other unspecified treatment processes or objectives (i.e., you used treatment codes T40, T41, or T42 or objective codes O21,
O22, O23), please write them in here.
These treatment codes (T40, T41, and T42) are for any treatment process you use that is not listed in
Table 1 on page 9. Please specify what each process is:
T40: Other (1)
T41: Other (2)
T42: Other (3)
These treatment codes (O21, O22, and O23) are for any objective you are trying to achieve that is not
listed in Table 2 on page 9. Please specify what each objective is:
O21: Other (1)
O22: Other (2)
O23: Other (3)
11
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
9 Using the water treatment plant identifiers from question 7, indicate if the specified residuals management practices are used and provide the
requested information regarding potential discharge. (Yes or No for each category)
Notes for the table:
1. Systems that are allowed to discharge to a waterway, septic system, or sanitary sewer do not face any legal or permitting restrictions on such discharge.
Water
treatment
plant
identifier
WTP1
WTP2
WTP3
WTP4
WTP5
WTP6
WTP7
WTP8
WTP9
WTP10
Do you use the following residual management process in the following water treatment plants?
(Use the water treatment plant numbers from Question 7)
Dewatering
Mechanical
dewatering
(e.g., belt
presses,
centrifuges,
pressure
filters, and
vacuum
filters)
Non-
mechanical
dewatering
(e.g.,
lagoons,
drying beds,
and freeze
assisted
drying beds)
Disposal
Land ap-
plication
(e.g.,
bene-
ficial
use)
On-Site
Storage
Deep
well
injection
Waste landfill
Hazar-
dous
waste
landfill
Non-
hazard-
ous
waste
landfill
Waterway
Are you
allowed to
discharge
to a water-
way
(surface
water)?
If yes,
do you
discharge
to a
water-
way?
Septic system
Are you
allowed to
discharge
to a septic
system?
If yes, do
you
discharge
to a
septic
system?
Sanitary sewer
Are you
allowed to
discharge
to a
sanitary
sewer?
If yes, do
you
discharge
to a
sanitary
sewer?
Recycle
filter
back-
wash
Other
(specify)
12
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
10 A Is your system currently treating (directly or indirectly) for any contaminants not regulated by the federal government?
(Directly means that the treatment in place is due to the presence of the unregulated contaminant.
Indirectly means that the unregulated contaminant is being addressed because of current treatment practices for a regulated contaminant.)
ฎYes
O No (Skip to question 11)
B Please provide the following information about unregulated contaminants addressed by your treatment plants.
What are the unregulated contaminants that are
being addressed by your treatment plants?
If known, please provide the concentration of the unregulated
contaminant in the raw and finished water as it leaves the plant.
Enter N/A if unknown. Enter ND if the contaminant was not
detected. Please also provide the units as well (e.g., mg/L).
Raw water
Concentration
Units
Finished Water
Concentration
Units
What water
treatment plant treats
for the unregulated
contaminant? (Use
plant identifiers
from question 7.)
Is the plant treating
directly for this
contaminant, i.e., is
treatment in place to
treat specifically for
this contaminant?
13
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
11 A What is the total capacity of storage located past
the first residential customer?
(in millions of gallons)
B Please indicate the number of each type of storage facility you
have in your utility that is located past the first residential
customer.
1 Fully or partially buried
2 Ground level
3 Elevated
4 Hydropneumatic
5 a. Standpipes
b. How many standpipes are operated
as surge tanks?
6 Other
C Indicate the typical number of years between
cleaning an individual storage vessel:
D Please provide the following information about the practices you use to maintain water
quality in storage vessels. Also indicate additional information you need about each practice,
regardless of whether you use a practice.
1 2
a Modeling or other detention time evaluations
b Longer fill/draw cycles to increase mixing
c Inlet/outlet modifications
d Mechanical mixing
e Increase or switch disinfectant residual
f Operational modifications to maintain
disinfectant residual
g Other (please specify)
Do you use any
of the following
practices to
maintain water
quality in
storage vessels
in your system?
(Please check all
that apply)
Do you want
additional
information
to help you
implement
or make better
use of any
of the following
practices?
(Please check all
that apply)
14
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
12 Estimate the length of the transmission lines and distribution mains in your system, and length of pipe replaced in the last 5 years.
A transmission line is defined as a pipeline that transports raw or partially treated water to a water treatment plant or that transports finished water to
distribution mains.
