Editor’s Office and Advertiser Information: Florida Water Resources Journal 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive Clermont, FL 34711 Phone: 352-241-6006 • Fax: 352-241-6007 Email: Editorial, email@example.com Display and Classified Advertising, firstname.lastname@example.org
P.O. Box 653, Venice, FL 34284-0653 Web: http://www.fwrj.com General Manager: Editor: Graphic Design Manager: Mailing Coordinator:
Michael Delaney Rick Harmon Patrick Delaney Buena Vista Publishing
Published by BUENA VISTA PUBLISHING for Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc. President: Richard Anderson (FSAWWA) Peace River/Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Vice President: Jamey Wallace (FWEA) Jacobs Treasurer: Rim Bishop (FWPCOA) Seacoast Utility Authority Secretary: Holly Hanson (At Large) ILEX Services Inc., Orlando
Moving? The Post Office will not forward your magazine. Do not count on getting the Journal unless you notify us directly of address changes by the 15th of the month preceding the month of issue. Please do not telephone address changes. Email changes to email@example.com, fax to 352-241-6007, or mail to Florida Water Resources Journal, 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711
Membership Questions FSAWWA: Casey Cumiskey – 407-979-4806 or firstname.lastname@example.org FWEA: Karen Wallace, Executive Manager – 407-574-3318 FWPCOA: Darin Bishop – 561-840-0340
Training Questions FSAWWA: Donna Metherall – 407-979-4805 or email@example.com FWPCOA: Shirley Reaves – 321-383-9690
For Other Information DEP Operator Certification: Ron McCulley – 850-245-7500 FSAWWA: Peggy Guingona – 407-979-4820 Florida Water Resources Conference: 407-363-7751 FWPCOA Operators Helping Operators: John Lang – 772-559-0722, e-mail – firstname.lastname@example.org FWEA: Karen Wallace, Executive Manager – 407-574-3318
Websites Florida Water Resources Journal: www.fwrj.com FWPCOA: www.fwpcoa.org FSAWWA: www.fsawwa.org FWEA: www.fwea.org and www.fweauc.org Florida Water Resources Conference: www.fwrc.org Throughout this issue trademark names are used. Rather than place a trademark symbol in every occurrence of a trademarked name, we state we are using the names only in an editorial fashion, and to the benefit of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the trademark. None of the material in this publication necessarily reflects the opinions of the sponsoring organizations. All correspondence received is the property of the Florida Water Resources Journal and is subject to editing. Names are withheld in published letters only for extraordinary reasons. Authors agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Florida Water Resources Journal Inc. (FWRJ), its officers, affiliates, directors, advisors, members, representatives, and agents from any and all losses, expenses, third-party claims, liability, damages and costs (including, but not limited to, attorneys’ fees) arising from authors’ infringement of any intellectual property, copyright or trademark, or other right of any person, as applicable under the laws of the State of Florida.
News and Features
4 Coronavirus in Biosolids: Monitoring the Risks 18 Making Lemonade Out of Lemons—Debbie Bradshaw and Yvonne Picard 40 Contractors Roundup: Developing Partnerships and Timely Communication Among Clients, Contractors, and Designers—Courtney Dantone 41 News Beat 48 National Survey Shows High Confidence in Tap Water, Lower Satisfaction Among African-American, Hispanic Respondents 51 WEF Selects 2020 Fellows for Contributions to Water Profession
30 FWEA Focus—James J. Wallace 32 FWEA Committee Corner: FWEA Student Design Competition Recap—David Hernandez 33 Test Yourself—Donna Kaluzniak 34 C Factor—Kenneth Enlow 36 FWRJ Committee Profile: Full STEA+M Ahead Robot Challenge for Youth Education Group—Jacqueline W. Torbert 38 FSAWWA Speaking Out—Kim Kowalski
47 New Products 51 Classifieds 53 Display Advertiser Index
6 Preparing for the Lead and Copper Rule Long-Term Revisions—Becki Rosenfeldt, Roger Arnold, and Christine Owen 23 Carbon Dioxide Treatment Revives Wellfield Performance in Collier County—Kirk Martin, Andrew McThenia, Pamela Libby, and Joshua Bauer 42 Biochar-Amended Modified Bioretention Systems for Livestock Runoff Nutrient Management—Md Yeasir Arif Rahman, Nicholas Truong, Sarina J. Ergas, and Mahmood H. Nachabe
Education and Training
11 AWWA Water Equation Online Auction 12 AWWA Florida Section Regional Sponsors 13 FSAWWA Fall Conference Overview 14 FSAWWA Fall Conference Competitions 15 FSAWWA Water Distribution System Awards 16 FSAWWA Conservation Awards for Excellence 17 FSAWWA Florida Water Landmark Award 21 CEU Challenge 22 FWPCOA Online Institute 43 TREEO Center Training 50 FWPCOA Training Calendar
20 Legal Briefs: “Middle Instances” of the Clean Water Act: Indirect Discharges Need NPDES Permits Too...Sometimes—Kyle Robisch
ON THE COVER: Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Treatment Facility. The authority has taken a proactive approach to corrosion control and has begun preparing for the proposed Lead and Copper Rule revisions. For more information, see the article that starts on page 6. (photo: Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority)
September 2020 Number 9
Florida Water Resources Journal, USPS 069-770, ISSN 0896-1794, is published monthly by Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc., 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711, on behalf of the Florida Water & Pollution Control Operator’s Association, Inc.; Florida Section, American Water Works Association; and the Florida Water Environment Association. Members of all three associations receive the publication as a service of their association; $6 of membership dues support the Journal. Subscriptions are otherwise available within the U.S. for $24 per year. Periodicals postage paid at Clermont, FL and additional offices.
POSTMASTER: send address changes to Florida Water Resources Journal, 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
Coronavirus in Biosolids: Monitoring the Risks Most of the water and wastewater industry has at this point seen the stories about tracking COVID-19 in sewage, but what happens to the virus in wastewater and biosolids? And what happens when it finds its way into the environment? These are questions Michigan Technological University researchers are trying to answer. Unlike many viruses, SARS-CoV-2, which causes the disease COVID-19, is not eliminated in the human gastrointestinal tract. So, when people infected with the virus—whether they have noticeable symptoms or not—have a bowel movement, the live virus in their feces enters the wastewater stream.
Tracking the Virus Researchers at the university want to track the fate of SARS-CoV-2 based on past work monitoring and treating other viruses, bacteria, and parasitic worms in the solids produced during wastewater treatment. “We’re not just interested in seeing if the virus is in the wastewater—it undoubtedly will be. We want to know what happens to the virus in wastewater and biosolids,” says Jennifer Becker, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at the university. Current biosolids production methods are effective at reducing even the hardiest disease-causing organisms historically found in wastewater; however, the SARS-CoV-2 virus clearly doesn’t always behave in expected ways. “We want to make sure that the SARSCoV-2 virus particles are no longer infectious
when we spread biosolids,” Becker says. “If any of the virus particles stay in the wastewater stream during treatment, what happens when wastewater is discharged to the environment? We know almost nothing about the answer to this question right now.” Becker works with Eric Seagren, professor of civil and environmental engineering; Ebenezer Tumban, associate professor of biological sciences; and Daisuke Minakata, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering. The team received seed funding from the university’s college of engineering to put together a research proposal to track SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater in partnership with local wastewater treatment facilities. The tests that are used to look for the virus in wastewater samples are similar to clinical tests used on humans. A positive wastewater test could be used by municipal wastewater managers as an early monitoring tool in communities that have not yet seen other evidence of the virus. “People can be asymptomatic but are shedding the virus in their stool,” Becker says. “For several years, Dr. Seagren and I have been doing research looking at the fate of pathogens in wastewater treatment biosolids.” Becker believes the research team will find coronavirus particles in the biosolids, but that the virus will be inactivated and unable to cause disease in a relatively short time after being spread in the environment. To test this theory, the research team has proposed spiking biosolids with another virus that shares many properties with SARS-CoV-2, but does not cause serious illness in humans.
4 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
By exposing the biosolids to different combinations of temperature, sunlight, and moisture, and by measuring the levels of this other virus in the biosolids over time, the researchers should be able to predict the survival of the coronavirus under a wide range of conditions.
Next Steps Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards for wastewater and biosolids treatment are rigorous and the measures for managing biosolids land application are protective of human health, the university research team does not want to take it for granted that conventional wastewater treatment systems are removing SARS-CoV-2. “We want to verify that the human coronavirus is being adequately inactivated,” Becker says. She also observed that previous work with Seagren, which involved spiking biosolids with a human poliovirus strain that is used in live vaccines and thus does not cause polio illness, showed that human poliovirus goes away much more quickly than other pathogens found in, or spiked into, biosolids, especially the eggs of parasitic worms. “We have a lot of experience with monitoring pathogens in wastewater and wastewater solids,” Becker says. “We look forward to applying this experience to monitoring for human coronavirus to aid wastewater managers and use wastewater treatment plants as a COVID-19 surveillance tool.”
Ready To Ship
SUBMERSIBLE WASTEWATER PUMPS & CONTROLS Assembled, Tested & Ready For Your Application Grundfos and our partners want to ensure you have what you need to continue facilitating and delivering essential water services. We have a large inventory of in stock SE/SL submersible wastewater pumps, LC controls, SEG grinders and competitor guide rail brackets that are ready for immediate shipping.
