EVALUATION
                 OF
    INFILTRATION/INFLOW PROGRAM
            FINAL REPORT
                 BY
         GERARD F. CONKLIN
                AND
           PAUL W. LEWIS
     EPA PROJECT NO. 68-01-4913
          PROJECT OFFICER
              LAM LIM
                         •
  MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION DIVISION
      WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
 OFFICE OF WATER PROGRAM OPERATIONS
      WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460
           February 1981

-------
                        TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER

        Title Page                                              i

        Table of Contents                                       ii

        List of Tables                                          iii

        List of Figui-es                                         iv

  1     Overview                                                1-1

        Purpose and Scope                                       i«,i
        History                                                 1-2
        Need for Study                                          1-3
        Methodology                                             1*3

  2     Findings                  .                              2-1

  3     Summary of Findings                                     3«1

  4     Reccrrjr.er.dat ions                                         4_1
                                 ii

-------
                         LIST	OF FIGURES



SSji.                                                            FACE

3-1   Infiltration/Inflow Data-Bell Buckle, TN                 3-2


3-2   Infiltration/Inflow Data-CMSD, NC                        3-3


3-3   Infiltration/Inflow Data-Mt. Holly, PA                   3-4


3*4   Infiltration/Inflow Data-Castle Ro-eJcf WA                 3-S
                                 f

3-S   Infiltration/Inflow Data-cfentralia, w&               . •    3-$


3-6   Infiltration/Inflow Data-Dian»muir r C&                    3-7


3-7   Infiltration/Inflow Data-Willits, CA                     3-1


3-8   Infiltration/Inflow Data-Shelton, WA                     3-5


3-9   Infiltration/Inflow Data-New Buffalo, MI                 3-10


3-10  Infiltratior./lnflow Data-Amity, PA                       3-11


3-11  Infiltration/Inflow Data-Sussex, WI                      3-12
                                                                  *

3-12  Infiltration/Inflow Daita-Conyngham, PA                   3-13


3-13  Infiltration/Inflow Data-Mason, MI                       3-14


3-14  Infiltration/Inflow Data-Salem, NH            .           3-15


3-15  Infiltration/Inflow Data-Veirgennes, V?        .           3-16
                 t

3-16  Infiltration/Inflow Data-Cortland, NY            ;        3-17
                                iv

-------
                        CHAPTER 1

                         OVERVIEW

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been funding
through Construction Grants, Sewer System Evaluations and
Rehabilitation for approximately seven (7) years.  The
specific intent of these studies and construction is to
eliminate and/or reduce Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) that would
be more costly to transport and treat.  In general, the I/I
Program would result in rehabilitated sewers and smaller
treatment plants.

EPA and others involved in the Construction Gr&nts Program
have become increasingly concerned about the extensive tine
required to analyze sewer systems, the costs of these analyses,
the costs of rehabilitating sowers and the lack of results
in eliminating and/or reducing extraneous water.

EPA has taken the initiative to evalu?,te on a broad base
the effectiveness of Sewer System Evaluation and Rehabilita-
tion.  This report summarizes the findings of sixteen  (16)
months of investigative work in evaluating the I/I Program.
The project has been funded by EPA Headquartars Office of
Water Programs, .Municipal Construction Division and is in-
tended as an "inhouse" report.
                            1-1

-------
HISTORY

Sewer System Evaluation and Rehabilitation has been an im-
portant component of the EPA Construction Grants Program,
since its inception in ,1972-  The intent of Sewer System
Evaluation and Rehabilitation was to eliminate excessive
infiltration/inflow from sewer systems.  This would allow
for the construction of smaller wasitewater treatment fac-
ilities, thereby saving millions of dollars in funds allocj
by Congress for municipal pollution abatement facilities.

The procedures for conducting Sewer System Evaluation and
Rehabilitation were outlined in the EPA final Construction
Grant Regulations, dated February 11, 1974*  EPA also
published, in March 1974, Guidance for Sewer System Evalua-
tion.  This brief program outline was followed by a tech-
nical bulletin entitled, "Handbook for Sewer System Evalua-
tion and Rehabilitation", dated December 1975.  The Hand-
book provided detailed methodology for conducting Infiltra-
tion/Inflow Analyses and Sewer System Evaluation Surveys.
In addition, information on sewer line rehabilitation and
costs for performing studies and rehabilitation were pre-
sented.

Daring the period between 1973 and 1978, Ei?A received evid«
from field experience that certain modifications to the
Sewer System Evaluation Program would be beneficial.  In
March 1978, EPA published the, "Construction Grants Prograa
Requirements Memorandum 78-10".  This memorandum provided a
technique for rapidly screening out non-excessive I/I, a
simplified scope of work for A/I investigations, and a mecfc
anism for performing sewer testing and repair eoncurrently.

In addition to these documents, EPA published supplemental
information relating to the Infiltration/Inflow Program as
follows:

       Sewer Plow Measurement-A State-of-the-Art Assessment
       1975

       Economic Analysis, Root Control and Backwater Plow
       Control as Related to Infiltration/Inflow-197?

       Sewer Infiltration and Inflow  Control Product and
       Equipment Guide-1977,

       Sewer System Evaluation, Rehabilitation and New Con-
       struction-A Manual of Practice-1977.
                            1-2

-------
NEED FOR STUDY

The Infiltration/Inflow Program has been controversial since
first implemented.   In the early years, much confusion re-
sulted from the procedures in conducting Infiltration/Inflow
Analyses and Sewer  System Evaluation Surveys.  The general
use and longevity of chemical grout for sealing sewer line
joints was questioned.  Many municipalities, consulting
engineers and contractors indicated that the I/I Program
was a principle factor in delaying the construction of
sewerage works.  As time progressed and projects were com-
pleted, EPA began receiving feed-back that indicated un-
acceptable levels of I/I were returning after sewer line re-
habilitation work was completed.

As a result of these concerns, EPA has undertaken this study
to evaluate the effectiveness of the Infiltration/Inflow
Program.

METHODOLOGY

Information £r>ur ce s

Only sewer systems in which sewer system evaluation and
rehabilitation had been completed, and had been funded
through the EPA Construction Grants Program, were considered
for evaluation under this study.  Eighteen  (18) such sewer
systems were selected.  Reports, field data, and Plans and
Specifications were available for review.  These documents
and other pertinent information were gathered from the fol-
lowing sources:


       EPA Headquarters-Names of contacts at EPA Regional
       Offices and  general guidance,

   *   EPA Regional offices-I/I Analysis Reports, Sewer
       System Evaluation Survey Reports, and Plane ancl
       Specifications.

       State Offices-I/I Analysis Reports, Sewer System
       Evaluation Survey Reports, and Plans and Specifications,

       Municipalities-Population, plant base flow, total
       plant flow data, rainfall data and general informa-
       tion concerning the stwer system,
                            1-3

-------
APPROACH TO STUDY

Screening of Candidate Projects

All EPA Regional offices were contacted and asked to provide
a list of projects in that respective region that had com-
pleted Sewer System Evaluation and Rehabilitation.  Those
regional offices which reported candidate projects were
visited and the plans and files of each potential syeteia
were reviev/ed.  Systems  in which sewer line rehabilitation
had been completed, and in which rehabilitation incl> ded
chemical grouting of joints, were given further considera-
tion.  During the visit, EPA filet were searched for pro-
jects which had completed sewer line rehabilitation includ-
ing chemical grouting of joints.

The I/I Analysis Reports for these systems were -munarized
to include the following:

       Consulting Engineer
       Population
       Length and Size of Sewers
       Ease Flow
       Infiltration
       Inflow
       Rainfall Data
       Amount of I/I to be Removed

The SSES Reports were summarized to include th« following:

       Consulting Engineer
       I/I to be Removed
       Outline of Proposed Rehabilitation

The Pl&ns and Specifications were summarized to include the
followingj

       Consulting Engineer
       Outline of Rehabilitation.

                        TABLE 1-1

               NUMBER OF PROJECTS! REVIEWED
EPA Region

  III
   IV
    V
   IX
    X
AT ISP A REGIONAL OR STATE OFFICES

                               No. of Projects

                                    7
                                    8
                                    5
                                    2
                                    4

-------
Criteria for Project Selections

During the initial stages of this study, it was anticipat*
that at least ont> sewer system from each EPA Keg ion would
be selected and that the sewer systems would be represent.
tive of small, medium and larga communities,  However, du:
ing the examination of EPA files it became apparent that
some Regions had no completed projects involving sewer lii
rehabilitation using chemical grouting of joints.  Also,
the distribution of projects tributary to various sizea 01
treatment plants was limited to small plants, with a few
medium size plants,

The selection of projects for this study was, therefore,
limited to the following criteria:

       Separate sanitary sewer systems,

       Sewer systems that were rehabilitated by chemical
       grouting of joints with possibly other forms of
       sewer line rehabilitation including slip lining
       and sewer replacement, and

   »    Sewer systems that reported to remove significant
       amounts of infiltration/inflow,
Each of the selected communities werii visited  prior  to  flc
monitoring.  During these visits the following was accompl

       Establish a working rapport with  the personnel
       responsible for the sewer sys.tem  and/or treatment
       plant,

       Obtain total treatment plant flow data, to the exti
       practicable, before and  aft«»r rehabilitation,

       Establish any changes in the sowjir  system that woul
       affect the base flow,

       Locate and observe potential Key  flow monitoring
       points ,

       Determine the flow measuring technique  to be  used  a
       each key flow monitoring 'points*

       Determine the high grcundwater period*  and,

-------
       Contact the community during the high groundwater
       period and arrange for a visit to monitor flow at
       the selected monitoring points,

Monitor Flows

       Manhole Selection-The general approach to selection
       of flow monitoring manholes was to obtain as much
       flow data on rehabilitated sewer reaches as possible.
       The basic objective was to select an adequate number
       of manholes for flow monitoring that would permit a
       comparison of flows on a reach by reach basis before
       and after rehabilitation.  The pre-rehabilitation
       flow data would be that used in the SSES Report.
       The manhole selection process involved the following
       procedure:

  1.   Sewer Reach Selection-Manholes were selected that
       would allow isolation of specific rehabilitated sewer
       reaches.  In some instances rehabilitation on several
       sewer reaches was performed.  In these instances,
       an attempt was made to select manholes that would
       isolate these reaches.

  2.   Subsystem Selection-An attempt was made to select
       key manholes in the sewer system that would isolate
       each subsystem.  Included in the Subsystem may be
       all rehabilitated sewers or a portion thereof.
       These xay manholes provide a check on data obtained
       from manholes in  (1) above and also delineate where
       the infiltration/inflow in the sewer system was
       located.

  3,   Total System-The total system flow was monitored at
       the treatment plant or at the nearest accessible
       manhole to the plant.  This data provided a check on
       the treatment plant flow meter and a record of the
       diurnal flow in the entire system for the monitoring
       period.

FlowMeasuring Technique

The flows at each selected manhole were measured by one of
two techniques.  First, calibrated V-notch weirs were used*
The flow was allowed to stabilize upstream of the weir prioxr
to  taking a direct flow reading.  Generally, two to ten
minutes were needed to allow  stable condition to exist.  In
                            1-6

-------
cases where flow in a sewer surcharged the weir, measure-
ments were taken of the depth of water in the pipe and the
velocity of flow.  Velocity readings were taken using a
mechanical-electronic velocity meter.  Flows were determined
in these sewers by utilizing measured data and hydraulic
elements and charts.

The flow at or just prior to the treatment plant was measured
using a continuous recording depth of flow measuring de--
vice in conjunction with a flume or velocity data.

COLLECT FLOW DATA

Selected^ Manhole Flows

The flow monitoring for each community was conducted at *
time when the groundwater was normally at its seasonal high
level.  This, of course, varies from year to year as a dir-
ect function of the weather conditions.  Flow measurements
were taken during early morning hours from 1 to 6 AM depend-
ing on the normal diurnal variation of flow to the treatment
plant.  The flows were measured over 1 to 3 days depending
on the reliability of the data collected.