A distribution main is defined as part of the pipeline network that distributes water to consumers.
Replaced pipe is pipe that has either been physically removed from the ground or has been subject to major rehabilitation efforts.
New pipe installed is new transmission lines or distribution mains that do not replace existing pipe.
Distribution Mains
Transmission Line
water
Plant
Transmission Line
Pipe Type and Diameter
Transmission lines
a
Less than 6"
6-10"
Greater than 10" and Less than 24"
24" or greater
Existing (or current)
length of pipe
(In Miles)
Length of pipe replaced in
the past 5 years1
(In Miles)
Length of new pipe
installed in the past 5
years1
(In Miles)
1. Ending on the date shown in your answer to question 2A
15
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
13 A Please provide the following information about each pressure zone in your distribution system.
1 How many pressure zones do you have in your distribution system?
2 How many pressure zones have booster disinfection stations?
3 How many booster disinfection stations do you have throughout your distribution system?
B If your system has experienced a loss of pressure below 20 psi during the past operating year,
please tell us the number of pressure losses that occurred for each of the following reasons:
1 Power outage
2 Fire
3 Main pipeline burst
4 Other (such as maintenance, flushing) Please specify
14 Do you flush your distribution system on a regular basis?
O Yes
O No (Skip to question 17)
15 What percentage of the distribution system is flushed each year on a regular basis?
(Please enter a whole number for the percentage, e.g., 50% is entered as 50, not. 50) %
16 What approach is used when you flush your system on a regular basis? (Please check all that apply)
A (Uni-) Directional (Restricting water flow to one direction using closed valves to maximize velocity,
generally from source/plant to the lowest elevation in the system)
B Conventional, random, or non-directional (Opening hydrants on lines without closing valves or
restricting the direction of water flow)
C Dead end (opening a hydrant or flush valve on the dead-end line)
D Other (Please specify)
17 A If you do not flush your system on a regular basis, have you ever flushed your system?
O Yes
O No (Skip to question 18)
B 1 What was the last year in which you flushed your system?
2 In what year did you flush the system before that?
(Enter "NA " if you only flushed the system once.)
16
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
18 A Do you use chemical disinfection at any of your water treatment plants?
ฎ Yes
O No (Skip to question 19)
B Please provide the following data on disinfection residuals for one summer month (June, July, August, or September) and one
winter month (December, January, or February) for the treatment plant in the system with the highest average daily flow.
(For the last part of the question asking for a percent, please enter the percent as a whole number instead of a decimal,
e.g., 50% is entered as 50, not .5)
Season
Summer
Winter
Month
Treatment Plant
Average entry point disinfectant residual for the
treatment plant with the highest average daily
flow
Total C12
(mg/L as Cl 2)
Free C12
Water Source
Distribution system
Average distribution system
disinfectant residual
(mg/L as Cl 2)
Total C12
Free C12
Percentage of distribution
system samples <0.2 mg/L ,
including non-detects
Total C12
%
%
17
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
19 Please list the 5-digit ZIP codes in your service area. Please estimate the percentage of your residential customers that
are in each ZIP code. This information will be used to identify the unique demographic characteristics of your service area so
that EPA can better assess the financial and operating characteristics of the system.
(Please enter the percent as a whole number instead of a decimal, e.g., 50% is entered as 50, not .5)
ZIP Code
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Approximate Percentage of the
Water System's Residential
Customers in this ZIP Code
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
ZIP Code
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Approximate Percentage of the
Water System's Residential
Customers in this ZIP Code
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
18
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
20 Please answer the following questions about water security. Please Check if Answer is Yes
A 1 Has your water system attended any EPA-sponsored water security training? Q
2 Have you used EPA's Web-based water security technology product guides? Q
3 Have you heard of EPA's Response Protocol Toolbox? O
4 Have you heard of the 14 features of an "active and effective" water security program? O
5 What, if any, information do you need that would help you protect your system against security threats? (Please write a brief answer below)
B 1 Have you heard of mutual aid and assistance agreements or compacts? (If No, skip to section C)
1 Would you be interested in joining such an agreement or contract?
3 If not, please explain why not:
C What are the two greatest barriers to enhancing security at your system? (Please select up to 2 from the menus)
If you selected "Other", please specify on the line below: _,. .,
Other (Please specify)
Choices are:
Lack of interest at the system, public, or rate board level
Competing priorities (regulatory compliance, aging infrastructure, etc.)