SE/SL Pumps High performing, efficient and easy to maintain submersible wastewater pumps
Competitor Guide Rail Brackets Are Available For EASY RETROFITS
SEG Grinders Designed for pumping effluent and untreated sewage in small communities or sparsely populated areas.
LC Controls Offer comprehensive features for control and monitoring of pumps in wastewater applications.
Should you require products or support while we face the COVID-19 crisis, Grundfos and our partners here for you. For product questions, or to request immediate shipping, contact your Authorized Grundfos Distributor.
Grundfos Americas Brookshire, TX 77423
F. J. NUGENT & ASSOCIATES INC. Central Florida: 407-936-1139 Florida Keys: 407-474-0026 South West Florida: 239-224-8422 nugentco.com
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ September 2020
F W R J
Preparing for the Lead and Copper Rule Long-Term Revisions Becki Rosenfeldt, Roger Arnold, and Christine Owen
he Lead and Copper Rule (LCR), established in 1991, requires utilities to monitor and control lead and copper levels in drinking water. The proposed LCR long-term revisions (LTR) released in 2019 propose sweeping changes to many aspects of the rule, constituting the first major update to the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations in more than a decade, which will impact every water system in the United States. A number of regulatory changes within the proposed revisions have a deadline of three years for compliance, and with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) committing to publication of the final LCR revisions in September/October 2020, utilities have begun taking proactive steps toward meeting these proposed requirements. The revisions will significantly alter how utilities implement corrosion control treatment, conduct compliance sampling, manage lead service lines (LSL), and communicate with customers. Understanding the implications of these revisions will allow utilities to plan for continued compliance, and an online interactive tool has been developed to help utilities proactively prepare (https:// www.hazenandsawyer.com/infographics/leadcopper-rule-revisions/).
Lead and Copper Tap Sampling Prioritizes Lead Service Lines The proposed LCR revisions redefine compliance site selection criteria and place a priority on sampling from sites with the highest potential for lead release—those containing LSL. Water systems will need to reevaluate their LCR sample site selection to determine if compliance monitoring locations comply with the proposed tier requirements (Figure 1). Special Sampling Requirements The LCR revisions also introduce additional sampling requirements. This proposed regulatory change will require utilities to adopt new protocols for evaluating and mitigating lead release on a site-specific basis (i.e., “find-and-fix”), increasing utility coordination and communication with customers. Utilities will also be required to sample from schools and childcare facilities, where high-risk populations, including children, are present. To meet this requirement, utilities will need to develop a sampling plan for these high-risk locations and develop procedures to communicate both the sampling results and potential actions the locations can take to reduce lead in drinking water.
Figure 1. Proposed Tier Requirements
6 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Becki Rosenfeldt, P.E., is an associate, and Roger Arnold, P.E., is an associate, with Hazen and Sawyer in Richmond, Va. Christine Owen is director of drinking water and reuse innovations with Hazen and Sawyer in Tampa.
Trigger-Level Changes Further Protect Public Health In addition to the current maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) of zero, and an action level (AL) of 15 parts per bil (ppb) for lead, the revised LCR aims to strengthen corrosion control treatment and further protect public health by establishing a new trigger level (TL) of 10 ppb. Revisions to the LCR define a tiered response of required actions based on the level of exceedance (TL and AL). Approximately 10 percent of systems that participated in a 2019 corrosion control treatment survey (Figure 2) reported historical 90th percentile lead levels between 10 and 15 ppb and would be affected by the proposed TL (Arnold, Rosenfeldt et al., 2020).
Corrosion Control Treatment Becomes High Priority According to the proposed revisions, utilities will be required to conduct a corrosion control study if either the lead TL or AL is exceeded. Utilities may also be required to conduct a corrosion control study prior to a source water or treatment change, or if EPA or a state regulatory agency deems the utility’s current corrosion control treatment not optimal. Based on the new requirements of the proposed LCR revisions, the number of systems needing to evaluate corrosion control treatment is expected to increase substantially. Nearly 20 percent of systems that currently meet the AL could exceed the TL and require a corrosion control study. When corrosion control testing is required, the proposed LCR revisions require the use of pipe loops for evaluating various corrosion control techniques (coupon testing is no longer an acceptable test method). Continued on page 8
All trademarks are owned by Lakeside Equipment Corporation. © 2020 Lakeside Equipment Corporation.
NO LOWER BEARINGS, SPROCKETS, BUSHINGS OR GUIDES. NO PROBLEMS! Capture more debris with no fouling or jamming. Lakeside’s Raptor® FalconRake® Bar Screen features a trouble-free stainless steel chain link design and multiple rake heads to achieve continuous, highly efficient solids removal with low headloss. The energy saving drive system operates at variable speeds to ensure superior cleaning, and is easily accessible above the water surface. And, as with everything Lakeside manufactures, our heavy-duty design and all stainless steel construction is made to last even in the most severe conditions. Protect your downstream equipment with the Raptor FalconRake Bar Screen, Lakeside’s proven, durable and cost-effective screen technology for rapid debris removal in municipal and industrial applications.
REPRESENTED LOCALLY BY:
Trippensee Shaw, Inc. Eustis and Sebring, FL www.TrippenseeShaw.com T. 863.382.2101
Cleaner Water for a Brighter Future®
Florida Panhandle Only T: 205.424.7570 www.eshelmancompany.com
Speak to one of our experts at 630.837.5640, email us at email@example.com or visit lakeside-equipment.com for more product information.
Raptor® Screening Products Fine Screen Micro Strainer Rotating Drum Screen Septage Acceptance Plant Septage Complete Plant Complete Plant Multi-Rake Bar Screen FalconRake® Bar Screen Rotary Strainer Screen Wash Press
Continued from page 6 This form of testing is more labor- and time-intensive, and utilities will need to plan accordingly. Systems will also be required to evaluate specific orthophosphate doses (1 mg/L and 3 mg/L) as orthophosphate (PO4), which is expected to push systems to use higher PO4 doses than historical norms. Many utilities are now taking proactive steps toward compliance with the LCR revisions by evaluating and optimizing their current corrosion control strategies (Figure 3). A phased approach to this may include a desktop evaluation, scale analysis of harvested LSL, immersion testing for screening alternatives, and pipe loop studies.
Developing Lead ServiceLine Inventories Figure 2. Corrosion Control Treatment Survey Results
Desktop Evaluation Historical and compliance data analysis
Scale Analysis Recommended for utilities with LSLs
Recirculating Pipe Loop
Phased Approach to Corrosion Control Evaluation Study
Figure 3. Corrosion Control Strategies
Figure 4. Distribution System Service-Line Inventory
8 September 2020 â€˘ Florida Water Resources Journal
Flow-Through Pipe Loop
When present, LSL are typically the primary source of lead in drinking water. The first step in understanding and addressing LSL risks is to determine their locations in the system. The proposed LCR revisions require all water systems to develop a publicly available inventory of all publicly and privately owned service lines in the distribution system (Figure 4), which must be submitted within three years. For large systems, the service-line inventory must be posted to a publicly available website in electronic format (interactive maps are recommended due to ease of use for customers). Systems will be required to submit annual notification letters to all customers with LSL, or service lines of unknown material. While many systems have unknown serviceline materials (often historically assumed to be nonlead), the LCR revisions will require such materials to presumptively be lead. By improving the accuracy of the inventory to reduce unknown materials, the burden of regulatory requirements associated with LSL notifications and required LSL replacement can be alleviated. To prepare for inventory development, systems can review historical records about local LSL use and analyze property data to identify portions of the system more likely to contain LSL. Utilities with paper records of service-line installation dates or materials should review or digitize these records. While the LCR revisions do not explicitly require service-line identification, utilities may benefit from developing procedures for this identification in the field. As unknown service lines will be presumed to be LSL for compliance purposes, utilities will need strategies to systematically identify service lines to reduce the number of unknowns in the system over time.
Expansion of Lead Service-Line Replacement The proposed LCR revisions aim to accelerate the removal of sources of lead in drinking water by expanding full LSL replacement (LSLR) requirements and mitigating the potential for lead exposure during the replacement process. Systems with unknown or LSL will be required to develop a LSLR plan to establish how a utility intends to perform LSLR within the system, for voluntary or mandatory replacements, in response to a TL or AL exceedance. The LCR revisions require utilities to establish a goal rate for LSLR and identify methods that they will use to fund the replacements as part of the LSLR plan. Systems exceeding the TL or AL at the 90th percentile will be required to replace full LSL, including privately owned portions, at a specified rate. In this scenario, partial LSL replacements do not count toward replacement-rate requirements, and customer coordination is critical to encourage customer acceptance of private LSLR. Annual notifications to customers with LSL may also increase the number of private LSLR. When notified of a private LSLR, the water system has 45 days to replace the public LSL.
Forward-Thinking Utilities Can Proactively Prepare The revisions will significantly expand utility responsibilities associated with privately owned infrastructure issues through the proposed â€œfind-and-fixâ€? provisions, private service-line inventory, and full LSLR requirements. They will also further expand public outreach and education needs through more-frequent customer contact and annual service-line notification letters. The revisions will drive a major change in the ways that utilities communicate and coordinate with customers about lead in drinking water. Utilities can proactively prepare for continued compliance by assessing TL impact; evaluating corrosion control treatment; developing a framework for service-line tracking, identification, and replacement; and identifying communication strategies (Figure 5).