Total System Flow

A flow meter was installed at or near the treatment plant in
each coiwr.unity.  The flow was continuously recorded for  a
1 to 3 day period.  The data was generally correlated with
the treatment plant flow meter, if possible.

flow Data Before Rehabilitation

Total Flow and rainfall data was obtained, whenever pos-
sible, from treatment plant records.  Flows for each re-
habilitated sewer reach were obtained from the SSES Reports.

Flow Data After Rehabilitation

Flow data was obtained, whenever possible, from treatment
plant records after rehabilitation was completed.  Rainfall
data was also obtained.

Analyse Data

Flow data obtained during  this  study was  analysed to det*
ermine the quantity of  I/I returning in terms of high day,
high week and  high month.  Additional flow parameters were
developed to approximate  infiltration and inflow.
                            1-7

-------
RE-TELEVISION INSPECTION

Project Selection

An attempt was made to schedule retelevising during high
groundwater conditions in as many of the study communities
as was practically possible.  Retelevising was performed in
twelve (12) communities.  .The record dry winter-spring of
•1S79-1980 *nd/or short-duration, weather dependent high
groundwater conditions precluded televising six (6) communities,
Two systems were retelevised  twice'Once at normal wet season
flow and then at peak flow conditions.

Sewer Reach Selection

Approximately 1,000-4,000 feet were retelevised in each
system.  Rehabilitated sewer reaches were selected for r«-
televising based on the quantity of I/I identified during
the SSES.  Generally, the sewer reaches with the highest I/I
were selected.  In some cases, adjacent non-rehabilitated
sewer sections were also televised,

Total System

Total system flow during retelevising was monitored using
treatment plant flow records.  These were available in all
except one community, where system flow was measured at a
manhole adjacent to the treatment plant.

Television Inspection Data Before Rehabilitation

Television inspection data generated during the SSES phase
was secured, when available, from SSES reports, TV contractors,
and consulting engineers.

ANALYSIS CF COST-EFFECTIVENESS

Cost effective analyses in the SSES Reports for the study
communities were summarized to include the following:

       Estimated Rehabilitation Costs
       Cost and Transporting and Treating I/I
       Least Cost Solution

The actual rehabilitation construction costs for each com-
munity were divided by the SSES T 6 T unit cost  ($/gpd)
to obtain a (gpdj minimum system .I/1 flow reduction neces-
sary to cest effectively  justify 'the rehabilitation work.
This figure was compared with actual system I/I reductions
achieved, based on analysis of treatment plant flow records.


                            l-a

-------
                        CHAPTER 2

                         FINDINGS

FINDING 11

THE EPA INFILTRATION/INFLOW PR06RAN WAS IMPLEMENTED TO

ELIMINATE EXCESSIVE I/I - GENERALLY THIS HAS NOT BEEN

ACCOMPLSIHED,


BACKGROUND


Eighteen (18)  municipal sewer systems that had completed
EPA Step 3 Construction Grants on sewer line rehabilitation
were analyzed.  Sixteen (16) of the eighteen (18) sewer
systems were tributary to new and/or expanded wastewater treat* ..
tnent facilities.  The remaining two (2) communities intended
to reduce I/I flows to existing secondary treatment facilities.

The Sewer System Evaluation Survey Reports for each of the
sewer systems were reviewed,,  The Infiltration/Inflow pre-
dicted to remain in the respective sewer systems after re-
habilitation were analyzed for effectiveness by three
methods 2

1.' Comparison of the predicted I/I to remain in the
   entire system with the post rehabilitation high week
   I/I.

   Plant flow records after sewer line rehabilitation were
   analy2ed to determine the average daily flow for the
   highest seven (7) consecutive days in a calendar year,
   The present base flow was subtracted and the difference
   was considered the I/I component.

   Table 2-1  lists each of the communities, the  I/I
   predicted  to remain and the high week I/I as det-
   ermined above,  Also «hown is the % I/I reduction
   predicted  in the SSES versus the % reduction achieved
   in high week I/I flow,  The results indicate that in
   no community was the I/I reduced to  the extent  predicted,

2» Comparison of the predicted I/I to remain in rehab-
   ilitated subsystems with post rehabilitation  flow
   monitoring.

   Flow monitoring was conducted on each of the eighteen
    (18) sewer systems.  The flow monitoring was performed
   during the early morning hours and during the period
   of the year when previous plant flow records  in-
   dicated the highest flows to the treatment plants*
   In fourteen  (14) of the  eighteen  (IS) systems ground-
   water was  observed, either by groundwater gages or


                            2-1

-------
                        TABLE  2-1

          SUMMARY OF  SYSTEM  INFILTRATION/INFLOW
         (1)             (2)             (3)           (4)
         I/I  Predicted   I/I  Remaining   %  Reduction  % Reduction
Community
Bell Buckle, TN
CMSD, NC
Mt. Holly, PA
Castle Rock, WA
Centralia, WA
Dunsmuir, CA
Willits, CA
Shelton, WA
New Buffalo, MI
Amity, PA
Sussex, Wl
Conyngham, PA
Mason, MI
Salem, NH
Vergennes, VT
Cor t land, NY
Notes: 1. I/I
(gpd)
158,000
350,000
491,000
185,000
1,830,000
71,000
688,000
1,360,000
45,000
116,000
85,000
230,000
950,000
240,000
124,000
7,000,000
predicted
?t . Average daily
Igpd)
280,000
2,100,000
1,010,000
400,000
3,710,000
449,000
3,430,000
2,930,000
336,000
742,000
899,000
418,000
1,340,000
890,000
440,000
8,370,000
to be remaining;
I/I flow for high
Predicted
711
83%
60S
82%
60%
99%
45%
70%
85%
85%
92%
92%
52%
63%
79%
35%
Achieved
N/A
Increase
23%
60%
3%
0%
N/A
Increase
1%
24%
7%
17%
N/A
N/A
N/A
Increase
from SSES reports.
week, after
rehabilitation?
    analysis of treatment plant flow records.

3.   % Reduction predicted;  taken from SSES report,

4.   % Reduction achieved in hiqh week I/I flow; from analysis of
    treatment plant flow records.

5.   N/A-Not Available

-------
    leaks  in manholes ,  to be above the sewer lines.  lr.
    the  remaining  four  (4)  systems  it  was not  clearly
    established  if groundwater was  above the monitored
    sewer  lines.

    Table  2-2  lists each of the  communities, the  I/I
    predicted  to be remaining in selected subsystems
    and  I/I measured in the same subsystems  during  this
    study.  The  data for the "SSES  Predicted"  column was
    obtained from  the corresponding SSES reports  for
    each community and  in some instances, represents  1001
    of the rehabilitated sewer lines,  while  in other
    instances  represents a major portion of  the rehabili-
    tated  sewers.   The  "EPA Measured"  -column represents,
    in each instance, the quantity  of  I/I actually
    measured during this study and  corresponds to the
    same sewer sections as the  "Predicted"  column.   Also
    shown  is the SSES  "Before Rehabilitation"  flow
    measurement  for the same sewer  sections  and the %
    reduction  achieved  in the system high Week I/I  (front
    analysis of  treatment plant  flow records)« The re-
    sults  indicate that in no community was  the I/I re-
    duced  on a subsystem bssis  to the  extent predicted.

3.   Comparison,  by television inspection of  predicted
    I/I  to remain  in selected sewer reaches  with  post
    rehabilitation flows.

    Twelve (12)  rehabilitated sewer systems  were  re-
    televised.  Approximately 1,000 to 4,000 feet were
    retelevised  in each system.   Specific  sewer reaches
    were selected  for retelevising based on  the quantity
    of  I/I identAfed during SSES.  Generally,  the sewer
    reaches with the highest I/I were  selected.  These
    sewer  systems  were  TV inspected during  the period o*
    the  year when  treatment pl:tnt flows were generally
    at  the highest levels.  Tftjie 2-3  lists  each  of the
    communities, the I/I estimated or  measured during
    SSES-TV work,  the I/I to be  remaining  after rehabil-
    itation and  the I/I measured or estimated  during
    this study,  Also shown is  the system  high week I/I
    % reduction  achieved  (from analysis of  plant  flow
    records).

    The  I/I  in the column  labeled  (1)  SSES-TV was either
    measured or  estimated froir, a TV screen.   The  measured
    flows  were generally on sewer reaches  that were tested
    and  sealed;'estimated flows were derived by observ-
    ing  leaking joints, manholes and running service con-
    nections  and estimating these flows.   In many of
                         2-3

-------
                                TABLE  2-2
                        SUMMARY OF FLOW MONITORING
Community
Bell Buck
Grifton.
Winters? il
Aydstn, NC
Mt. Ho
Cattle
Centra
Dunsmu
Willit
Shelto
New Bu
Amity, PA
Sussex, WI
Cony rtg ham
Mason, MI
Salem, NH
NfOteS:
y
kle, TN
NC
lie, NC
1C
y, PA
:ock, WA
a, W&
, CA
CA
WA
alo, MI
'A
WI
,m, PA
il
IH
:S, VT
., NY
1. I/ 1
(1)
SSES
Predicted
(gpd)
130,850
3,372
5,790
16,232
491,076
20,200
1,52 2 ,,000
70*510
249,000
386,100
32,500
20,000
17,000
45,000
N/A
34,000
69,000
2,810
predicted to
(2)
EPA
Measured
(gpd)
272,700
19,500
25,200
165,800
645,500
88,200
3,640,000
125,000
600,500
1,378,000
121,000
35,000
227,500
62,000
215,000
230,000
208,000
43,000
be remaining
2. Returning I/I measured under
3, SSES
(3)
SSES
Before
391,850
11,240
19,300
54,105.
1,247,208
803,300
4,352,000
6,712,420
829,000
1,280,200
216,800
132,000
239,000
564,000
N/A
470,000
315,100
284,800
(4)
System I/I %
Reduction Achieved
N/A
)
/ Increase
)
23%
60%
3%
0%
N/A
Increase
1%
24%
7%
17%
N/A
Increase
N/A
N/A
in study reaches; from SSES repo
this study
; I/I measured or estimated before
4. % reduction achieved in syste
m I/I flow
*
rehabilitation.
for High Week flow
            parameter-from analysis of -plant flow records.
         5.  N/A-  Not Available

-------
                     TABLE 2-3



          SUMMARY OF TELEVISION  INSPECTION
Community
Bell Buckle, TN
Grifton, NC
Wintervilie, NC
Ay cj en, NC
Mt. Holly Springs
Centralia, WA
Willits, CA
Shelton, WA
New Buffalo, MI
Sussex, WI
Salem, NH
Cortland, NY
Notes: 1. flow
2 . Flow
3. Flow
4 , % Bed
(1)
SSES-TV
Flow, gpd
93,500
7,870
6,800
13,770
, PA 145,000
16,500
15,600
101,600
89,100
157,637
31,340
151,125
(2)
SSES-TV
Flow, gpd
39,500
1,900
2,000
0
22,500
4,000
4,700
20,320
5,700
?92
0
1,739
estimated or measured duri
predicted to be
estimated during
uction achieved
remaining
Re-TV.
in system
(3)
Re-TV
Flow (qpd)
60,500
14,500
6,900
4,500
55,000
78,400
21,375
100,900
63,675
119,800
18,500
27,000
ng SSES-TV.
(4)
System I/]
t Reductic
N/A
•\
\ Increase
J .
23%
3%
N/A
Increase
It
7%
!I/A
Increase

after rehabilitation

high wee.k I/I;

from analysis
    of  plant  flow records.



5.   N/A-Kot Available

-------
        these  instances, the estimated  flows were increased
        to match flows measured at a  different period during
        the  SSES work.