Lack of funding
Lack of knowledge /guidance /training materials
D Who do you prefer to get Water Security Information/Products from? (Please select only one)
1 Department of Homeland Security
2 EPA O
3 Water Associations ^
4 No preference
5 Other (Please specify)
19
-------
If you received and completed EPA's Water Treatment Plant Questionnaire AND and you are willing to give EPA access to that information
for purposes of this survey, you do not need to complete questions 21 to 24, and questions 26 to 28.
Are you willing to give EPA permission to use data from the Water Treatment Plant Questionnaire
to complete the financial sections of the Community Water System Survey?
O Yes (Skip to Question 25)
O No (Continue to Question 21)
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
21 A Please complete the table below for the most recently completed fiscal year (the
12-month period indicated in question 2B). Financial information is needed to assess
the financial condition of your water system, to assess possible future expenditures, and
to see how costs are distributed among customers. No financial information provided
will affect any EPA or other federal financial assistance program.
Column A: What was the amount of water produced and delivered to each of the following
customer categories? Report the amount in millions of gallons per year (MGY).
Unaccounted for water includes system losses and uncompensated uses (e.g., fire flow).
Columns B and C: How many connections and people did your drinking water
system serve year-round? Please indicate the number of connections and number of
people served by your water system for all customer types that apply. If you do not
know the connections or people served, please provide your best estimate.
Column D: What were your drinking water system's revenues from water sales for
each of the following customer categories? (Enter "0" if you do not have revenue
from a source.)
Column A
Water
Quantity
Delivered
Column B
Number of
Connections
Served
Column C
Number of
People
Served
Column D
Water
Sales
Revenue
1 Sold to other water suppliers
a Finished water
b Partially treated
or untreated water
2 Residential
3 Non-residential (Commercial,
Industrial, Agricultural)
a Finished water
b Partially treated or
untreated water
4 Unaccounted for water and
uncompensated usage
B Please indicate your water system's revenue during the last
year from other water-related sources.
1 Connection and development fees
2 Revenue from the Government (e.g.
General fund of Municipal Government)
3 Other water-related revenue not reported
above (e.g., fines, penalties, other fees)
Please specify
Provide the PWSID or name of each public water supplier
included in the response to part Al above.
1 Finished water
2 Partially treated or untreated water
D Please indicate the revenue you received from
non-drinking-water-related business, not
included above, including rental income and the
sale of other goods and services:
E If you did not report any revenue under parts A, B, and D,
how did you pay for your system's operations?
21
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
Non-
residential
Customers
22 Please identify your drinking water system's billing structure.
(Please check all that apply)
Residential
A Metered charges Customers
1 Uniform rate CH
2 Declining block rate Q
3 Increasing block rate Q
4 Peak period rate (e.g., seasonal) Q
B Unmetered charges
5 Separate flat fee for water
6 Annual connection fee
7 Combined flat fee for water
and other services (e.g., rental fees,
association fees, pad fees)
C Other billing methods Please specify
23 A Does your system have a program that lowers the cost of drinking water
for low- or fixed-income households?
O Yes
O No (Skip to question 24)
B What are the eligibility requirements for this program?
C How many households qualify
for the program?
24 A Does your system serve a residential population that changes on a
seasonal basis? The seasonal population is considered the population
that fluctuates within a system based on the seasons. For example, the
population of a water system serving a winter or summer resort area has
an influx during certain periods of the year.
ฎ Yes
O No (Skip to question 25)
B Please indicate the average daily flow during
peak season (MOD) :
C Please indicate the approximate number of days
in the peak season (e.g. 30, 60, or 90 days):
22
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
25 Please enter the following information about operators, mangers, and administrative staff that work at the water system.
Enter the wage for hourly employees. Exclude overtime pay from the hourly wage. For salaried employees, enter their
hourly equivalent. For example, for full-time salaried employees, enter their salary divided by 2,080 hours.
Benefits include statutory benefits such as PICA and unemployment insurance, as well as pension and other retirement
contributions, health insurance contributions, vacation, and sick leave. It also includes supplemental pay, including
overtime pay for wage employees and holiday pay.
(If you do not know the exact information, please provide your best estimate)
A Full-time Employees
Enter the number of full-time employees, their average hourly wage rate or salary equivalent, and their benefits as a
percentage of their salary or wages.