Case Study: Proactive Corrosion Control Treatment Evaluation of Blended Waters
for the southwest coast of Florida, Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority (PRMRWSA) provides treated surface water to over 900,000 customers, including several local governments (Figure 6). In some cases, the water supplied to these governments may be blended with local groundwater resources. Understanding the challenges in maintaining stable water quality and controlling corrosion in regions where blending occurs, PRMRWSA has taken a proactive approach to corrosion control and has begun preparing for the proposed LCR revisions. In 2019, PRMRWSA initiated an update of its regional water supply plan, which includes identification of new water supply sources and pipeline projects that will expand the regional transmission system. New water sources and input locations would require a review of corrosion control, and to prepare for the extensive LCR revisions proposed in November 2019, PRMRWSA has taken a proactive approach looking at the future needs of the region. The first step in this evaluation identified the current performance of the lead and copper corrosion control within each customer system and then compared the compatibility of each strategy to neighboring member governments, where the opportunity to exchange water existed. The evaluation also considered impacts of implementing a regional corrosion control strategy to understand the costs and benefits of a unified strategy across the PRMRWSA region. All PRMRWSA member governments
have consistently met the 90th percentile LCR AL. Historical 90th percentile lead levels within the system range between 0.7 and 6 ppb, and historical 90th percentile copper levels range between 0.04 and 0.51 mg/L. The PRMRWSA region is expected to need additional water supply to meet future demands. In areas where the water sources are mixed, there is an opportunity for different corrosion control strategies to interact, which could present challenges in meeting the lead and copper requirements. Some of the concerns and issues that may arise when blending differing corrosion control strategies are: S Differing pH regimes that are not optimal for the corrosion inhibitor in use. S Mixing of different inhibitor chemicals in an interface zone. S V ariability of water quality conditions. Fluctuations in water quality can cause existing legacy scales within pipes to become unstable and result in a substantial release of lead and copper into drinking water. Although lead and copper levels have historically been below AL, as blending zones expand with rising future water usage and alternate water sources, distribution system blending patterns have the potential to affect corrosion control, driving the need for a unified regional corrosion control strategy. As a part of its planning effort and proactive philosophy, PRMRWSA investigated strategies to address blending concerns, including the implementation of a general Continued on page 10
Assess possible impacts of proposed Trigger Level.
Corrosion control treatment evaluation.
Develop framework for LSL tracking and identification
Initiate generation LSL Repacement Plan
Identify Customer Communication Stategy
Historical compliance data analysis
Compare existing CCT with USEPA recommended CCT (2016 Guidance Manual)
Identify available service line information and develop strategy to identify unknown service materials
Identify strategies for funding and customer coordination.
Develop framework for rapid sample result notification and customer communication
Proactively Preparing for LCR-LTR Compliance Figure 5. Preparing for Lead and Copper Rule Compliance
As the regional wholesale water supplier
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ September 2020
Continued from page 9 regional corrosion control strategy across all member governments, in lieu of the current practice of individual strategies practiced by each utility. There are two generalized options for a regional strategy, including: S Adjustment of the pH and/or alkalinity/ dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC). S Corrosion inhibitor chemical addition, which generally requires target pH ranges for optimization, so it may include pH control chemicals. A unified regional strategy would eliminate mixing zone concerns and address potential issues with corrosion control strategy compatibilities. Additionally, this approach could present some shared-cost opportunities for chemical purchases, although it may require operational changes by some utilities for parameters (such as pH) to maintain compatibility, depending on the corrosion control strategy selected. Currently, because the current corrosion control strategies have been effective, all the member governments are eligible for reduced triennial monitoring. If a new corrosion control strategy were implemented, state and federal rules may require the utilities to resume standard LCR compliance monitoring, which would increase the frequency and number of samples required for compliance sampling, as well as reporting requirements for each utility. Implementing an optimal corrosion control treatment strategy, however, may reduce the potential for a TL exceedance under the LCR revisions that would also trigger annual standard monitoring. As PRMRWSA (and its member
governments) are currently in compliance with LCR requirements, its staff is monitoring both anticipated future water requirements and the proposed LCR revisions before recommending wholesale changes in regional corrosion control strategy. This approach is prudent, as it would minimize increases in compliance sampling by changing the corrosion control strategy in conjunction with the LCR revision implementation timetable. Additional Impacts of Proposed Revisions The LCR revisions are intended to improve the effectiveness of corrosion control and reduce exposure to lead. Based on the proposed changes, systems will need to implement lead sampling in all schools and childcare facilities. As proposed, the LCR revisions specify changes to water quality parameter (WQP) monitoring requirements, and sampling locations that would now include point of connection (POC). With sampling required at the POC, the evaluation of compatibility and blending of different control strategies within the PRMRWSA system will be important. Future water needs in the region will lead to different source contributions to each system and may lead to future water quality requirements that could drive treatment changes at both the Peace River facility and at individual member government facilities. Should the proposed language for the LCR revisions remain largely unchanged, there are opportunities for substantial impacts to PRMRWSA and its member governments. Under the LCR revisions, sample site locations for both the wholesale supplier and the member governments may change. Changing sample locations will pose additional
challenges for water utilities, including finding willing and able participants. If triggered by the new levels, the regional water systems will be required to evaluate specific orthophosphate doses of 1 mg/L and 3 mg/L as PO4. Calcium hardness adjustment would no longer be an acceptable corrosion control treatment strategy, which essentially curtails the use of the Langelier Stability Index (LSI) as a corrosion control technique in many Florida systems. Because most of the population growth in Florida has occurred in very recent decades, and mostly in subdivisions, LSL are not commonly found in these newer water systems. Nonetheless, development of a service-line inventory documenting publicly and privately owned service-line materials will be required.
Conclusion The LCR revisions are expected to have significant impacts on systems throughout Florida and across the U.S. The PRMRWSA provides an example of proactive planning for long-term corrosion control strategies, which can be especially complex in situations with multiple water sources, interconnected systems, and distribution system blending of different water quality conditions. Changes to tap sample site selection and sampling procedures increase the risk of lead levels exceeding the proposed TL. Many systems may benefit from a proactive corrosion control evaluation to understand potential TL impacts and develop strategies to reduce the risk of a TL exceedance. The extent of regulatory impacts will depend significantly on the presence of lead service lines or unknown service-line materials, which places a greater regulatory burden on utilities; however, it’s anticipated that all systems will need to develop a serviceline inventory and begin tracking serviceline materials—a new paradigm under the proposed rule. Despite the anticipated regulatory impacts on utilities and state regulatory agencies, working deliberately toward compliance with the LCR revisions will further minimize lead and copper levels in drinking water and promote public health.
Figure 6. Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Treatment Facility
10 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
• A rnold, R.; Rosenfeldt, B.; Rhoades, J.; Owen, C.; Becker, W. “Evolving Utility Practices and Experiences with Corrosion Control: Results from a U.S. Survey.” Journal AWWA. 2020.
JOIN THE FLORIDA AWWA SECTION IN WE BID!
September 20 - September 24, 2020 Your FSAWWA Region could win bragging rights by contributing one item to the online auction to benefit AWWA Water Equation! Select an item to contribute that is specific to your Region. Support your community through gift certificates! Support the water industry with your auction item! Collect a local online auction item, write a description, & take a photo Determine the minimum bid and Buy Now pricing Submit to Peggy@fsawwa.org by September 4, 2020 Help to promote WEBid! on social media Mail/email the item to the donor Bragging rights in the Florida Section AWWA!
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
The Roy Likins Scholarship Fund
The FSAWWA Fall Conference brings together utilities, consultants, manufacturers, regulators, and students. Register and learn from the industry’s best through technical session, workshops, and exhibits. Network with water industry professionals. Over 160 exhibitors will give you first-hand information on the latest developments to help your utility take actions to implement Florida’s future.
Exhibitor Registration: Registration is NOW OPEN www.fsawwa.org/2020exhibits
Attendee Registration: Starts August 3, 2020 fsawwa.org/2020fallregistration
For more information: fsawwa.org/2020fallconference Hotel Accommodations: fsawwa.org/2020hotel Host hotel is Omni Orlando Resort at ChampionsGate.
• Potable Reuse • Improving our Piping Systems • Innovations in Water Treatment • Role of Membranes for the Future • Tools for Assessing our Assets • Financing the Future • Water Systems Resilience • Water Conservation Conference Highlights
• BBQ Challenge &
Incoming Chair’s Reception
CHEER for Meter Madness!
Prep for HYDRANT Hysteria!
Let loose at the RODEO!
Join the Tapping FUN!
• Operator Events:
Meter Madness Backhoe Rodeo Hydrant Hysteria Tapping Competition
• Young Professionals Events:
Luncheon Water Bowl Fresh Ideas Poster Session
• Water for People’s Fundraising Events: Duck Race Exhibitor’s Raffle Fundraiser
Events Poker Tournament Monday, November 30, 2020 Starts at 9:00 pm
November 29 to December 3, 2020 Omni Orlando Resort at ChampionsGate
Golf Tournament Thursday, December 3, 2020 8:00 am Shotgun start
Tuesday & Wednesday | December 1-2, 2020
Join the Competition
fsawwa.org/2020fallconference FSAWWA hosts fun and lively competitions between municipalities to find the most skilled person or team in the Meter Madness, Tapping, and Back Hoe Rodeo contests. Please join us as a spectator or visit our website to download the application to complete.