        The  I/I  in  the colomn  labeled (2)  SSES-TV represents
        the  predicted I/I  to be remaininf  in the same sewer
        reaches  as  column  (i), after  sew«r line rehabilita-
        tion.  In most instances chemical  grouting of joints
        and  tnanholes or replacement of  sections of sewers
        was  to remove 100% of  the Infiltration arid the re-
        maining  I/I was attributed to service connections
        that were not rehabilitated*

        The  I/I  in  the* column  labeled (3)  RE-TV represents
        the  flow in the same sewer reaches a* column (1)
        and  (2)  and was estimated from  joints, manholes and
        service  connections.   The flow  «stimat*s us.** the
        actual estimates observed by  thtt same individual on
        all  twelve  (12) sewer  systems,

        The  results indicate that in  all instances I/I on a
        reach  by reach basis has not  been  reduced to- the
        extent predicted.
FINDING *2


'POST-REHABILITATION INFILTRATION/INFLOW ARE EXCEEDING

MENT PLANT DESIGN I/I  FLOW COMPONENTS,

BACKGROUND

Seventeen (17)  of the  eighteen (18)  sewer systems studied
are  tributary to treatment plants that have been constructed
or designed under the  present Construction Grants Program*
The  design I/I  flow component represents the non-excessive
I/I,  and  in most cases an allowance for future additional
I/I  as the plant approaches its design lift.


Table  2-4  lists  the  communities,  design  I/I  flow component
and post-rehabilitatioa high  day,  high week  and  high month
1/1,   The  design  1/3 flow  component was  obtained from the
actual treatment  plant design criteria.   The post-rehabilita-
tion high'day I/I was  obtained from treatment plant, flow
records and  is  the  highest daily  flow  recorded minus the
present base  flow.   The high  week I/I  A-epresents the average
of the highest  seven consecutive  days  flows  minu» the pre-
sent base  flow.   The high  month I/I represents the highest
average monthly  flows  minus the present  base flow.

-------
                                TABLE 2-4

                        SUMMARY OF PLANT FLOW DATA
Community

Bell Buckle, TN

Grifton, NC

Wint'erville, NC

Ayden, NC

Mt. Holly, PA

Castle Rock, HA

Centralia, WA
     ('
Dunsrhiiir, CA

Willits, CA

She 1 ton, WA

New Buffalo, MI

Amity, PA

Sussex, WI

Conyngham, PA

Mason, Ml

Salem, NH

Vergennes, VT

Cortland, NY
Design I/I Flow
(gpd)
                                     Post Rehabilitation I/I (gpd)
High Day    High Week   High Month
158,
> 350,
506,
290,
2,
500,
71,
1,
2,

7
60,
38

4
11





2
9
4
7
3
0,
5,
6,
2,
0,
50,
5
23
1,
00
0,
9,
0,
000
000
000
000
000
000
coo
000
000 '
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
N/A
3,260,
1,731,
583,
4,800,
748,
4,760,
3,930,
342,
1,050,
1,167,
656,
2,584,
1,110,
>750,
9,290,
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
ooc
CC'O
000
000
000
000
000
000
N/A
2,100,
1,010,
400,
3,710,
44
3,43
9,
0,
2,930,
33
74
6.
*,
899,
418,
1,34
890,
944
8,37
0,
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
o,
0,
000
000
N/A
1,010,000
520,000
178,
2,450,
162,
1,890,
2,050,
273,
470,
588,
222,
804,
480,
N/A
7,380,
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000

000
 1,   N/A-Not  Available

-------
The results indicate that in all cases the high day and
high week I/I flows exceed the design I/I flow component.
The data further shows that the high month I/I exceeds or
is almost equivalent to the design I/I.

Two additional analyses were performed in order to compare
the significance of the remaining I/I.

   1.  Determine the rate of the remaining I/I.
       Table 2-5 lists each of the communities, the rernain-
       1/1 in terms of high week  ',nd the corresponding I/I
       as a rate,  expressed in gallons per day per inch-mile
       (gpd/ia-mile).  The high week I/I as & rate was
       determined by dividing the high week I/I by the actual
       inch-miles of sewer pipe in the respective systems,
       not including service laterals.  Infiltration,  ex*
       pressed as a rate, on newly constructed sewer lines,
       is generally specified not to exceed from less  than
       100 to 500 gpd/in-mile".  EPA,  in its program guidance
       Memorandum 78-10 specified as  a rapid check on
       determing non-excessive I/I that infiltration,  as a
       rate, less than 1,500 gpd/in-mile includino service
       laterals would be considered non-excessive,
       Without service laterals this rate would be more
       like 2,000 to 2,500 gpd/in-mile.
  * _
   2.  Determine the remaining I/I as a percent of the pre-
       sent base flow.
       Table 2-6 lists each of the communities, the present
       base flow,  the remaining high week I/I and the  re-
       maining high week I/I as a percent of the base  flow.
       The base flow was determined by an analysis of  water
       use data, population data and dry weather flows to
       the treatment plant.  The remaining high week I/I
       was derived previously, and the remaining I/I as a
       percent of  base flow was obtained by dividing the
       high week I/I by the base flow.

       Many sewer and sewerage works design handbooks  sug-
       gest that 100 gallons per day per capita be used for
       design purposes including Infiltration/Inflow.   As-
       suming that the per capita flow component is 70 gal-
       lons  per cay, thus 30 gallons per day would be at-
       tributable to I/I.  This recommended I/I represents
       approximately 43% of the base flow.  Thus, the  re-
       turning I/I as a percent of base flow as shown  in
       the Table is substantially greater for all studied
       sewer systems, than me recommended design figure.
                            2-8

-------
                        TABLE 2-5
         REMAINING INFILTRATION/INFLOW AS A RATE
Community
Bell Buckle, TN
Grifton, NC
Winterville, NC
Ayden, NC
Mt. Holly Springs, PA
Castle Reck, WA
Centralj.a, WA
Dunsmuir, CA
Will its, CA
Shelton, V,'A
New Buffalo, MI
Amity, PA
Sussex, wi
Conyncham, PA
Mason, MI
Salem, KH
Vergennes, VT
Cortland, NY
1.  N/A-Not Available
Remaining I/I
High Week, gpd
N/A
2,100,000

1,010,000
  400,000
3,710,000
  449,000
3,430,000
2,930,000
  336,000
  742,000
  899,000
  418,000
1,340,000
  890,000
 >440,000
8,370,000
Remaining I/I
gpd/In-M.lle
N/A
 5,300

10,600
 4,300
 9,800
 3,000
21,300
 8,900
 4,000
 7,700
 7,000
 6,500
 5,400
 2,900
>4,000
15,100

-------
                           TABLE 2-6


        REMAINING  INFILTRATION/INFLOW AS  % OF BASE FLOW
                                                      Remaining I/I
                                      Remaining I/I   «» % of B*M
Community
Bell Buckle, TN
Grifton, NC
winterville, NC
Ayden, NC
Mt. Holly Springs, PA
Cattle Rock, WA
Central ia, WA
Dunsmuir, CA
Willits, CA
Shelton, WA
New Buffalo, M!
Amity, PA
Sussex, WI
Cor.ynchair, , PA
Mason, Ml
salem, NH
Vergennes:, VT
Cor t land, M *
Base Flow, gpd
50,000
217,000 -,
200,000 f
320,000 )
280,000
212,000
1,000,000
192,000
425,000
1,250,000
200,000
150,000
250,000
125,000
550,000
850,000
400,000
3,000,000
High Week, gpd
N/A

2,100,000

1,010,000
400,000
3,710,000
449,000
3,430,000
2,930,000
336,000
742,000
899,000
418,000
1,340,000
890,000
>440,000
8,370,000
Flow
N/A
-
285

360
189
371
234
807
234
168
495
360
334
244
105
>110
279
1,   N/A-Not Available

-------
 FINDING »3


 HOUSE SERVICE CONNECTIONS AND NON-REHABILITATED PIPE JON

 ARE THE MAJOR SOURCES OF RETURNING I/I FROM REHABILITATE

 SEWER REACHES,

 Background

 Table 2-7  lists  the communities, the  source breakdown of
 sewer joints,  service connections  and manhole* during the
 SSES-TV work  and the source  breakdown of  sewer joints,  ••
 vice connections and manholes from re-televising the same
 sewers during this fttudy.  The SSES-TV column, when only
 one number  is shown, represents a  measured flow from
 sever reaches.   In all other instances, the number  of joli
 service connections and/or manholes yiecede the flow.

 Table 2-8  shows  the totals of Table 2*7 where direct com-
 parisons can  be  made.  Not included in the table were flot
 that were measured during test and sealing because  no usa!
 documentation was available.
 The  results  indicate that flow and/or  number of leaks
 as coining  from  pipe line joints were generally reduced  as
 result of  chemical  grouting or pipe  line replacement.   T*3
 vision inspection during this  study  revealed that chemicaJ
 grouting of  joints  was generally  successful in sealing  out
 groundwater,  and most of the remaining infiltration was
 entering through  joints that were not  grouted.

 The  overall  television inspection results indicate that pi
 line joint lea.ks were reduced  in  number and in flow? ser-
 vice connection flows increased in number and in flow and
 manhole leaks decreased in number yet  increased in flow,
 House service; connections are  contributing the largest
 amounts o£ returning I/I,  followed by  pipe line joints  tha
 were not rehabilitated^

 FINDING.,* 4


REHQVAL  OF  EXCESSIVE  INFLOW WAS APPARENTLY  NOT ANY MORE

SUCCESSFUL  THAN INFILTRATION REMOVAL,

BACKGROUND

Table 2- 9  lists each  community, the inflow predicted to  *•*
main and the  inflow remaining  after rehabilitation.  Th*
inflow predicted to remain was obtained  from the SSES r«po*
                            2-11

-------
           TABLE 2-7




SUMMARY OF TELEVISION INSPECTION




     SOURCE IDENTIFICATION

Jo 1 n L :>
9,. 500
20- 4,600
9- 4,800
21- 6, 570
345,000
11- 8,600
15,600
101,600
97- 47,250
20- 57,456
6- 6,000
62-132,405
SSES-TV
No. - qpd
Serv i re
Connect ions
Flow Gnrjed
7- 2,910
6- 2,000
2- 4,500
(None)
13- 5,900
Flow Gaged
Flow Gaged
25-33,600
25-88,704
20-20,000
4-18,720

Manholes
0
1- 300
0
2- 2,700
0
2- 2,000


11- 8,250
2-11,477
3- 1,800
0
!
Joints
12-34,500
4- 6,800
4- 2,300
8- 4,500
8-50,000
60-45,700
1- 1,500
91-42,800
40-11,775
10-23,000
4- 3,800
2-3,000
Re-TV
No. - gpd
Service
Connections
6-25,500
5- 7,700
4- 4,600
0- 0
0- 0
39-32,700
13-19,875
40-55,100
45-51,150
11-66,800
10-12,450
12-12,000


Manholes
1-
0
0
0
1- 5
0
n
2- 3
"1 w
2-30
1- 2
500



,000


,000
750
,000
,250
1-12*000

-------
               TABLE 2-8




SUMMARY OF TELEVISION INSPECTION  TOTALS
Joints Services
No. - gpci No. - gpd
Before After
246-267,681 132-100,875
Before
1C2-176.334
After
126-187,400
Manhoi
HO. -
Before
21-26,527