Staff
1 Operators
a Treatment Plant
b Distribution System
2 Managers
3 Administrative staff
Number of
full-time
employees
Average
hourly
salary
or wage
($xx.xx)
$
$
Benefits as a
percentage
of salary or
wages
%
%
%
%
23
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
B Part-time Employees
Enter the number of part-time employees, the average hours worked per week by part-time employees, their average
hourly wage rate or salary equivalent, and their benefits as a percentage of their salary or wage rate.
Staff
1 Operators
a Treatment Plant
b Distribution System
2 Managers
3 Administrative staff
Number of
part-time or
employees
Average
number of
hours
per
employee
per
week
Average
hourly
wage
($xx.xx)
$
$
Benefits as a
percentage
of salary or
wages
/O
/O
/O
%
C Contract Employees
For contract employees that operate the system, provide the number of employees, the number of hours worked
and the average hourly cost to the system (including wages, salaries, benefits, and fees).
Staff
1 Operators
a Treatment Plant
b Distribution System
2 Managers
3 Administrative staff
Number of
contract
employees
Average
number of
hours
per
employee
per
week
Average
hourly labor
cost
($xx.xx)
24
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
26 This question is intended to account for all of your drinking water expenses
related to the revenues referred to in questions 21 A and B. Please provide
finanical data for the latest 12-month period for which they are available. Please
do not compile new data specifically for the survey if data already exists. The
categories below are intended to be mutually exclusive. For example, expenses
for purchased water in part B should include the cost of the water only (an
operating expense), not the capital required to bring it to the system.
A Please e-mail or upload available summaries of financial statements,
including a balance sheet, income statement, and statement of cash flows.
Please attach a depreciation schedule, if one is available (i.e., a program
defining your process for depreciating the value of capital improvements).
Please follow the upload or e-mail process listed in question 5.
Please enter the following routine operating expenses in the past year:
1 Expenses for purchased water: _$
2 Security-related expenses (spending for
security only, e.g., gates, locks, or guards): _$
3 Other routine operating expenses (including
expenses for labor, chemicals, power, materials
and supplies, and contractor services): $
27 A
If you have paid for major capital improvements, repairs, or
expansions in the 5 years ending on the date reported in
question 2B, please indicate the total amount spent on these capital
expenditures.
1 a Land: $
B
b How much land was purchased (acres):
2 Water source:
3 Transmission and distribution system:
4 Treatment:
5 Storage:
6 Security (include security-related
spending not included in other capital
expenditures):
7 All other not included above:
4 Depreciation expenses:
5 Income taxes:
6 Other payments to the general fund, e.g.,
payment in lieu of taxes:
C Please enter the amount of debt service expenditures in the past year:
7 Interest payments: _$
8 Principal payments: _$
D Other Expenses
9 Capital improvements: _$
10 Payments to reserve funds: $
B What percentage of the total capital expenditures identified in part A were
used for the following? (must total 100 percent)
(Please enter the percent as a whole number instead of a decimal, e.g., 50%
is entered as 50, not .5)
1 System expansion, regardless of whether
expenditure includes replacement and repair
of equipment or compliance with regulations:
2 Replacement and repair of equipment, regardless
of whether it includes compliance with regulations
but excluding spending for system expansion:
3 Compliance with regulations, excluding expendi-
tures for system expansion and replacement
and repair of equipment:
25
-------
CWSS Questionnaire
C How were the major capital improvements, repairs, and expansions of the past 5 years from question 27 A funded?
(Please enter the percent as a whole number instead of a decimal, e.g., 50% is entered as 50, not .5)
Percentage of For borrowed funds, please provide the:
capital expenses
funded from each
source (should sum
to 100 percent)
Average interest
rate
Average length of
loan period (Years)
1 Current revenue (including payments
from reserve funds):
2 Equity or other funds from private investors:
3 Department of Homeland Security Grant:
4 Other government grants:
5 Drinking Water State Revolving Fund
a Principal Repayment Forgiveness:
b Loans:
6 Other borrowing from public sector
sources (e.g., state or regional authorities):
7 Borrowing from private sector sources
(e.g., banks or the bond market):
8 Other (Please specify) :
28 Do you have an asset management plan or other formal written strategy addressing
your long-term (e.g., 20 years or more) needs for infrastructure rehabilitation and replacement?
26
-------
-------
-------
------- |