Let loose at the RODEO!
Back Hoe Rodeo: Tuesday | 10:00 am - 12:00 pm
Backhoe operators show off their expertise by executing several challenging lifts and drops of various objects in the fastest time.
Tapping Contests: Tuesday | 11:00 am - 2:30 pm
Join the Tapping FUN!
In a contest of skill and dexterity as well as speed, teams of four compete for the fastest time while they perform a quality drill and tap of pipe under available pressure. Penalties are assessed in seconds for infractions of rules such as leaking connections or safety violations. Only two taps are allowed per team. Ductile Iron Tap: 11:00 am - 12:00 pm Fun Tap: 1:00 - 2:30 pm
Meter Madness: Tuesday | 4:00 - 5:00 pm
CHEER for Meter Madness!
Contestants are challenged to put together a completely disassembled meter against the clock. To make the contest more interesting, three to six miscellaneous parts are included in the bucket of meter components. Once the meter is assembled, it must operate correctly and not leak.
Hydrant Hysteria: Wednesday | 9:00 - 11:00 am
Hydrant Hysteria is a fast paced two person competition as to who can assembly a fire hydrant quickly, totally, and accurately. Two or more teams go head to head while assembling the hydrant. All parts will be assembled in proper manner and reassembled hydrant shall be tested by the judges for ability to operate correctly.
Prep for HYDRANT Hysteria!
November 29 to December 3, 2020 Omni Orlando Resort at ChampionsGate
Please Contact: Mike George firstname.lastname@example.org (352) 200-9631
2020 Water Distribution System Awards The FSAWWA Water Distribution System Awards are presented to utilities whose outstanding performance during the preceding year deserves special recognition by the section.
The Award Criteria is based upon the following:
Divisions based on the Number of Water Services Division 1 = 1 - 5,999 Division 2 = 6,000 - 12,999 Division 3 = 13,000 - 19,999 Division 4 = 20,000 - 29,999
Division 5 = 30,000 - 45,999
Division 6 = 46,000 - 69,999
Division 7 = 70,000 - 129,999
Division 8 = 130,000+
Emergency Prepardness Cross Connection Control Program Must be an AWWA member (Organizational or Individual) Actively supports the activities of the FSAWWA Demonstrates high standards and integrity The selection committee is under the Manufacturers/Associates Council.
• • •
2019 Winners: Division 1:
Destin Water Users
City of Coral Springs
Bonita Springs Utilities, Inc. Distribution & Collection
Charlotte County Utilities
Collier County Water-Sewer District
Hillsborough County Public Utilities Department
Send applications to: Mike George 10482 Dunkirk Road Spring Hill, FL 34608 email@example.com
Deadline Monday, October 19, 2020
Download the application form:
November 29 to December 3, 2020 Omni Orlando Resort at ChampionsGate
FSAWWA Water Use Efficiency Division
2020 Water Conservation Awards for Excellence
Entries must be submitted by Friday, October 9, 2020 No Entry Fee
This awards program recognizes innovative and outstanding achievements in water efficiency throughout Florida.
Each entry must be for a project or program implemented within the last three years which has not already won this award.
Submittal Requirements: Only Accepting Online Applications This Year! One entry form must be completed for each project or program. Points will be taken off if not all the requirements are met. Application must include the following: . • A short abstract (300 words or less, in Microsoft Word) describing the project or program and how it meets the evaluation criteria
Award Presentation Agencies winning the top two awards (Best in Class and Show of Excellence) for each Award Category / Agency Profile will receive one complimentary ticket to the awards luncheon on December 2 at the FSAWWA Fall Conference.
• Three to ten images representative of the project or program, for possible publication or use in the awards presentation. Suggested format is JPEG.
• Any other supporting information. Award Category:
• Public Education (events, brochures, etc) • Supply Management (water loss, leak detection, etc) • Demand Management (retrofits, evaluations, etc) • Research (pilot projects, rate studies, etc) • Comprehensive Program (combination of projects)
Questions Please Contact: Keeli Carlton Water Use Efficiency Division (WUED) Chair firstname.lastname@example.org
For complete submittal requirements and online application, go to:
November 29 to December 3, 2020 Omni Orlando Resort at ChampionsGate
Florida Water â€œLandmarkâ€? Award Purpose of the Award: To recognize and preserve a Florida Water Landmark at least 50 years old that has had a direct and significant relationship with water supply, treatment, distribution, or technological development. The Florida Section AWWA will also submit a nomination of the Florida Water Landmark awardee to AWWA as an American Water Landmark. The Award: A sturdy bronze plaque to be appropriately mounted on the water landmark. Eligibility for Award: The Florida Water Landmark must be a tangible, physical property that has or has had a direct and significant relationship with water's supply, treatment, distribution, or technological development. It should be of a permanent and nonexpendable nature, such as a building, dam, reservoir, tower, etc., and not machinery or a natural water resource. A water landmark must be at least 50 years old and be recognized within its own community or region as a popular, valued, or historically significant property. (Evidence of this recognition must be provided.) Nomination Process: Fill out the entry form: www.fsawwa.org/waterlandmark Send completed form by email to: Rick Johnson at email@example.com Terri Holcomb at THolcomb@regionalwater.org Peggy Guingona at firstname.lastname@example.org
Making Lemonade Out of Lemons FSAWWA raises more than $30,000 for Water For People despite cancellation of Water Bash Debbie Bradshaw and Yvonne Picard For almost 30 years, Water For People (WFP), a global nonprofit, has helped provide sustainable water and sanitation solutions to communities in low- and middle-income countries. For decades, the Florida Section of the American Water Works Association (FSAWWA) has been supporting the work of WFP by hosting statewide events at conferences and by holding local benefits hosted by FSAWWA regional committees.
Combining Fundraising Events For more than 10 years, FSAWWA Region III has hosted an annual WFP fundraiser in July called Wine For Water. With the announcement that the AWWA Annual Conference and Exposition (ACE20) would be held in Orlando in June 2020, the Region III WFP Committee posed the idea of combining Wine For Water with the WFP fundraiser, Water Bash, which occurs annually in conjunction with ACE. Given that the two events would occur one month apart, both FSAWWA and WFP agreed to combine efforts and focus on Water Bash. Thus, the Water Bash Committee was created, which included FSAWWA members from around the state, Water For People representatives, and national corporate leaders. Through discussions with Wine For Water sponsors and ACE exhibitors, the committee developed a concept of utilizing Water Bash,
not only as a party for WFP supporters, but also as a venue where ACE exhibitors could host their client events. This win-win idea would offer a readymade event to companies (secured venue, catering, drinks, entertainment, etc.), while also increasing the fundraising potential and allowing companies to highlight their support for WFP. Of course, securing a premier venue early was critical for attracting sponsors; therefore, the committee started investigating venues in summer 2019 and reserved space at TopGolf Orlando. In January 2020, a final agreement with TopGolf was secured, which reserved two full floors, including over 60 golf bays, multiple conference rooms, and capacity for over 800 guests The committee developed five sponsorship levels and divided the two floors into 36
18 September 2020 â€˘ Florida Water Resources Journal
sponsorship packages that included golf bays and guest tickets. The fundraising goal was to net a minimum of $80,000 for WFP. To meet that goal, the committee needed to sell 26 sponsorship packages (about 70 percent of the total packages) and 100 individual tickets. By March, in just two short months, more than 50 percent of the sponsorship packages were sold and sponsorship pledges of over $95,000 were secured!
A Pandemic Arrives Then, the coronavirus pandemic hit the United States, and committee efforts were paused. When ACE20 was cancelled in early April, so was Water Bash. At the end of April, New York Times columnist and two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Nicholas Kristof featured Water For People as one of five nonprofit organizations responding to the current crisis and he launched the COVID-19 Impact Initiative to encourage financial support for these organizations. The inclusion of WFP in this initiative brought national recognition to the importance of the work of WFP in providing sustainable access to safe water, hygiene, and sanitation, all of which are crucial in maintaining public health during a pandemic. This article provided a much-needed morale boost and the committee became determined to leverage its momentum and find a way to support WFP. Through regularly scheduled virtual
meetings, the committee began to brainstorm and investigate different ways to create a fun virtual fundraiser. The answer came when the national WFP Mosaic Challenge was announced, which was an online fundraising competition for both professional societies and water-related companies, slated to run in May and June. Utilizing their relationships with Water Bash sponsors, committee members encouraged them to redirect their pledges to the WFP Mosaic Challenge, and four transferred their sponsorship. A $15,500 Water Bash pledge from CDM Smith was changed to an employee-match drive, which generated $35,000 for WFP! The remaining three sponsors, Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC), Wharton-Smith Inc., and Guardian Equipment, combined their funds to create the FSAWWA $10,500 matching fund for the Mosaic Challenge. The FSAWWA members and supporters rose to the challenge and ranked fourth out of 33 on overall donations and ranked second in individual donations. Together, committees and workplace-giving companies raised a collective $367,000 through the WFP Mosaic Challenge!