-------
Community
Bell Buckle, TN
Grifton, NC
Winterville, NC
Ayden, NC
Mt. Holly, PA
Castle itock, WA
Centralia, WA
Dunsrouir, CA
Willits, CA '
Shelton, WA
New Buffalo, MA
.Amity, FA
Sussex, wi
Conyngham, PA
Mason, MI
Salem, NFI
Vergennes, VT
Cortland, NY
                        TABLE 2-9
                      INFLOW SUMMARY
SSES-Inflow
Predicted, gpd
Inflow Remaining, gpd
18,000
12,000
13,000
40,000
16,000
62,000
500,000
0
150,000
100,000
9,000
68,000
15,000
183,000
4950,000
100,000
024,000
200,000
N/A
\
> 1,160,000
J
721,000
183,000
1,090,000
299,000
l,3iO.,000
1,000,000
6,000
308,000
268,000
232,000
1,244,000
220,000
310,000
920,000
 1.   N/A-Not  Available

-------
                        TABLE 2-10

           COMPARISON OP TELEVISION INSPECTION

         DURING DIFFERENT GRQUNDWATER CONDITIONS
Community
A
B
(1)
Joints
No— crod
1- 800
23-2,600
Services
1- 200
15-5,000
12)
Joints
33-31,300
91-42,800
Services
No-qpd
4- 1,900
40-55,100
1,  System  I/I  Rate  at:
2.  System  I/I  Rate  at;
2,600 in Community A
2,300 in Community S

10,500 in Community A
10,000 in Community 8

-------
                                TABLE 2-11
                  SUMMARY OF COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSES
Community
Bell Buckle, TN
Grifton, NC
Winterville, NC
Ayden, NC
Mt. Holly, PA
Castle Rock, WA
Centralia, WA
Shelton, WA
Dunsmuir, CA
Willits, CA
New Buffalo, MI
Sussex, WI
Amity, PA
Conyngham, PA
Mason, MI
Cortland, NY
vercennes, VT
Salem, NH
1.  N/A-Not Available
(1)
T & T
S/9P4
1.31
y 3.04

1.35
2.00
0.67
2.63
1.50
3.30
2.20
1.10
2.60
1.27
0.50
0.85
2.50
1.36
(2)
Construction
Cost, $
69,731
351,034

45,378
125,994
459,000
180,844
673,000
505,040
62,523
281,500
145,958
580,000
721,000
869,000
700,000
57,113
(2) I (1)
gpd
53,000
115,000

34,000
63,000
685,000
69,000
448,000
153,000
28,000
256,000
56,000
457,000
1,442,000
1,022,000
280,000
42,000
(4)
SSES
Predicted
Reduction
390,000
1,730,000

750,000
817,000
2,770,000
3,150,000
7,829,000
563,000
255,000
919,000
654,000
2,649,000
1,550,000
4,500,000
460,000
410,000

-------
The inflow remaining is a calculated value.  The value
derived by subtracting the average daily flow for the high
week I/I from the high day I/I flow.

The derivation of the remaining inflow as described above
is the only rational method that would provide a reasonable
value.  The methods utilized to determine inflow in all the
SSES reports reviewed during this study, were based on
estimates.  Methods used for estimating inflow included
calculating inflow to catch basins based on the area tributary
to each source, estimating inflow entering holes in manhole
covers, estimating inflow from illegal connections as » re-
sult of smoke testing and estimating inflow from illegal
connections as a result of dye water flooding.

The methods used to estimate inflow during the SSES work
were inexact and the method used to calculate inflow during
this study may be questionable.  Thus, it is scientifically
unsound to state that inflow removal on the eighteen  (J.8')
sewer systems that were studied was or was not effective.
What can be stated and documented is that in all cases,
during high intensity rainfalls, that flows to the treat-
ment plants increase dramatically in relatively short times.
Thus, wet weather flows are present and at rates substantially
greater than predicted to remain after rehabilitation.

More inflow than infiltration was quantified in six  (6) of
the eighteen (18) communities.  Of these six  (6) communities,
calculated inflow from public inflow sources documented
during SSES rainfall simulation accounted for a majority
of the inflow in only three  (3) communities.  High day and
high week flows from these three communities, which comprise
one metropolitan sewer district, did not decrease after
rehabilitation.

FINDING E5

THE MAJOR ELEMENTS OF THE  I/I METHODOLOGY ARE  IMPRECISE,

BACKGROUND

The pitfalls that have prevented successful completion of
eliminating excessive I/I are as follows:

   l.> Flow measurements and estimates  for determining I/I
       during the I/I Analysis and  SSES work can give mis-
       leading results.

-------
    Flow gaging  techniques utilized during the conduct
    of  the above studies often are inaccurate.  A host
    of  problems  are  inherent in  sewer systems that may
    result in errors up.to 200%  in flow determinations.
    These include grit  and debris in sewers that affect
    depth of  flow, cross-sectional areas of flow and
    velocity  determinations.

    Measurement  of sewer flows during early morning hours
    is  considered the best time  to establish I/I flows.
    Caution must be  taken  when  relying on these flow
    data to determine I/I.  Normal domestic wastewater
    could be  present if there is a long lag tine in the
    sewer sn especially  in larger sewer systems.  Thus*
    all the measured flow may not be I/I.

    Intermittent sources that discharge to the sewers
    could affect flov measurements.  These could include
    pump stations and house sump pumps.

2.   Flow estimates made during television  inspection can
    give erroneous results.

    The EPa publication,  "Sewer  System Evaluation  Rehab-
    ilitation and K&v Construction"? - a Manual of Prac-
    tice, dated  December 1977 states,  "Estimates within
    50% represents a handle on  infiltration poxnt  quan-
    tification which can be used to  establish the  desir-
    ability of rehabilitation".   Experience during the
    conduct oil this  study  indicates  that flow estimates
    made at point sources  from  a TV screen can  vary  by at
    least a factor of four.

    Television inspection work  is  not always performed
    during the high  groundwater  periods.   Complete er-
    roneous data will be generated  if this is done.  Dur-
    ing the conduct  of  this study  two  (2)  communities
    were televised at two different  psriods during what
    is normally considered  the  high  groundwater period.
    Table 2-10 summarizes  the results during these dif-
    ferent conditions.   There was  a  substantial difference
    in the number of I/I  sources and flow,

3.  Normalizing or pro-rating measured or  estimated  flows
    to a peak or design condition  can result in erroneous
    data,

4.  Flow measurements or  estimates made  during  the I/I
    Analysis  and SSES work  could be dramatically  different
    if performed in a different year as  a  result  of
    chances in wet weather  conditions.
                        2-16

-------
   5.  The estimated I/I reductions made during SSES  work
       are not realistic.  They generally range from  70 to
       1001 and in reality achieve 0 to say 40% reductions.

   6.  During SSES work, the transport and treatment  Gouts
       utilized in the cost effectiveness analyses are gea-
       erally rough estimates.

   7.  Cost effectiveness analyses performed during SSES
       work is of questionable  value, due to the impreci-
       sion that exists in quantifying the cost effective
       elements.

Table 2-11 Summary of Cost Effectiveness Analysis lists th«
following information:

       Column  (1) lists the Transport and Treatment (T & T)
       cost per gallons per day for I/I.  These .costs were*
       obtained from SSES reports and are cost estimates.

       Column  (2) lists the actual rehabilitation construc-
       tion costs for each project.

       Cclur.n  (3; represents the gallons  per day of I/I
       that haa to be removed based on the T & T cost and
       actual construction costs on a direct relationship
       ba s i s »

       Column  (4) lists the I/I predicted to be removed
       as obtained from the SSES reports.  These data are
       estimated predictions.

       Column  (5) lists the high week I/I that was reduced.
       These data were obtained from plant flow records
       when available.

The data presented in this Table indicate that, in all cases,
the predicted  l/l reductions were not achieved.  Using the
"predicted" I/I it can be said that none  of the cases proved
cost effective.  Another way of analyzing the data would be
to compare Column  (3) with Column  (5) .  This comparison re-
veals that of  the eleven  (11) cases with  available data,
eight (8) cases were not cost effective,  and three (3) cases
were cost effective.

In summary/ the cost effectiveness analysis utilizes esti-
mated T & T cost, estimated I/I quantification and estimated
percent I/I reductions after rehabilitation.   The results
can only provide ambiguous results as Table 2-11 shows.
                            2-18

-------
                   ADDITIONAL FINDINGS


THE EXCEPTION
!<£MM^BKir.£-A, ~MKHMI«NI^BIBM*MMIIIMWMB

      Documented system I/I reductions achieved in one »tx
      conmunity were significantly higher than reductions
      achieved in any of the other study communities.   Thi
      project was distinguished chiefly by its high %  of
      leaking joints (versus I/I from services) documented
      during televising, and its high t of the system to b
      rehabilitated.  Also, a high t of the joint* took
      grout, and the relatively few leaking services were
      repaired or replaced.  (See Table 2-12).

SSES DETERMINATIONS ON I/I FROM PRIVATE SOURCES

      Private inflow sources were noted as a "substantial"
      problem in one study community, "undetermined" in
      two communities,  and "minor" in four communities.
      Only one study community undertook a thorough home
      plumbing inspection/illegal I/I source disconnection
      program.  A large number of samp pumps were discon-
      nected  (fall 1S79),  but unusually low groundwater coi
      ditions this spring prohibited any determination of
      peak flow reduction attributable to the disconnectioi
      program.

      Infiltration from' service lateral sewers was specific
      quantified as a non-removable % of the system infil-
      tration (varing from 151 to 30%) in 4 communities,,
      Replacement of service laterals on private property,
      at community expense, wns done in 3 communities.

LEAKING SERVICE CONNECTIONS

      Services leaking at the connection to the main sswer
      were identified as significant sources of I/I in
      6 communities.  Except for communities that did m&jor
      amounts of replacement or slip-lining (which includes
      service connection replacement), the highest rate of
      service connection repair done in the «tudy communiti
      was 8% of the services in the system (See Table 2-12)

JOINTS REQUIRING GROUTING

      Available test and seal records for the  study com-
      munities showed that the % of joints to  require grout
      ing (that is, the I of joints that failed the air
      test), varied widely; from over 90% to under 4%.
      (See Table 2-12) .

-------
                        CHAPTER 3

                   SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS

The expectations of the I/I Program to eliminate excessive
I/I were not achieved in any of the sewer systems evaluated
during this study.  The upper portions of Figures 3-1 to
3-16 graphically display the following information on the
.systems included in this study.

       The I/I  before and after rehabilitation as presented
       in the SSES reports,

       The high day I/I, before and after rehabilitation,
       obtained from the plant flow records, when available,

       The average daily flow for the high week I/I,  before
       and after rehabilitation, obtained from the plant
       flew records,  when available, and

       The average daily flow for the high month I/I, before
       and after rehabilitation, from plant records,  when
       available.

SSES before and after  figures  for  infiltration and inflow
are summarized in Table  3-1,

These data illustrate that the I/I reductions predicted
versus that attained were seriously misjudged.

INFIL75ATION/INTLOW DESIGN COMPONENT

The treatment plants encountered in this study were designed
to accommodate  non-excessive I/I,  Thus, a specific I/I
design flow was used.  The findings of this study indicate
that in all cases, the design I/I flow component has been
exceeded by returning I/I.

HOUSE SERVICE CONNECTIONS AND NON-REHABILITATED SEWER JOXOT8

Television inspection of rehabilitated sewer lines was per-
formed during this study,  The lower left portions of Figures
3-1 through 3-16 compares the pre and post rehabilitation
flows and sources.  The data indicate that in all cases
post rehabilitation flows exceed that predicted to remain.
House service connections and non-rehabilitated joints ere
the major sources of returning I/I.

-------
PERCENT OF COLLECTION SYSTEM REHABILITATED

      The percent of sewers in the study communities that
      was rehabilitated varied widely? from 6% to 70%.
      (See Table 2-13). .

SSES TV DOCUMENTATION OF I/I

      TV leakage documented during SSES televising reasonably
      accounted for measured I/I flows in only four of the
      18 study communities.

   .  The % of I/I coming from main barrel leaks (versus
      I/I from services) varied from a high of 93% to a low
      of 20%  (See Table 2-12). .