In retrospect, the committee truly did make “lemonade out of lemons” by continuing to find new ways to fundraise and bring awareness to the world’s water crisis, and also give FSAWWA members a platform to support. Water For People Match Sponsors
Even though Water Bash was cancelled, there are multiple reasons to be proud: S Although the concept of holding client events at the Water Bash was never fully realized, the level of interest by sponsors ($95,000 in sponsorship commitments in two months!) demonstrates that the concept is worth pursuing at future AWWA conferences. S Through early sponsorship recruitment efforts, the committee brought awareness of the work of WFP to vendors and exhibitors that may not have otherwise been as conscious of the vision, mission, or scope of Water For People. S The Water Bash Committee raised $30,140 through virtual fundraising—even during a pandemic!
Many Thanks to Make A huge thank you goes out to all of the many wonderful committee members—there is not enough room here to thank each of them individually. The success, however, would have been limited without the unwavering support of FSAWWA, Georgia David with Water For People, Shane Majetich with Hydromax, and, last but not least, our sponsors. On behalf of Water For People, thank you all for the commitment to bringing clean water and sanitation services to communities around the globe to everyone, forever! Debbie Bradshaw is a retired engineer with Orlando Utilities Commission and Yvonne Picard is a senior project manager at Atkins in Orlando.
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
LEGAL BRIEFS Legal Briefs is back! The Journal is excited to have Kyle Robisch as the new columnist. Kyle is an environmental, regulatory, and business attorney with Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP in Tampa. He assists clients with a wide range of legal issues, including infrastructure development, federal and state environmental permitting, and all manners of litigation (environmental and otherwise). He is especially experienced with the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, and recently chaired the American Bar Association’s Water Resources Committee. Ideas for future column topics can be sent to Kyle at email@example.com.
“Middle Instances” of the Clean Water Act: Indirect Discharges Need NPDES Permits Too…Sometimes
or the past decade or so, the regulated community and federal courts alike grappled with the outer reaches of the Clean Water Act (CWA) point source permitting program. The core of the program—the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)—is clear enough. Under the NPDES program, discharges from point sources to navigable waters (what qualifies as “navigable waters,” i.e., “waters of the United States” presents another thorny question) require a NPDES permit. But what about more attenuated discharges? Say a Hawaiian municipal wastewater facility collects, partially treats, and discharges wastewater into underground injection wells, which, through groundwater connections, carry the effluent roughly 2,500 feet into the Pacific Ocean. Groundwater is generally beyond the NPDES program’s reach; the Pacific Ocean is firmly within it. So, does the wastewater facility need a NPDES permit (because the groundwater conveys the effluent to a navigable water) or not (because the groundwater breaks the regulatory link)? Before April, federal courts around the U.S. would’ve applied different legal analyses—and, by extension, reached different permitting conclusions—to this same factual question. Some said the CWA applied so long as groundwater discharges created a “direct hydrological connection” to navigable waters. Others required permits if the pollutants were “fairly traceable” from the point source to the navigable water. And others still held that discharges to groundwater never required NPDES permits. Practically speaking, this meant federal courts in California, Virginia, and Tennessee all applied different legal rules to the same theoretical discharge, with very real consequences for permittees. Just a few months ago, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved this “circuit split,” but, in many ways, the Court left the regulated community with more questions than answers. The case of County of Maui v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund concerned the question just posed: Does the Hawaiian municipal wastewater facility require a NPDES permit to pump its partially treated effluent into groundwater that hydrologically reaches the Pacific Ocean? Sidestepping the specific question of whether that discharge required a NPDES permit, the Court answered with a resounding “maybe.” Though the Court sent the particular issue back to the lower courts
Celebrating 150 years of providing innovative solutions, dependable responsiveness and a deep commitment to success 100 NORTH TAMPA STREET, SUITE 2200 TAMPA, FL 33602 813.559.5500 bradley.com | ALABAMA | FLORIDA | MISSISSIPPI | NORTH CAROLINA | TENNESSEE | TEXAS | WASHINGTON, D.C. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING. Contact: R. Craig Mayfield, Esq., 813.559.5533, firstname.lastname@example.org, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, 100 North Tampa Street, Suite 2200, Tampa, Florida 33602. ©2020
20 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
for further factual development, it did announce a new rule controlling whether any discharge triggers NPDES point source permitting requirements: The CWA requires NPDES permits “when there is a direct discharge from a point source into navigable waters or when there is the functional equivalent of a direct discharge.” What, then, is “the functional equivalent of a direct discharge?” In a boon to lawyers everywhere, the Court eschewed a bright-line rule. Instead, it crafted a flexible, case-by-case analysis for permitting agencies, permittees, and courts to follow in these “middle instances.” Broadly speaking, the Court said federal permits are necessary if a point source “directly deposits pollutants” into navigable water or “reaches the same result through roughly similar means.” Fortunately, the Court did get more specific: “Time and distance are obviously important.” And, the Court flagged the following nonexhaustive factors: S T ransit time S D istance traveled S Th e nature of the material conveying the discharge S Th e degree of any pollutant dilution or transformation S Th e amount of pollutant ultimately reaching the navigable water relative to the amount initially discharged S Th e manner by or area in which the pollutant enters the navigable waters S Th e degree to which the pollutant, upon reaching navigable waters, retains its “specific identity” That’s a lot to chew on. It leaves us with few firm answers, but the Court did give us some useful guideposts. Most obviously, indirect discharges that reach navigable waters faster (in five minutes, rather than five years) and more directly (in 50 feet, rather than 50 miles) are likelier to require a NPDES permit. In the Court’s eyes, this “time and distance” analysis “will be the most important factors in most cases.” Of course, that’s little comfort for permittees facing the many “middle instance” discharges presenting closer calls. In those situations, permittees should work with their permitting authority (Florida Department of Environmental Protection for most NPDES and groundwater permits) and counsel to assess “functional equivalency.” So, what does this mean for Florida and its water industry? In the short term, Florida municipalities, permittees, and project proponents will all be in “wait and see” mode. Over time, this “middle instance” murkiness should fade away as regulators issue guidance, and courts—including Florida federal and state courts—interpret County of Maui’s guidance. Indeed, we’re already tracking several post-County of Maui bellwether cases, but until then, permittees and project proponents should carefully consider whether indirect discharges—to groundwater, or otherwise—now require state and federal permit coverage. That is especially so in Florida, where most groundwater discharges already required state permits. And, Florida permittees and their regulators should also steel themselves for fresh challenges to existing “middle instance” discharges, which are sure to ensue.
Operators: Take the CEU Challenge! Members of the Florida Water and Pollution Control Operators Association (FWPCOA) may earn continuing education units through the CEU Challenge! Answer the questions published on this page, based on the technical articles in this month’s issue. Circle the letter of each correct answer. There is only one correct answer to each question! Answer 80 percent of the questions on any article correctly to earn 0.1 CEU for your license. Retests are available. This month’s editorial theme is Emerging Issues and Water Resources Management. Look above each set of questions to see if it is for water operators (DW), distribution system operators ( DS), or wastewater operators (WW). Mail the completed page (or a photocopy) to: Florida Environmental Professionals Training, P.O. Box 33119, Palm Beach Gardens, Fla. 33420-3119. Enclose $15 for each set of questions you choose to answer (make checks payable to FWPCOA). You MUST be an FWPCOA member before you can submit your answers!
EARN CEUS BY ANSWERING QUESTIONS FROM PREVIOUS JOURNAL ISSUES! Contact FWPCOA at email@example.com or at 561-840-0340. Articles from past issues can be viewed on the Journal website, www.fwrj.com.
Carbon Dioxide Treatment Revives Wellfield Performance in Collier County Kirk Martin, Andrew McThenia, Pamela Libby, and Joshua Bauer
(Article 1: CEU = 0.1 DS/DW02015370) 1. F low rate (gal per minute [gpm]) divided by drawdown (ft) yields a. p roductivity. b. t ransmissivity. c. s pecific capacity. d. fl ow coefficient. 2. A ________________ test evaluates the condition of the well by measuring well performance at multiple flow rates. a. s urge b. a ccelerated production c. s tep-drawdown d. d evelopment 3. Th e active reagent formed by the introduction of carbon dioxide into water is a. c arbonic acid. b. h ydrochloric acid. c. c arbon dioxide gas. d. s odium hypochlorite. 4. F ollowing carbon dioxide treatment, the process of pumping compressed air into the well through a tremie pipe is referred to as a. r epressurizing. b. s tabilizing. c. r ecarbonation. d. a irlift surging. 5. A (an) ______________ was used to distribute the carbon dioxide/water solution into the raw water stream. a. v aporizer b. e ductor c. i njector d. d iffusing stone
___________________________________ SUBSCRIBER NAME (please print)
Article 1 ____________________________________ LICENSE NUMBER for Which CEUs Should Be Awarded
Article 2 ____________________________________ LICENSE NUMBER for Which CEUs Should Be Awarded
If paying by credit card, fax to (561) 625-4858 providing the following information: ___________________________________ (Credit Card Number)
___________________________________ (Expiration Date)
Preparing for the Lead and Copper Rule Long-Term Revisions Becki Rosenfeldt, Roger Arnold, and Christine Owen (Article 2: CEU = 0.1 DS/DW02015371) 1. U nder the proposed Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) revisions, systems exceeding the trigger level are required to a. replace only utility-owned lead service lines. b. replace all lead service lines, whether publicly or privately owned. c. increase corrosion control chemical dosage. d. implement raw water source changes. 2. W hen corrosion control testing is required under the proposed rule, ____________ must be used. a. pipe coupons b. dissimilar metals c. high-velocity flow rates d. pipe loops 3. Approximately __ percent of systems surveyed in a 2019 corrosion control treatment survey reported historical 90th percentile lead levels between the proposed trigger and action levels. a. 5 b. 10 c. 15 d. 20 4. W hich of the following is not listed as a concern that may arise when blending waters with differing corrosion control strategies? a. Differing inhibitor dosage rates b. Variability of water quality conditions c. Differing pH regimes d. Differing inhibitor chemicals 5. The proposed LCR revisions require which of the following sampling program changes? a. Schools must be included. b. Hospitals must be included. c. The number of sample sites must be increased. d. More sites with copper plumbing and lead core solder must be added. Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
The Florida Water & Pollution Control Operators Association’s
ONLINE TRAINING INSTITUTE
Licensed Florida Treatment Plant & Water Distribution Operators! Get Continuing Education Credits for License Renewal Online! Featu r the F ing CEU C EPT hallen (0.1 ge
CEU p er co urse)
with an average cost of $15 per 0.1 CEU
manual m anual
FW&PCOA Voluntary Certification Courses
Stormwater C Course ..............$260/$290* * Members/Non-Members Includes the course manual and proctored exam.
Wastewater Collection B Course (New!).............$275
Wastewater Collection C Course.........................$275
Includes the course manual and proctored exam.
Includes the course manual and proctored exam.
Training Courses for the Florida Licensing Examination Water Distribution Level 2 System Operator Course.....................$225 (Fee includes a proctored exam)
Water Distribution Level 3 System Operator Course ....................$225 (Fee includes a proctored exam)
Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator Class B Course ....................$300
Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator Class C Course ....................$300 Water Treatment Plant Operator Class B Course.....................$300 Water Treatment Plant Operator Class C Course.....................$300
Enroll Today at http://go.flextraining.com/FLC8518/
For more information on enrollment, contact Program Manager Tim McVeigh at OnlineTraining@fwpcoa.org
F W R J
Carbon Dioxide Treatment Revives Wellfield Performance in Collier County Kirk Martin, Andrew McThenia, Pamela Libby, and Joshua Bauer Kirk Martin, P.G., is president, and Andrew McThenia, P.G., is senior hydrogeologist, with Water Science Associates in Fort Myers. Pamela Libby is water distribution manager, and Joshua Bauer is wellfield manager, with Collier County Public Utilities in Naples.
Figure 1. Aerial map showing wells rehabilitated in the Golden Gate Wellfield.
ollier County (county) produces water from four separate groundwater sources: two that are fresh and two that are brackish. As part of an effort to optimize the utilization of fresh water sources, the county implemented a phased program of well rehabilitation to improve capacity of the Lower Tamiami Aquifer (LTA) wellfield. A unique carbon dioxide (CO2) treatment process was developed for the wellfield that resulted in well yield improvements ranging up to 625 percent. During the initial rehabilitation phase, treatment methods using hydrochloric acid (HCl) and CO2 were compared, with no significant difference in results. Because well rehabilitation using CO2 as the reagent is inherently safer and less expensive than using stronger acids, the use of HCl was removed from subsequent phases of the rehabilitation program. The CO2 method involves an inline diffusion of CO2 into raw feed water from the wellfield transmission system to create carbonic acid. The injected acid solution reacts to dissolve carbonate minerals in the well bore. Upon completion of the injection phase, water flow is reversed by airlifting and agitation to remove water saturated with dissolved carbonate material and any loosened residue from the formation. Wellfield capacity has been increased by close to 10 mil gal per day (mgd) from treatment of 20 LTA production wells. Additional applications of CO2 acidification are being contracted as part of a regular budgeted maintenance program.
Figure 2. Carbon dioxide diffusing stone.
Figure 3. Carbon dioxide diffusion manifold.
Water Science Associates was contracted by Collier County Public Utilities to design and oversee rehabilitation treatments of 20 LTA production wells in the Collier County Golden Gate Wellfield. The treatment techniques included Continued on page 25
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ September 2020
Figure 4. Carbon dioxide injection tanks and raw water main connection.
Figure 5. Acid header assembly at wellhead.
Figure 6. Plots of pumping rates versus drawdown for wells 3, 4, 5, and 6.
Figure 7. Plots of pumping rates versus drawdown for wells 10, 15, 17, and 18.
24 September 2020 â€˘ Florida Water Resources Journal
Figure 8. Plots of pumping rates versus drawdown for wells 19, 20, 21, and 22.
Continued from page 23 injection of either a solution of HCl acid or injection of dissolved CO2 gas. The process was conducted in three phases, with some experimentation applied in the first phase and adaptive lessons learned applied in each subsequent phase. Plans and specifications were prepared, and Wells and Water Systems, a water well contracting firm, was hired to perform the specified work. Figure 1 shows the locations of the treated wells within the Golden Gate Wellfield.
Step-Drawdown Testing Prior to any rehabilitation treatment, a pretreatment step-drawdown test was conducted on each well to establish baseline-specific capacity values. During the initial step-drawdown testing, each well was pumped at three separate and increasing rates for a period of approximately 30 minutes per step. After the completion of acid treatment and development, a post-treatment stepdrawdown test was conducted at approximately
Figure 9. Plots of pumping rates versus drawdown for wells 23, 27, 28, and 29.
the same step rates and step durations as the initial test for comparison purposes. At the end of the post-treatment specific capacity test, an additional rate step was performed at the highest safe capacity of the pump and well. Static water level was measured prior to step-drawdown testing. After the start of pumping, water level readings and flow measurements were taken at five-minute intervals throughout the duration of the test. Existing flow control valves at each well were used to adjust the pumping rate for each step. Specific capacity was calculated by dividing the step flow rate in gal per minute (gpm) by the final drawdown at the end of the step calculated in feet below the static water level.
Carbon Dioxide Treatment Procedures The CO2 was used to treat the wells via diffusion of the CO2 gas through a carbonation stone into a stream of raw feed water, with
the resulting solution of dissolved carbon dioxide injected into the well through a tremie pipe. Once dissolved into the feed water, the formation of carbonic acid provides the acidic reagent needed to dissolve carbonate minerals in the borehole and surrounding formation. The feed water source consisted of raw water from the countyâ€™s pressurized water line connected to the larger wellfield. The food-grade CO2 used in the treatment was delivered to each site in liquid form and transferred from a bulk tanker to fill multiple individual 450-lb capacity tanks onsite. The individual tanks were connected to each other in a series via a vaporizing system of regulated flow lines, which allowed continuous feeding of CO2 though the diffusion stone into an injection manifold, where it was introduced to the raw feed water. The resulting blend was pumped down a tremie pipe set at varying depths, but generally within 20 ft of the bottom of the casing in each well. Continued on page 26
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ September 2020
Continued from page 25 Treatment at each well consisted of injection of 4200 lb of CO2 per well diffused inline into the raw water at a feed ratio of about 10 lb of CO2 per 1,000 gal of water over a period of about 100 hours. A total volume of between 500,000 and 700,000 gal of raw water infused with CO2 was injected into each well at rates that averaged between 60 and 80 gpm, depending on the raw water system pressure and flow. The contractor adjusted the water flow and gas feed rates to maintain the pH of the solution entering the well. The pH was measured downstream from the mixing point immediately prior to injection on an hourly basis and was recorded by the contractor, along with the flow rate. The time required for injection ranged between 100 and 140 hours, depending on the feed pressure from the raw water supply system. Figures 2 through 5 show the CO2 diffusing stone and vaporization manifold system used for injecting CO2 into each well.
Airlift Development and Disinfection
Figure 10. Plots of pumping rates versus drawdown for wells 31, 33, 34, and 35.
Table 1. Specific Capacity Comparison Summary Well No. 3 4 5 6 10 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 27 28 29 31* 33* 34 35
PRETREATMENT Step 3 Drawdown Specific Avg. Flow (ft below Capacity Rate (gpm) static) (gpm/ft) 420 25.8 16.3 452 25.5 17.9 702 18.3 38.4 426 34.6 12.3 346 36.1 9.6 552 9.1 60.8 500 15.5 32.3 750 20.5 36.5 700 15.0 46.8 711 11.8 60.3 399 37.3 10.7 596 18.7 31.9 812 17.4 46.6 637 22.9 27.8 282 37.5 7.5 404 29.8 13.6 549 32.1 17.1 690 21.6 31.9 486 22.0 22.1 783 44.4 17.6
POST-TREATMENT Comparabl Drawdown Specific e Flow (ft below Capacity Rate (gpm) static) (gpm/ft) 416 8.3 50.0 452 6.3 71.3 701 10.2 68.5 425 20.6 20.6 336 11.4 29.5 546 1.5 363.7 509 7.0 73.0 754 12.3 61.4 678 5.6 121.1 706 6.3 112.6 403 13.5 29.9 600 8.6 69.5 815 10.9 74.9 639 11.2 57.0 277 5.1 54.5 402 4.1 98.1 539 5.1 104.9 709 5.1 139.6 507 4.6 109.7 783 8.1 96.2
26 September 2020 â€˘ Florida Water Resources Journal
Percent Improvement 207% 297% 78% 68% 208% 498% 126% 68% 159% 87% 180% 118% 61% 105% 625% 623% 514% 338% 397% 445%
After completion of each acidification procedure, airlift development was performed on the well by pumping compressed air down a 2.375-in.-diameter tremie pipe installed to a depth of approximately 100 ft using a 375 cu-ftper-minute (cfm) air compressor. Airlifting was alternated with periodic short (five-minute) idle periods for the water levels to partially recover. This airlift surge method is intended to physically agitate and remove particulate matter from the well by reversing the direction of flow into and out of the open borehole. The idle periods allow the water in the casing to fall back into the well, with the resulting pressure and reversed flow suspending solids that can then be removed during the next airlift cycle. The airlift development was performed over a period of approximately eight hours for each well. Prior to reinstallation of the well pumps, each well was chlorinated using sodium hypochlorite. After the pumps were reinstalled and a minimum contact time of 24 hours had elapsed, the wells were purged of residual disinfectant prior to the posttreatment step-drawdown testing. Bacteriological clearance sampling was performed by the county prior to returning each well to service.