      SSES TV flow estimates were used directly in the
      cost-effective analysis in 5 communities.

I/I RETURNING VIA NON-REHABILITATED JOINTS

      Retelevisino during  this study found I/I returning
      through non-rehabilitated joints  (that had passed the
      air test during test and seal) to be a significant
      source of returning I/I (see Table 2-7) .

      The joint immediately adjacent to a service connection
      cannot be tested or sealed internally - a heavy con-
      centra cion of leaking joints adjacent to services
      was observed in only one of the .communities retelevised
      under this study.

TELEVISING UNDER THIS STUDY OF NON-REHABILITATED REACHES

      Televising during this  study of  a total of 3,761* of
      selected non-rehabilitated sewers adjacent to rehab-
      ilitated sewers found a total of 78 main barrel leaks
      (32,775 gpd TOTAL} and 36 leaking services (O,7Q0
      gpd TOTAL).

AM9 VERSUS 3M GROUTING

    .  AM9 was used in all of the study communities except
      one.  Retelevising under this study found joints
      grouted with AM9 to be generally sound.  In the one
      3M community, what leaking joints were found  (10
      joints leaking a total of 28,500 gpd in 2,092* of
                           2-22

-------
                                fABLE 2-13




                        REHABILITATION TECHNIQUES
                                    % SYSfEM REHABILITATED


Community
Bell Buckle, TN
Grifton, NC
Winterville, NC
Ayden, NC
Mt. Holly, PA
Castle Rock, WA
Central ii, WA
Dunsmuir, CA
Willits, CA
Shelton, KA
New Buffalo, MA
Ariuty, PA
Sussex, wi
Conyjighafis, PA
Mason, MI
Voraennes, VT
Saleto, NH
Cortland, NY
(1)
Ft. of
Sewers
18,400
40,000
61,500
107,000
50,500
50,000
200,000
80,000
85,000
l"*3 , 000
44,500
51 ,000
68,000
34,000
130,000
51,000
160,000
293,000


Grout
63%
10%
13%
26%
38%
6S%
36%
4%
22%
15%
20*
10%
7%
231
11%
41
19%
1%


Reglace
2*
.
-
2%
i
11
-
33%
3%
-
~
2%
4%
44%
12%
33%
,
i


Line Total
651
10%
13% .
28%
38%
70%
36%
2% 39%
34% 591
1% 16%
20%
12*
11%
67%
23%
\ 11 38%
19%
1% 6%
Notesj   (1)  Not including service laterals.

-------
      retelevised test and seal sewers) were either at or
      near joints that had been grouted,- footage differences
      between the test and seal logs and the EPA TV logs
      made positive identification difficult.,

TEST AND SEAL QUALITY CONTROL

      As stated throughout this report, retelevising found
      grouted joints to be generally sound.  In one community,
      a large number of leaking joints  (91 joints leaking a
      total of 42,800 gpd in 2,733' of tetelevised test and
      seal sewers) were found;  no:footage logs showing which
      joints had been grouted were available.  In another
      community, one heavily leaking reach (26 joints leak-
      ing a total of 26,300 gpd in 302* of retelevised 12*
      test and seal sewer) was attributed to an equipment
      problem or operator error during the grouting operation.

MANHOLE REHABILITATION

      Manhole infiltration and/or inflow was quantified in
      the study community SSES reports at an average of
      6,3t of the system I/I.  The maximum SSES manhole
      I/I was 14r« of the system I/I.

      Based on ranholes observed in retelevising areas,
      chemical grouting appears to be an effective rehabili-
      tation measure.  Repair by cement grouting appears to
      be not as effective,

FREQUENCY OF .PEAK FLOWS

      Analysis of before and after rehabilitation plant flow
      records for flow "spikes" found a wide range of peak
      flow frequencies in the 18 study communities,

      "Sharp" spikes associated with rainstorms were found
      in 8 communities.  The annual frequency of rainfall
      associated  "sharp" spikes exceeding twice the study
      community's base flow ranged from 3-6 per year to
      about 15,   These spikes were generally associated with
      daily rainfall totals exceeding  1 inch.

      Peaks that  rose and fell gradually with rainstorms
      were -found  in 3 communities.

      Peaks primarily associated with  snowmelt were found in
      5 communities.
                           2-24

-------
      Peak flows in 1 community were more responsive to t',
      rise and fall of a nearby river than directly with
      rainfall.

REHABILITATION

      There is a possibility that the replacement or renal
      ilitation of old, leaky trunk sewers may actually ii
      crease peak flows,, by eliminating exfiltration durii
      surcharged conditions and loss of dampening via bad
      up sewers.  In one study community, a large amount c
      undersized, heavily leaking trunk sewers was replace
      in 1976.  A 40% reduction of system I/I was expected
      but high week I/I increased.

REDUCTION OF LONG-TERM I/I

      Based on analysis of plant flow records, % reduction
      achieved in long-term system I/I flow parameters (Hi
      6-Months, Annual Average) were not significantly dif
      ferent from % reductions achieved in short term syst
      I/I How parameters (High Day, High Week, High Month)
      See Table  2-14,
                           2-25

-------
                       TABLE 2-14
             %  REDUCTION OF SYSTEM  I/I  FLOWS
             FOR  SELECTED FLOW PARAMETERS (l)
Community
Bell Buckle, TN
CMSD,NC
Mt. Holly, PA
Castle Rock, WA
Centralia, WA
Shelton, WA
Dunsrnuir, CA
Will its, CA
New Buffalo, MA
Sussex, WI
Ami ty , PA
Mason, WA
Cor tl ana, NY
Vergennes, VT
Salem, NH
Conyncham, PA
Notes: (1) From
High
Day u
N/A
Increase
N/A
51%
Increase
Increase
1%
N/A
' 2%
IT. c r s 2 s e
421
N/A
1%
N/A
N/A
28%
analysis
High
Week
N/A
Increase
23%
60%
3%
Increase
0%
N/A
1%
7%
24%
N/A
Increase
N/A
N/A
T "* e
.i. i '€
of available
High
Month
N/A
28%
37%
N/A
23%
Increase
19%
N/A
Increase
7%
33%
N/A
Increase
N/A
N/A
22%
plant flow
High
6 Months
N/A
N/A
30%
N/A
9%
Increase
50%
N/A
3%
14%
N/A
'N/A
1%
N/A
N/A
25%
records
Annual
N/A
N/A
16%
N/A
Incr
Incr
50%
N/A
10%
1%
N/A
N/A
4%
N/A
N/A
12%
before an
     rehabilitation,  through March 1980,
(2)   N/A-Not Applicable

-------
                 PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS




£
o
k
a

1
"3
<9
JO
2



o
o
o

M
>.
s
1
*
.2
o
w

% REDUCED
0 «MO«OaQK)0


0.6

O.5

0.4
0.3

0.2
O.I
0
1 	 "•"'" 1



"X
^
\.
^
s^
^X.
^
X.






cN
[_^r^
flBHL__

99ES
% HEOUCEO % REDUCED % REDUCED
0 M 40 CO BO 100 0 » 4O «O »0 100 O2O4O6O0O100
1 III !
LEGEND


t. I I/I P«fof^
No trtalm*nl flow recordt are kepi at L:* 	 '
Btll Bueklt. A syit«m I/I flow of 0.28 mgd t r_ , -
was meoeured on 1/17/79, under thli tiudy. LL-:^''g !/l Af(*r





High Day Hiah Week High Month
TELEVISION INSPECTION -
100

80


ec
40

20

.^SSES Flow Gaging








1 j S
gH-
Kw j

0 1 	 • 	 •

S f/1 From S«rvic«

j f^oift Barrel! I/I
{ J Before Rehab.
£J2S frrt'cfed After


I 1 EPA.R«-TV
> ••IIII.IIHilM. 	 ilil^ll*
COST -EFFECTIVENESS
| 70,OOO(n | 1 .3ltt) = 53,000 gpd(31

til n«hcbllllollon Construction Colt (2) 3SE3 TftT Catl
(3) Minimum Syiltm I/I Rtductlon R«qul(»4

System I/I Reduction Achieved
0.2
E Ol
O» *-*-• I
6
bDVMM N/A N/A N/A
(3) Hic»h Day Hioh Week H!«»! Montli
FIGURE 3-1=  INFILT RAT (ON/INFLOW DATA; BELL BUCKLE, TENNESSEE

-------

-------
                            PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
           % REDUCED
            20 40 tO «0100
        2-0
     I  °8
     o  0.4
     i   -
             SSE9
 % REDUCED         % REDUCED
OZO 4060*0 100     020406080100
         High Doy
                     High W««tc
                                            % REDUCED
                                           0 20 4O W 00 100
                                                                                        LEGEND

                                                                                L   1   I/1  Be for*

                                                                                B&3I   I/I Afftr
     High Month
     gieo
       CO
     i80
     o  0
TELEVISION   INSPECTION

                LEGEND

            S      I/I From

            J      Main Barrel! l/i

                   Btfort Rthob.
          f^S   Pr«
-------
M
l
% itefiucee
     i«o
                                PLANT FLOW  RECORD ANALYSIS
                                                   % itcouccD
                                                  O 80 4O«0 MIOO
                                                  %  REOJCtO
                                                 0 20 40WTOKW
                                                     N/A
                                                                                           LEGEND
                                                                                                    R«hafoliltat
                                                                                           l/i After R«habilitall
SSE3
                  High Day
High W*«k
High Month
          s
          o
          5
          "3
       TELEVISION   INSPECTION

                      LEOEHO

                   S     l/f From 3«rvic»»

                   J     Main Barrel) I/I

                         ft if art Rthab.

                         Pr«4icl«d After
                 NO Tf LCVIttNO WAS
                 DONE IN CASTLC  KOCK
                 UNDCH  THIS ITUOT.
                                                       COST-EFFECTIVENESS
                                                         J»
                                                 $I26,000 -r  ^2.00/gpd    «   63,000 gpd

                                                 (I) H*MMIH*tl«i C*ft»1rucflOB Coil    (2) I3ES TttT Coil
                                                       (3) Minimum Sytttm I/ 1 ft«4Matl«n
                                                                                                         ,13)
                                                                Syittm I/I Reduction Achl»vtd
                                                                                High Day   High WM*   High Month
           FIGURE 3-4«  INFSLTRATION/INFLOW  DATA,   CASTLE ROCK, WASHINGTON

-------
                              PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
               % ftEMCCI
                 SSES
        % UDUCI9
                          f~"
                        >*
                                                   40 MM )00
         Htgh Ooy
High W«*K
              % ftCOUCED
              -TV
                                                                   COST -EFFECTIVENESS
             459»000    -r  $ 0.67/«pd   «  665,000gpd
            (I) ft«t»i«fc3ma(l«n CDn«lnicl{«n Co»t  (2) 39CS T»T Colt
                  Ol Minimum  9y*t^m l/t Ntduellen ft»qulr*4
                                                           I/I Reduction AchUvad
                                                                            High Day   High W««fc  High Month
         FIGURE 3-5= INFILTRATION/INFLOW  DATA,  CENTRAL! A, WASHINGTON

-------
                      PLANT PLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
% REDUCED
   1.0
   0 §
o
I
-5
o
§  at
        S3E8
 % REOUCCO
ofiJlBAJP*
                                        % MEOUC80
                            Day
                                    Mlfih W«ek
                                                         % REDUCED
                                                            40 10 >0100
                                    High Month
                                                                               LEGEND
                                                                            J  !/l  8«for»


                                                                               t/i  AfUr RthabIM
S
I
!
i
      Nt
                 tMt
        TELEVISION   INSPECTION

                        LEGEND

                    S     !/l From

                    J     Main Borrtll I/I

                  |      |  Btfor* Rthak.