Specific Capacity Improvement Evaluation Pretreatment step-drawdown tests were performed on all wells prior to acid treatment. The testing included three steps, with the step 1 rates established at approximately 50 percent of the estimated maximum pumping rate for each well, step 2 rates at approximately 75 percent of
the estimated maximum pumping rate for each well, and step 3 rates at the estimated maximum pumping rate for each well. Figures 6 through 10 contain graphs of pumping rates versus drawdown for each step test performed. Post-treatment step-drawdown pumping rates were determined for steps 1 through 3 to best match those rates used during the pretreatment testing for each well to provide a direct comparison of well performance improvement. At the end of post-treatment step-drawdown testing, an additional fourth step rate was included at the improved maximum capacity of the pump to evaluate the potential productivity of each well. The performance improvements to each well were evaluated at the step 3 pumping rate, which was the highest common rate used during both pretreatment and post-treatment tests. The percentage improvements in specific capacity at step 3 ranged from 60 to over 600 percent, with the average improvement being around 260 percent. The average pumping rates, drawdowns, and specific capacities of each well during step 3 are summarized in Table 1, and graphical comparisons of pretreatment and posttreatment drawdown are provided in Figure 11. Continued on page 28
Figure 11. Pretreatment versus post-treatment drawdowns at step 3.
Figure 12. Percentage specific capacity improvement at step 3.
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ September 2020
Table 2. Summary of Pretreatment and Post-Treatment Maximum Pumping Rates Well No.
Average Max Flow Rate (gpm) 3 420 4 452 5 702 6 426 10 346 15 552 17 500 18 750 19 700 20 711 21 399 22 596 23 812 27 637 28 282 29 404 31 549 33 690 34 486 35 783 SUM 11196 COMBINED INCREASE OVER PRETREATMENT
POST-TREATMENT Average Max Test Rate (gpm) 976 1052 1085 743 657 1059 1017 1000 1125 1074 730 928 1092 1087 974 1207 1139 1206 1014 1102 20267 9071
28 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Continued from page 27 The percent improvement in yield at step 3 is shown in Figure 12. The combined pumping rate improvements for treatment of 20 wells equates to a total increase of about 7,000 gpm, or about 10 mgd on a 24-hour pumping basis (Table 2).
Summary The CO2 acid treatment method has proven to provide a safe and cost-effective means to make significant improvements in well yield in the county’s LTA wellfield. The setup and process is relatively simple, and to a large degree, selfperforming, once the system is set up on an individual production well. While the process can be completed without removal of the production pump, the vigorous and high-capacity posttreatment development with air provides greater yield improvements over pump development, and therefore, a higher rate of return on the county’s investment in the process. The county has now started budgeting for regular CO2 maintenance within its annual operations budget to allow for continued improvements and a more reliable system year to year.
MANUFACTURING THE MOST COMPLETE LINE OF GATE VALVES IN THE INDUSTRY.
METAL SEATED SOLID WEDGE AWWA C500
ROLLING DOUBLE DISC AWWA C500
RESILIENT SEATED SOLID WEDGE AWWA C509 & C515
AVAILABLE IN SIZES 2” TO 120”
DESIGNED FOR LONG SERVICE LIFE! LEARN MORE ABOUT OUR GATE VALVES AT JANDSVALVE.COM OR CALL 281.324.3990 Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
Addressing Today’s Challenges and Celebrating Water Workers James J. Wallace, P.E. President, FWEA
t seems that this year, more than any I can remember, has presented us with an unrelenting, continuous stream of challenges. The “biggest” one we continue to face is COVID-19; however, a cascading list of secondary impacts (e.g., remote working, social distancing, safe practices, infectious diseases in water and wastewater, etc.) are all directly linked and/or exacerbated by this pandemic. Add to these newer issues the many challenges we were already facing (e.g., diversity and inclusion, resiliency, sustainability, emerging contaminants, nutrient removal, microplastics, etc.), and clearly, it’s easy to see that we are at a pivotal time that requires us to be at our very best. As I discussed here last month, continuous learning and professional development are key components to the advancement of our industry, as well as each of us individually. The solutions to the many challenges I’ve stated are at our fingertips. The magazine’s focus this month on emerging issues happens to be well-timed, with the robust growth in online, virtual opportunities in which to engage. These pertinent conversations, technical sessions, and learning environments will assist each of us in real time to adapt and solve these unique challenges.
to offer learning experiences, and unlike previous years, they are doing so virtually (so everyone can take part from the comfort of their own home or office). I encourage you to take another look at the Water Environment Federation Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC®), which will be taking place October 3-7. This year, WEFTEC Connect will offer a mixture of real-time, interactive, and scheduled learning events; a virtual exhibitor showcase; and more than 400 ondemand technical presentations. I think the detailed explanation of the conference’s keynote session says it best: “During this time of uncertainty, everyone is experiencing a learning curve as we adapt to changes in our world. Rather than resisting it, we’re ‘leaning into the curve’ to become more adaptable, innovative, and influential leaders of the future.” If you are unable to participate in WEFTEC, please consider other valuable industry and organizational offerings to stay on top of the most-current information. Our industry is rising to the challenge and providing some great content. All I ask is that you remain open to change, new ideas, and collaboration with all of the brilliant minds in our industry that exist at each and every level of our organizations (and with all levels of experience).
Learning Opportunities Beginning with our state and local organizations, we are providing roundtable discussions, where our utility leaders are sharing their experiences in dealing with the new challenges they face. Do not miss these opportunities to get involved and stay abreast of the most-pertinent challenges facing your local community. Additionally, consultants and manufacturers are also offering increased opportunities to participate and discuss today’s challenges. Finally, our national organizations continue
30 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Support Water Workers! While we are on the topic of overcoming challenges, and the amazing people in our industry, let’s not forget to highlight the great stories of water workers accomplishing great things! It’s a passion of mine to see a spotlight shined upon our best, brightest, most-hardworking, and resourceful water workers. On the local and state levels, please share these examples with those around you and your representative FWEA local chapter leadership. In the end, we want to find any way we can to spotlight the good deeds in our industry. At the national level, WEF has instituted a “Water Workers Are Essential – We’ve Got Your Back” drive within the “Water’s Worth It” campaign. The key aspects of this campaign are to “Stay Informed,” which begins with the vast resources available through WEF, and to “Tell Your Story,” where you will find a plethora of materials to help communicate both your stories and your passion for water. What matters is that water workers worldwide receive the adoration and respect they deserve as members of one of the most-noble industries. As Theodore Roosevelt once stated, “Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing.”
FIBERGLASS EQUIPMENT SHELTERS FOR THE WATER AND WASTEWATER INDUSTRIES ● Maintenance Free ● Graffiti Resistant ● Easy To Install ● Superior Construction ● Non-Conductive
Authorized Florida Distributor
● UV Resistant ● Low Cost of Ownership ● Energy Efficient ● Performs In Any Environment
Hudson Pump and Equipment A Division of Tencarva Machinery 3524 Craftsman Boulevard Lakeland, Florida 33803 1-863-665-7867
WWW.SHELTERWORKS.COM | (800) 794-8037
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
FWEA COMMITTEE CORNER Welcome to the FWEA Committee Corner! The Member Relations Committee of the Florida Water Environment Association hosts this article to celebrate the success of recent association chapter activities and inform members of upcoming events. To have information included from your chapter send details to Megan Nelson at firstname.lastname@example.org.
FWEA Student Design Competition Recap
hen I volunteered to write this article, I thought I would be recapping all the successful events we had at the Florida Water Resources Conference (FWRC). I would have talked about what a great experience it was for our Florida universities to have the opportunity to present their projects in front of their peers and members of our industry. I would have talked about how wonderful the career panel was, how much fun we all had at the Sunday
night social, and I would have included a few creative posts from our Social Media Scavenger Hunt. But, because of our “new normal,” we were challenged to come up with a new way of doing things. This included our annual Student Design Competition.