                                  Aft*
                                EPS*. ft»-TY
                                                            COST - EFFECTIVENESS

                                                         673,000(l1  -r  ^1.50/gp^1  -  448,000 gp
                                                      10 ReMkllltfltlOfl C«nitrgell«i» C«*t   (2) 35E3 TftT Coit
                                                            (31 Minimum 9y*t«n  i/l
                                                                     9y«t>m I/I Raductton AchUvtd
                                                                     HI0h Day  High W*tk  HToft Mom
FIGURE 3-6=  INFILTRATION/INFLOW  DATA,     DUNSMWR, CALIFORNIA

-------
              PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
               % MCQUCEO
              0 M 40 MM WO
              FNA     I
                                     % niouceo
                                     0 «P40<0«OK)0
                                     I    NM    [
              % ftCOUCeO
              <|_2O 4O CO •$ IOO
              j  "~NM1

                                                                      LEGEND
                                                               L   1  '/I Befori Rihobili

                                                                      I/I Afftr  Rthobili
SSES
                      High D«y
Hlflh W*«k
High Month
1.
25
0 2O
o
" 55
9%
£f %V
i o
TEL£VIS:DN SMSPECTION
I ™ ww
f ^







s -
......

LEGEND
S i/l From 3»rvic«t
J Moin Sorr all I/I
gfmi Pr9dicl«d Afi«r
i --••. 1 crri* n^_-r\/
- -.1 . -. { . : ; tr"**, fr» i y
COST
-EFFECTIVENESS
$ 505,000(l)-r ^330(2) = 153,000 gpd(3)
(1) Rehabilitation Construction C«»t U) 33E3 TUT Coil
(3) Minimum SyiUm I/I Rtduotlan Required
Sy«l«m I/I Rftducflon Achltved
04
•o
w O.2
6o.i|pi|
HbuM
^J ™B^^^^^^^" 	 •••fa
0)

High Day High W«k High Mor
FIGURE
        !NFlLTRA.TtQN/!NFLOW DATA,  WSLLITS, CALIFORNIA

-------
                     PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
     %
    0 20
      3SE3
                 % AltWCED
                0 30 4080 SO 100
High Day
High W»*k
               % AEDUCED
              0 M 40 <0 80 100
High M
                                                                               LEGEND
                                                                                   Befort R«habiliraf
                                                                                   Afftr Rthdbilifotl
                           INSPECTION
                             LEGEND

                         S      l/t From Str'vicM

                         J      MoiR Borr*ll I/I

                                B«for« R*hob.

                                Prtdicftd Affor

                                    R«-TV
                                     COST -EFFECTIVENESS
                                 |l8t,000(l> -r  $2.63/gpd<21 *
                               (l|R*h«blllt
-------
                     PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
     % ftCOUCCB
     0  tO 4O « «0 )00
 % MEDUCCD
O 20 40 tCW 100
 % REDUCED
O 20 4O 6O 10100
 % REDUCED
o 20 40 so so loo
 r
                                                                              LEQENO

                                                                              l/[ B«fort

                                                                              I/I Afl«r
       3SES
 High Doy
   High
  High  Month
              TELEVISION  INSPECTtON

                             LEGEND

                         S     (/I From Strvic*i

                         J     Main Borr.ll I/I

                                S«for» R*hob.

                                Prvdicltd W!«r

                                EPA  R.-TV
                    COST-EFFECTIVENESS

                $S3,000UV$2.20/apd(ZI =   28,000 gpd
                                                                    Is?
               (I)
                              4O
                              3O
                               IO
               >;»ort Cotl   (2
      Minimum SyiUm I/1 R»4ueH0n

             Sytlsm l/t Raductton
                                                                TST
                                                                    o
                                                                    v
                                                         (3)
                                              High Doy  High Week  High Month
FIGURE 3-9'  INFILTRATION/INFLOW DATA,  NEW BUFFALO, MICHIGAN

-------
                       PLANT  FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
       % wouceo

      O 2040*0 •0100
0 2Q40JO 10(C?
           % HfDUCtD

          4h AM A**. 4k4h M A, *** J»
          v gg -^py %rif wiw
        39E3
 High Day
High W««k
               % REDUCED

               5 EG 5O io SO ipo
                              High  Month
                                                                                    LEGEND
                                                                                 I   I/I Before RehabilH



                                                                                    I/1 A(f*r  Rthabllit
o
o
o
^*^
3

I
•
o

i
               TELEVISION   INSPECTION
    S


    J
  [^     |
LEGEND


   I/I From Services


   Mam Borrtll l/i


   Before Rthofa.
           Predicted After



           EPA* He
                   COST-EFFECTIVENESS


                      (li    ,         (21              (3)
               146.0OO -T   $2.60/gpd    =   56,000 gpd

             (l)R«h«t>iwcnon Coil   (2) 39ES TftT Co«l

                   (3) Minimum Sy*t§m I/I Rtductlon R«qulr»(J



                            Syiteai 1/1 Reduction Achieved


                             077
                                                             (3)        High Day   High W*ek   High Won


  FIGURF 3-K>  INFILTRAT^4/INFLOW DATA, AMITY  TOWNSHIP,  PENNSYLVANIA

-------
                       PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
       % REDUCED
      0 tO 40 » W100
                    % MOUCS&
                   0 10 40 W SO 100
                % MIOUCE0
        SSES
                     High Day
                  High Witk
 % REDUCED
0 20 40 W *0 100
                                                                                  LEGEND


                                                                          £7  "1  I/I Befor* Rehabililal


                                                                                  171 Aft»r  Rehobilifot
  Hi ah Month
   ISO

O
g  IZO
^  90i
S
I  ">
o
i
90

0

s
J


y
J
           TELEVISION  INSPECTION

                           LEGEND

                       S      I/I From S«rvic«

                       J      Main Barrvlt I/I

                              Btfort Rthab.
CZJ
                                  Prtdicttd Afrtr
        EPA' Rt-TV
                                                              COST -EFFECTIVENESS


                                 2B2.OOO'—  fil.lO/gpd '   =   256.OOO gpd

                               (l| RthObUltaHon Conitrucllon Colt   (Z) SSES  TAT Cotr

                                     (3) Minimum Syittm  I/I Reduction R»qulr*d


                                              System l/i Reducl(on Achieved
                                                                       High Day   High Week   Mlflh Month
 FIGURE 3-1^  fNFILTRATJON/lNFLOW  DATA,     SUSSEX,  WISCONSIN

-------

-------
                      PLANT  FLOW  RECORD ANALYSIS
      % REDUCED
     O tt> 40 «0 90 00
 %
0 10 40 «Q to (00
        SSES
                                         % REDUCED
                                         0  20 40 «O 80 JOO
                                         I    NM  I
 High Coy
                                           High Wt»k
 %  REDUCED
0 20 40 60 «0 100
                                                          I    N/A
  High Month
                                                                                 LEGEND



                                                                                 I/I Aft«r
O
O
O
M
>%
n
O
               TELEVISION   INSPECTION
                              LEGEND

                           S     t/1 From S»fvic«
                           J     Main Borr«ll'l/i

                                 B*fort Rthob.
                »•*- «»••
                                 Pr«diet*d
                                     R«-TV
                                       COST -EFFECHVENESS
                                                            - I.442.0OO
                                 (Oa«hoblttla)ion Conilrucilon Co»t   (2) 33E3
                                       13} Minimum SytUiti I/I R*duello»
                                                Syttem I/I flccijcfion Achlovad
                                                                       N/A
                                                           N/A
                                                                                           N/A
                                                                      High Do/   High VVsafc  Mgh Mon
  FIBURE3-I3"-  (NFtLTRATION /INFLOW DATA,   MASON,  MICHIGAN

-------
                      PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
      % ficauceo
                       % RCOUCID
                      O <0 40 1010
                      I   N/A
                                  % ftcouceo
                                   AJSJAjS^o
                                     ti/A!
   % REDUCED
                                                        I    N/A
                                                                               LEGEND
                                                                       L  1 VI
                                                                               I/ 1 After Rihobili
               TELEVISION   INSPECTION
§
p
M
  40
  SO
S  to
«
I
 f99
J.	,
   3SCS Fkw
                J-'
     LEGEND
  S     I/) From Strvic*!
  J     Main Borr«il I/I
|     1  S*for* flthab.
        Pr«d)ct*d
        EPA- R«-TV
      COST -EFFECTIVENESS
    57,000° -r  fl.36/gpd2   *   42,000 gpd
/| Rtducflon Achloygd
                                                                      N/A
                                                                          N/A
                                   N/A
                                                                    High Day   High W««k  High Mo
 FIGURE 3-14=    INFILTRATION/INFLOW DATA,   SALEM, NEW HAMPSHIRE

-------
                 PLANT FLOW  RECORD ANALYSIS


 % REDUCED        % REDUCED         % REDUCED
0 20 40 80 80.100    0 » 408080100    0 20 
-------
                       PLANT  FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
      % acouceo
      0  20 40•ON 100
   KXO
a
o  SO
o

o
        sses
 % Kcouceo
0 20 40 tO W WO
                                          % MCOUCEO
                                          0  20 40 «0 *0100
                     High Wt«K
                                            % DEDUCED
                                            0  20 40 «0 CO 100
                                                              High Month
                                                                                    LEGEND
                                                                                        Before RehablW<
                                                                                    I/I  After Rehobilifc
O  160
o
a

I

£
a
o
   120


    80


    40


    0
TELEVISION  INSPECTION

                LEGEND

            S      I/I From Services

            J      Main Barrel! I/I

          f     j   B»for» R»hab.


                           After
           EPA Rt-TV
                                        £°-!LLlAF F E_?TJ V e,NE ss
                                            ,«>.  * « ~-.   .«>
                                                           $ 869,000- $ 0. 85/gpd

                                                         (11 Rehabilitation Con*truc!(on Cotl

                                                                O) Minimum Sy*'"11 '/'
                                                             '  l,022,000gpd

                                                             (21 SSES  TUT Co*l

                                                                  H»quir*d
                                                                                                   (3
                                                  Sys1«m I/I Reduction Achieved
                                 1.0
tncreose
ncr
                                                                         High Day   High Week  High Mont
 FIGURE 3-16= INFILTRATION/INFLOW DATA,   CORTLAND,  NEW  YORK

-------
                         PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
w
<
& 0.6
a
5 0.5
a,
« 0.4
1 0,3
S 0.2
e
£ 0.1
So
no
O
o 80
i'°
JP 4 0
£ 20
o

% REDUCED % REDUCED % « EDUCED % REDUCED
9204O«OaOKX> OM40«O«OKX> O 80 40 «O •<> IQO O 20 40 «0 *X> IOO
•••
X
"II II
1 ! 1
LEGEND
L ^ I/I Bsfor* n«hntti!itfi
No treatment flow record* oro kept at ^ 	 '
Bell 8uckl«. A syefem I/I flow of 0.28 mad lu,^-.
wat meoeured on 1/17/79, under thli etudy . ^-^j l/l Aft»r *»*abl\i\a\
^K •• ^ "' ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Lfl
2v>
|yE9
39ES High Day High We»K High Month
^" &••

TELEVISION INSPECTION .
S I/I From Service*
J Main Barrel* t/(
( 1
1 s [ | Before Rthab.
BSJB1 Ee«3 Pr^'Ct^d After



Bgfafl ! \ EPA. Re-TV

COST -EFFECTIVENESS
| 70,000(lt |l.3fttl = 53,000 gpd131
(l)n*lidbi!lle!lon Contfrucllon Co»( (2) 33ES T6T Coil
(9) Minimum Ay*l«m I/I R*ducHon R«qulrttf
System I/I Reduction Achieved
0.2
§1 O.I
El
tarm N/A * N/A N/A
(3) High Day High Ws«k High Month
         FIGURE 3-h  INFfLT RATION/INFLOW DATA ; BELL BUCKLE, TENNESSEE

-------
                              PLANT FLOW  RECORD ANALYSIS
 I
X
               % ftCouceo
              O M 40 00 tO K>O
 % REDUCED
0 20  *00
 % KCDUCCO
0 10 40 90 90100
% REDUCED
0 20 40 60 60 100
                                                                                     LEGEND
                                                                                     I/I Before RehobilitaM
                                                                                     I/I Afttr Rehabilitolli
                 3SE3
 High Day
   High W**k
  High Month
O
O
B 2»
«
S 15
A! 10
S
5 5
^5
0 0

S

J
TELEVISION INSPECTION


/-S
S
J

LEGEND'.
S I/I From Services
J
1 I
Main Barrel! I/I
Before Rehab.


1 I

EPA R«-TV
COST-
•EFFECTIVENESS
. (1) , (25
1 351,000 -r 1 3.04/gpd
(1) Rtbobd Motion Contlructlon Co»f
(5) Minimum Sy»t«m I/I
Syirem I/I
04
0.3
T?
E O.I m M^.J
(3)


-------
                                    PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
-C
In
                   %  REDUCED
                  0 *0 40 «0 60 100
 % E1DUCED
0 » 40 «0 10100
                            % «EDUCED
                            0  20 40 60 00100
 %  REDUCED
0 20 40 10 6O 100
                                                                                            L
                                                                LEGEND

                                                                I/I B«fors  nehohilil

                                                                l/t After R*habili1
                     S3ES
  High Day
                               High W«k
  High Month
TELEVISION   INSPECTION

                 LEGEND

             S      I/I From Services

             J      Main Barrel) I/I

                    Before  Rehab.

                            After
                                       [     J   EPA  R«-TV
                                                                              COST -EFFECTIVENCSS
                                                                        (I) n«h«bJIII«tlan Comlrucflon Co»r   (Z) 33ES TOT Co*t
                                                                               (3) Minimum  Syiltat I/I B#duct|on
                                   0.4
                                   0,3
                                   0.2
                                   0.1
                                    O
                                                                                         Syitom I/I  Reduction Achieved
                                                                                         N/A
       NOTEi Till* TV data i» from or>* h«avily-|*akinQ (TO-foot tccllon
              of  cross-country
                                                                             (3)
                                                    High Day   High Week  High Mon
            -tr*i tni
            r»w  nATA   MT  HOI  t V  «iPRINfi.q  PFNNSYLVANIA

-------
                      PLANT  FLOW  RECORD ANALYSIS
      % HEDUCEO
          40WWIOO
 % MEDUCEO
ft 10 4O«0
 % MEOUCfO
0 aO 4000*0100
        99£S
 High Dsy
   High Wttk
 % REDUCEO
0 20 4O CO CO ICQ
 I   N/A
  High Month
                                                                                LEGEND
                                                                                 I/I  Btfor* RthobllitoHi
                                                                                 i/l After
               TELEVISION   INSPECTION
o
o
o

       NO TELCVISWO WAS
       DOME IN CASTLl  NOCK
             THW
        LE3£ND

          I/I From 5Urvic«

          Wain Barrtfl l/t

          B«fort  Rthab,


          Pr*tfict*d Aft*r


          CM R»-TV
                                      COST -EFFECTIVENESS
                                          «  63,000 gpd

               (DfUhabllltctlM Cwttlruc*l*A C«*t    (2) I3E5  T6T Co.I
                     (3) Minimum 3y*!*«i I/I RMuoHon
                                                      0.6
                                    I/I Reduction Achitvtd
                                                                      High Day  High W«cK  High Month
 FIGURE 3-4*  INBLTRATION/INFLOW  DATA,   CASTLE ROCK,  WASHINGTON

-------
      % MEOUCCO
        SSE3
                     PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
         High Doy
High W*«k
                                         % MEOUCtO
                                         0 10 40 to «0100
                                         r-       i
                                                                              LEGEND
                                                                      L  1   I/'  B«for« Rthobllifa
                                                                              !/!  After Rthabllilol
High Month
I
"  «0
>»
**.
I
O
i
   £0
TgUVISiON  INSPECTION
               LEGEND
           S     I/I From 9«rvic«
           J     Main Barrtll I/I
              J   Be for* R«hab,
                  Prtdictcd Aft»r
                 EPA,R»-TV
                 COST -EFFECTIVENESS
           i         0)     i          (2)
           $459,000    -r$0.67/gpd   «  665,OCQgpe
           (I) ft«hablMt«li*fl Connection Coll   (2) 3SES  TftT Coil
                  (3) Minimum Sfiitm  I/1  N*4uctlon
                                                     Sy«t>m t/{ Reduction AchUv«d
                             9
                             o
                             V
                             i
                                                                   High Doy  High W«fc  Hlg)> Wonlti
 FIGURE3-5^  INFILTRATION/INFLOW  DATA,  CENTRAL!A,WASHINGTON

-------
sse*
                      PLANT FLOW  RECORD ANALYSIS
                         ftEMJCCO
Rtmicto
                      o mmmmm    o mmmiam
Htflh D«y
                                          Hi«h
                                                 % NEOUCED
                High Month
                                                                               LEGEND
                                                                            1
                                                                               I/I Af*»r
              TELEVISION   mSPECTtON
                             LCOENO
                          S     I/I From Strvicw
                                Moln Mrr... I/}
            »«j»r t«»     i     I  Bofert Rthob.
                        '   "  <•
                                Pr«dtet»d Afl*r
                                EPA, «t-TV
                 COST 'EFFECTIVENESS
            $ 6T3,OQOW 4-  $lv50/gpo?i Achltvtd
                                                                    High Day   High Wwk  Meh Month
FIGURE 3-6=   INFILTRATION/INFLOW  DATA,     DUNSMUIR, CALIFORNIA

-------
                     PLAKT FLOW  RECORD ANALYSIS
                      % ftCOUCllft
                     OJOW6O 100
             % ttcftuceo
            0 » 40 •010100
                 N/A
               % weouceo
               o_» 40 
-------
                         R.QW R£COK&
    % REDUCED
   0 20 4v»0»0»0e
      39E3
 % fit$££0
0 ?0 40 » «9

|	™
             %
             a ao 49
 High Day
High W*«k
High
                                                               L
                                                   LEGEND


                                                   J/l 8«for«
O
o
&
1
•*
c
o
I
JOG
75
90
25
O
/-33C
I
TELEVISION INSPECTION
t rim*
•
•«inf
S
J
UM«M»—
LEGEND
S I/I From S*r'vic»t
J Main Borrttl I/I
f """' | B«for» R«hob.
BH9 Pr»dict»d Aft»r
WHHIB
I'^'i'i'l EFW Bi-TV
*
(II*
04
0.3
"0.2
O.I
O
COST
181,000*"
IsbabHtloiloa
(3) Mini
mam^_
(3)
-EFFECTtVENESS '
-T $?.63
CoA»iraeti$n
SysUm
Incftias*
/gp
Cotl
1/1
i/i

High Day
dc% ~ 69,000 gpi
12} 3SES TftT C»«.:
R«duc?lon K9(jt)lr«d ,
Reduction Achieved
V Cf
8 |
u <5
c ' jc
High W»*K High

Me
FIGURE  3~8=  INFILTRATION/INFLOW DATA,    SHELTON, WASHINGTON

-------
                      PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
      % HEOUCEO
     O M 40ttK>K>0
         % AEOUCEO
        0 10 40 tO 10 MO
 % HEDUCED
o ao 4O6Oeoioo
 %  REDUCED
0 20 40 60 8O 100
                                                                                LEGEND

                                                                        L   "1  \/\  B«for«

                                                                                i/i  Aftir Rthabiht
        SSES
         High Day
   Higfc W«tk
  High Month
TELEVISION   INSPECTION

               LEGEND

            S     i/J From Strvictr

            J     Main Barrtlt l/i

                  Btfor* R*nab,

                          After
                     COST-EFFECTIVENESS

                       rR
                                                                                            l3>
                                                        •       til          121
                                                        $ 63.OOO 4- $ 2.EO/gp
-------
                       PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
      % HCOUCEP
        3SE3
                 % ftffDUCtO

                 Ot04QJOJOjpO
                           % niouceo

                          0 » 40 «0 90100
                  Hl«h Bay
                             High W»«k
 %  REDUCED

0 2O 4010 tO tOO
  High Month
                                                                                    LEGEND
                                                                                    I/I B«fort Rthabilf
                                                                                    I/I AfUr  Rthabliil
o
o
o
8

£
«t
o

i
M» t«f*tf*l*f
TELEVISION  INSPECTION


                LEGEND



            S      I/I From S«rvic*»


            J      Main Barrtll l/|



                   B«for« ftthab.
       f«
         tw«
                   L
                   Prtdicttd Afltr




                   EPA* Rt-TV
                                                        COST -EFFECTIVENESS




                                                    146,000 -  $2.60/gpd   *  56,000 gpd 5

                                                  (1) FUhabttitoHon Conduction Cott    (2) 33£3 T 5T Coil


                                                        (3) Minimum 9ytl*m  l/t R«ductlon R«qu!r«ir> I/I Rtductlon  Achldvcd


                                                                   0.77
                                                             (3)         High Day   High W»«k   High Mon



  F1GURF3-|0=  INFILTRATION/INFLOW DATA, AMITY  TOWNSHIP,  PENNSYLVANIA

-------
                    PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
     % nxoucto
    O 2040tO«0 100
%  ftcoucEo
 % ftKDUCCD
0 » 46 «O tO IOO
       SSES
High Ooy
   High W«tk
 % REDUCED
0 214010 §0 100
  Higi* Month
                                                                            LEGEND
                                                                    [y__J  '/I  Bafor« Rehobllit<


                                                                            I/I Aff«r Rehobilifc
ISO
0
8 »»
X
fc 90
£ W
I »
1 0

S
j
TELEVISION INSPECTION


^
J
LEGEND
S I/I From Service*
J Main Barrel! I/I
j J Befort Rehob,
mi Predicted After
pCT] ERA' Rt-TV

COST -EFFECTIVENESS
di i (2>
$ 262.OOO ~r p 1,10/gpd =
(!) R«habitlla(lo!i Conitrucllen Cotl (Z)
(3) Minimum 9y«t*m I/I fitducrl
Sy*fem I/I R«duc
0.4
0.3 «»
1 ° 2 •• s
(3) High Day High
256.0OO gpd
39E3 TST Co»l
on fl*quir*d
flon Achieved
Week High Monll
FIGURE  3"W'  INFILTRATION/INFLOW DATA,    SUSSEX,  WISCONSIN

-------
                      PLANT  PLOW  RECORD ANALYSIS
      % fCDUCCD

     o to 40to
   1.0
o


»
o.
I  O,
        SSES
                          ftEDUCtt
             flCDUCCO
                        Hl«h Day
            Htgh WM)I
   %  REDUCED

  O 20 4Q«QiSfelOO
                       0»«0«>0>|10     OW40JOJOIOO    020 40*0^01C
    High Month
                                                                                 LEGEND
                                                                              1  I/! B«for« Rehobi




                                                                                 I/I After  R»habil
               TELEVISION   INSPECTION
8
o
I
                      I*
LEGEND


   t/l From Sirvic**


   Moin BorrelJ t/l
                              j  Btfort R«hob.



                                 Pr«tftctt
-------
             <   PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
 % REDUCED
O 80 4O«0«OIOO
 % REDUCED
0 20 40 fO *0 »0
 % REDUCED
0 20 4O«0 tO tOO
   SSES
 H«cti Day
   High W«»k
 % REDUCED
0 20 40 60 «0 100
    N/A
  High Month
                                                                        LEGEND
                                                                     J  I/I B«for» Rvhobtlit

                                                                        I/1 Afttr R*habUU(

0
o
o
X
>>
1
•*
o
a
(9

TELEVSSJON INSPECTION
LEGEND
S I/I From Stryicti
j Main 8acr«llVl
I 1 Rflf&ri ft*bab
Ito t*i**Ul*f ;»«•• «»iw 1 1 •••»•» n*ww».
IB IJMlt »M* tht 	 ,
*N*' WH9l ^ Jt-« j .*.
MSEJM PrtdfeUd AfU'/
WKKHV
(di^fj EfW Rt-TV

COST-EFFECTSVENESS
^721,000 -T- ^0.50/gpd • 1,442,000 gpc
(H ««hcallll^rion Comffucllon Coif <2l 39ES TftT Co»f
(?) Minimum 3yil*m I/I Reduction fl«qu.r*d
System I/I Rftduclion Achlov«d
O 1 HIBI M ft tit ( A N/A

(3) Hi^h Ocy High Wftefc ^h Monl
          INFILTRATION /INFLOW  DATA,  MASON, MICHIGAN

-------
                      PLANT  FLOW  RECORD ANALYSIS
         ftCDUCCD
     o w 44 fete no
                       % MCOUCtD
                        % HtDOCCO
 % MCDUCCD
0 » 40 «0 10
    ft/A
        SSES
                                          High W»»k
                                      (•NtathM *w t* raw* *rjr
                                          High Month
                                                                              LE0END
                                                                              J/t Btfw*
                                                                              1/1 AfUr  Rihobilitotl
8
O
M

5
  40
I  10
i  o
              TELEVISION   INSPECTION
                             LflQENO
              no.
          s
          J
                                          5/1
                        |     |  itfort Rthob.
  S

t"1
                                      rTV
                                           COST -EFFECTIVENESS
                                      <(]
                                                    O.I
                            42,000opd
         Conitru4«on Co«t  (l\ S3C9 TftT Cott
    (9) MiAlmwm  Sytttm I/I Rtduoitori ««qulf«(J

             3y*t>m_|/jI Rtducflon AchKvtd
                                                                     N/A
                        N/A
N/A
                                                         (3)
                                                    High Day   High W««k  High Month
 FIGUftE 3-14=     INFILTRATION/INFLOW DATA,   SALEM, NEW HAMPSHIRE

-------
                      PLANT FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
      % REDUCED
     0 20 40 WW KX>
 % REDUCE*
0 10 40 10 tO 100
|   N/A    |
 % REDUCED
0 20 40 «0 M iOO
I   KV»|
 % REDUCED
0 K> 40 60 flK> tOO
                                                                               LEGEND
                                                                        j^   ^j   I/I  Before Rfthobilitoll

                                                                                i/l AH»r RehabililotU
                                                         N/A
                                                          High Month

M
£
o
%h
£
«
^



TELEVISION INSPECTION
LEGEND
S I/I From Services
J Main Borr«ll I/I
N* titavliliif HI 4«M 1 	 	 1 ••'Of* Rthob.
tm *to*r. E2B Pr»«C^ Afttr
1 :' :;v;' J C|M Ra-TV/
1 '-.".: ::!:^J f-rf\ W9 1 W

COST-EFFECTtVENESS
^ TOO^OOO"' -r ^2.5O/gpd'2' = E80,OOOgpd(3'
(If AfhabMltalloft Conduction Cotl (ZJ 33CS TATCatt
(3) Minimum 9/«t«m t/l Reduction R*quir*d
Sy«r«m I/I Rftducflon AcfiUvad

NOTE* ONLY A SMALL AMOUNT OF THE fRQJECT WAS
JUSTIFIED ' ABIfllMAI 4PtlimC


(3) High Day High W«ok. High Morth
FIGURE 3-15=   INFILTRATION/INFLOW  DATA,   VERGENNES,  VERMONT

-------
                        PLANT  FLOW RECORD ANALYSIS
       %  BEOOCEO
      0 20 *0« M100
o.
o  60
o
s
         SSES
         % ftCDUCCO
        0 M40MWIOO
 % AfDUCCQ
0 20 40 90 BO 100
          High Day
   High W«*k
 %  REDUCED
0 20 40 60 SO 100
   Hi Oh Month
                                                                                       LEGEND
                                                                     1  I/!  B»for« RahoblF

                                                                       I/I  Aft«r  Rthabil
o  ieo
o
i   w
S   40
TELEVISION   INSPECTION
                 LEGEND

             S      I/I From 5trvic0s
             J      Moin Borrill I/I

           j      |   B«for» Rthob.

                    Predicted After
                                    EPA R»-TV
                                                                  CQST-E F F E CJIV E N E SS
                                                                      JH».
                                                             $869,000
                                             =  J,022,000 g pc
                                             (Z) 33E3  TftT Cot'
                       (31 Minimum  Syittm  I/I Rtducdon R«quir«d

                                 Syetam t/j_Rtd>jctlon Achltvad
tncr«o
crtos*
                                                                           High Day   High Woek   High Me

-------
                        TABLE 3-1

                  SSES  FLOW SUMMARY (1)
          SSES Infiltration
SSES Inflow
Community
Bell Buckle, TN
Grifton, NC (3)
Winterville, NC
(3)
Ayden, NC (3)
Mt. Holly, PA
Castle Rock, WA
Central ia, WA
Dunsmuir, CA
Will its, CA
5 he! ton, WA
New Bufflao, MA
Amity, PA
Sussex, WI
Conyngham, PA
.Mason, MI
Vercennes, VT
Salem, NH
Cor t land, MY
Notes: 1. All
Before
Rehab
0.466
0.013
0.032
0.099
1.241
0.847
4.1
6.7
1 .0
4.41
0.240
0.320
0.989
0.564
0.3
0.584(
0.55
11.0
flows in
2. Method used
ill
FM
TV
TV
TV
PM
TV
FM
FM
?M
FM
TV
FM
TV
FM
PR
4 ) FM
FM
PM
itigd.
Estimated Before
After Rehab (2)
0.140
0.004
0.010
0.030
0.491
0.123
1.33
0.071
0.538
1.26
0.036
0.048
0.060
0.045
N/A
0.124(4)
0.140
6.8

to quantify flow:
0.082
0.122
0.128
0.391
0.016
0.155
0.5
1.2
0.25
0.1
0.060
0.450
0.015
2.315
2-3
0.584(4)
0.1
0.5

TV«Televised
RS
RS
RS
RS
RS
RS
PR
RS
RS
RS
RS
PM
RS
FM
PR
FM
RS
RS

Estimat
After
0.018
0.012
0.013
0.040
0.016
0.062
0.5
0
0.15
0.1
0.00$'
Q.06II
O.Olfi
0.18'J
o
0.124(4)
0.1
0.2

Inspection, FM»
    Flow Measurement, PR-Plant Flow Record Analysis, RS»Rainfall
    Simulation.

3.   Only p*rt of system studied in SSES.

4,.   SSES figures for total I/I only.

-------
INFLOW REMOVAL

Wet weather flows to treatment plants have not been reduced
to the extent predicted following sewer line rehabilitation.
Differentiation between infiltration and inflow to determine
the quantity of each is an inexact exercise.  Thus, the
findings of this study simply state that wet weather I/I
flows have not been effectively reduced*

METHODOLOGY

The major elements of the I/I methodology are imprecise.
Each of the elements, namely flow monitoring, flow estimat-
ing, assumed flow reductions after rehabilitation and cost
effectiveness can live erroneous results.  Thelow«r right
portion of Figure 3-1 through 3-16 illustrates the amount
of I/I that should have been removed cost effectively versuv
the actual removals.
                             4*

-------
                       CHAPTER 4

                    EECOMMENDATIONS
General

The findings of this study indicate that Sewer System Evalua-
tion and Rehabilitation generally does not result in substantial
system I/I  flow reductions.  The consequence of this is that
returning I/I has used up all or substantial portions of the
reserve capacity of new and upgraded treatment facilities and
thus, shortened the plants' design lives.

I/I is not  going to be removed by ignoring it.  Thus, it it
essential that it be evaluated in order that sewerage- *orks
can be designed and operated effectively.

In order to improve the effectiveness of Sewer System Evalua-
tion and Rehabilitation it is necessary to make substantive
changes in  technical procedures utilized in evaluating I/I.
These technical procedure changes must incorporate new devel-
opments and the most recent state-of-the-art technology.

The recommendations for improving the I/I Program and detailed
technical procedures for accomplishing this will be presented
in a separated document.  This document will be prepared in
accordance  with the Scope of Work under this Contract.
                      3-7,

-------
                  Reproduced by NTIS
•oES>
 00 >?
 2.    o o
 0    o 0)
4- 0 0) 0
— 21 +- +*
M- a1"1"
s
        .
   0 3 £
 0) O OS
 ajS>c
 j Q.O)n
 0£.So
   TJ
 0 o " (0
T3 C ® C
 " 3T3 E
Zo«c
^m \J ,mm tmt
                  National Technical Information Service
                  Springfield, VA 22161
                          TViis report was printed specifically for your order
                        from nearly 3 million titles available in our collection.
                  For economy and efficiency, NTIS does not maintain stock of its vast
                  collection of technical reports.  Rather, most documents are printed for
                  each order.  Documents that are not in electronic format are reproduced
                  from master archival copies and are the  best possible reproductions
                  available. If you have any questions  concerning this document or any
                  order you have placed with NTIS, please call our Customer Service
                  Department at (703) 487-4660.

                  About NTIS
                  NTIS collects  scientific,  technical, engineering, and business related
                  information — then  organizes,  maintains,  and   disseminates  that
                  information in a variety of formats — from microfiche to online services.
                  The NTIS collection of nearly 3 million titles includes reports describing
                  research  conducted  or sponsored   by  federal  agencies  and  their
                  contractors;   statistical  and  business   information;   U.S.   military
                  publications; audiovisual products;  computer software and electronic
                  databases developed by federal agencies; training tools; and technical
                  reports  prepared by research organizations worldwide. Approximately
                  100,000 new titles are  added and  indexed  into  the  NTIS  collection
                  annually.
                      For more information about NTIS products and services, call NTIS
                      at (703) 487-4650 and request the free NTIS Catalog of Products
                           and Services, PR-827LPG, or visit the NTIS Web site
                                        http://www.ntis.gov.
                                              NTIS
                        Your indispensable resource for government-sponsored
                                  information	U.S. and worldwide

-------

-------

-------
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE
Form Approved
OMB WO: 0704-01 68
Public reporting burden for this collection of Information is estimated to.avtrsge 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing Instructions, searching existing data sources
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information, Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
rnllK*inn n» infomwtbu. i»-i. »*-- —~-~"~-" 'Or reguclflQ this burden, to Washington Headquarters Service), Directorate For Information Operations and Reports, tin Jefferson
III III! II Illlll II III II III III t302'>^tothe0fficeo'Mana9em'ntdrd8ud^tt'p3^workR^grtionproiM(0704^188''Wavhin9ton.D{: 20503.
Ill Illl II Illlll I ill I Hill I'llll :) 2. REPORT DATE 1 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED
PB95-207213 F*b / • .
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
9. SPONSORING/ MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
OP-pfcfc c>r woifef' .
i}0i M Sf.-f5W
JAJasliJnAfw , DC a snrf others involved in the Construction Grants Program \
E ^L™ increasinalv concerned about the extensive tlroe
Thf Project has b4tn funded by EPA Headquarter* Office of
Wate? ?roorams, Municipal Construction DivisxorLand xs in- ^
tended as"an vinhouse" report. ? _ ,',..- '
14, SUBJECT TERMS fti / . . i - "Vp
IS. NUMBER OF PAGES
fcSk
16. PRICE CODE
17, SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20, LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT
NSN 7540-0 1'280-S500 Standard form 298 (Rev 2-P'y)
PreWbed by ANSI Sid Zj'J-IS

-------