Keeping the Competition Going Florida’s Student Design Competition is now older than the students participating in it, and it was our duty to make sure we gave these students the chance to compete on the national
stage at the Water Environment Federation Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC®) in the fall. For those who are not familiar with the competition, there are two categories: environmental and wastewater. Students are judged based on a written report and an inperson presentation, which is usually held the Sunday of FWRC. This year we had three competing teams for each category: Wastewater S Florida Atlantic University S Florida Gulf Coast University S University of Florida Environmental S Florida Gulf Coast University S University of Central Florida S University of South Florida
Covid Changes the Competition University of South Florida team members are (left to right) Daniel Eagan, Elliott Tegan, and Jasmine Wood.
Because of our “new normal,” we knew presentations would have to be different this year. As a result, it was decided to conduct the presentations virtually. Each team submitted a 20-minute recorded presentation for the judges to watch and score. Questions were submitted by the judges in writing, and students provided written responses. As it is every year, the competition was hotly contested, and the scores were close. After tallying up all the scores, I am honored to present the winners of the 2020 FWEA Student Design Competition: Environmental - University of South Florida Wastewater - University of Florida A huge “thank you” goes out to the students, advisors, mentors, judges, volunteers, sponsors, Students and Young Professionals Committee, and everyone else who continues to make the Student Design Competition a success.
University of Florida team members are (left to right) Ryan Winslow, James (Jack) Snyder, Alexandra Rubin, Gabrielle Bryson, Nicholas Thomas, and Ricker Lamphier.
32 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
David Hernandez, P.E., ENV SP, is senior principal engineer with Hazen and Sawyer in Coral Gables.
Test Yourself What Do You Know About Domestic Wastewater Industrial Pretreatment Programs?
1. P er the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) website, Domestic Wastewater Industrial Pretreatment Program (pretreatment program website), “Pretreatment is the removal, reduction, or alteration of pollutants in industrial wastewater prior to discharge or introduction into a domestic wastewater treatment facility (WWF).” A pretreatment program is required when a publicly owned WWF discharges to surface waters of the state or various reuse systems and receives discharge from
a. any industry. b. c ategorical industrial users only. c. c ommercial establishments. d. significant industrial users. 2. P er FDEP’s pretreatment program website, goals of the program include preventing introduction of contaminants into the WWF that will interfere with operation or that will a. b. c. d.
c reate foul odors. increase the cost of treatment. p ass through the WWF inadequately treated. r equire additional reporting.
3. P er Florida Administrative Code (FAC) 62-625, Pretreatment Requirements for Existing and Other Sources of Pollution, a public utility that administers a pretreatment program that has been approved by FDEP is a(n)
a. b. c. d.
5. P er FAC 62-625, public utilities are required to develop a pretreatment program when they receive pollutants that will pass through or interfere with the WWF process, discharge to waters of the state or to certain reuse systems, and the utility owns or operates one or more WWFs with a total design flow of greater than how many mil gal per day (mgd)?
a. b uilding code. b. industrial administrative order.
a. b. c. d.
1 mgd 3 mgd 5 mgd 1 0 mgd
6. Per FAC 62-625, a significant industrial user (SIU) means a categorical industrial user or an industrial user that discharges an average of how many gal per day of process wastewater to the WWF?
a. b. c. d.
1 0,000 gal per day 2 5,000 gal per day 5 0,000 gal per day 1 00,000 gal per day
a. P art II Slow-Rate Land Application Systems; Restricted Public Access. b. Part III Slow-Rate Land Application Systems; Public Access Areas, Residential Irrigation, and Edible Crops. c. P art IV Rapid-Rate Land Application Systems. d. Part III or Part V Groundwater Recharge and Indirect Potable Reuse. 8. Per FDEP’s FGM, Florida regulations require public utilities to identify and locate all possible industrial users (IUs) that might be subject to the pretreatment program. How often must the list of IUs be updated, with detailed standards that apply to each IU?
designed monitoring program of its IUs, including sampling and inspections. Of the various types of sampling and inspection, demand industrial sampling and inspection are usually performed in response to
a. b. c. d.
a request from the industrial facility. a n emergency situation or violation. random spot checks of the industrial facility. s cheduled monitoring.
10. Per FDEP’s FGM, all control authorities are required to adopt an enforcement response plan (ERP) as part of their approved pretreatment program. One enforcement mechanism is penalties. General pretreatment regulations require control authorities to have legal authority to assess penalties of at least
a. b. c. d.
$ 100 per day per violation. $ 500 per day per violation. $1,000 per day per violation. $ 10,000 per day per violation. Answers on page 54
7. P er FAC 62-610, Reuse of Reclaimed Water and Land Application, a pretreatment program shall be developed and implemented for reuse projects regulated under
a pproval authority. c ontrol authority. e nforcement authority. industrial authority.
4. P er FDEP’s Florida Guidance Manual for Pretreatment Programs (FGM), Chapter 3: Legal Authority, notes that the ability to develop and implement a successful pretreatment program depends on adequate legal authority at the local level. When the WWF is owned by a municipality, this is typically found in the
c. s ewer use ordinance. d. s tate regulations.
a. Annually b. Biannually c. Every five years d. Every 10 years 9. Per FDEP’s FGM, the success of a control authority’s pretreatment program is a properly
References used for this quiz: • F AC 62-610, Reuse of Reclaimed Water and Land Application • F AC 62-625, Pretreatment Requirements for Existing and Other Sources of Pollution • FDEP’s Domestic Wastewater Industrial Pretreatment Program website: https://floridadep. gov/water/domestic-wastewater/content/domesticwastewater-industrial-pretreatment-program • FDEP’s Florida Guidance Manual for Pretreatment Programs (FGM): https://floridadep.gov/water/ domestic-wastewater/documents/florida-guidancemanual
Send Us Your Questions Readers are welcome to submit questions or exercises on water or wastewater treatment plantoperations for publication in Test Yourself. Send your question (with the answer) or your exercise (with the solution) by email to: email@example.com
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
Budget Basics Kenneth Enlow
reetings, everyone. I hope you all are doing well. It’s hard to believe we are into September already this year. As we approach the last quarter, many of us are looking at budget preparations for next year. If your fiscal year begins October 1, you have probably already prepared your budget for the next fiscal year; if your budget runs on a calendar year, you may still be in the budgeting process. Whether you have already completed your budget or are still in the process of preparing it, I
thought maybe this would be a good topic for folks who are new at it, or may be doing budgets in the future as they progress in their careers.
Budget Models There are several different types of budget models, each having characteristics that are designed for your type of business plan. Two of the most common types are the static budget and the zero-based budget. Static Budgeting This is a classic model of budgeting, where a business creates a model of its expected results and financial position for the next year, and then attempts to force actual results during that period to align with the budget model as closely as possible. Often, this budget model sets expected earnings for the year (margin),with the budget designed to support costs versus profits.
34 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Zero-Based Budgeting A zero-based budget involves determining what outcomes management wants, and then developing a package of expenditures that will support each outcome. By combining the various outcomes and expenditures, a budget is derived that should result in a specific set of outcomes for the entire business. This budgeting model is often used in service- or government-based utilities, where a budget value is given and the budget must be designed to fit into that value.
Budgeting has Changed The old days of “use the same budget as last year, just add 10 percent” are long gone. In many utilities, our budgets are competing with other department or division budgets. We need to have a good handle on costs so we can support our budgets when they come under review by upper management and government officials. In most cases, we will have no input on revenue. We are either working from a fixed fee with risks, or a defined budget value that we will need to fit into. In a case where you have a fixed fee with risks, your revenue is fixed, but the margin (profit) can vary from your expectations if your costs exceed your budget predictions (forecast). This is typically how a static budget works. When working with a defined budget, such as with zero-based budgeting, you are confined to the budget values you have assumed when the budget was prepared. In many ways, this is a more difficult budget to work with. When developing a budget, you are going to make assumptions for what you believe your costs will be for the next year. Some of these may be easy to predict, such as chemical use and electricity—if you know what your typical production demand is going to be and you know what the unit cost for chemicals and power are. Labor costs are usually easy to define as well, if you are budgeting for staff from a defined organization table. Benefits and insurance values are generally understood also. If you’re budgeting for capital improvements, you usually know what these costs will be, as they are contained in the basis of design and cost models. Costs for repair and maintenance may be much harder to predict. In today’s world, spare parts have proven to be more expensive, many vendors are not maintaining readily available stock, their availability is sometimes questionable, and they can take a longer time to get. You may want to budget for more spare parts to minimize down time.
One of the best ways to help understand what repair and maintenance, and other costs, might be for your next budget is to look at the expenditures over your current and past budgets in those categories. Examine your spending, preferably on a monthly basis, over the last year or two, which is often defined as a run rate. Review the monthly costs and yearly totals. Look at a run rate going back the last 12 months and a run rate for the last full budget period. Evaluate each month’s expenditure to determine if it’s a typical or a one-time expense, like a chemical pump replacement, for instance. Take the one-time expenses out of your run rate to get a closer assumption for costs for your new budget. Other items, like supplies, uniforms, etc., will need to be defined as well. Consider the age of your equipment. If you have equipment that is reaching the end of its life cycle, even if it’s still operating, you may want to budget for a replacement. In many cases, you can’t find replacement parts for outdated equipment, as they may have been discontinued. Oh, and by the way, one of the things you probably won’t be able to do is put a contingency in the budget to cover everything you missed. I hope this information helps you when
your budget time comes around. There are many considerations, and I have only touched on a few. If you are an old hand at budgets, I probably didn’t tell you anything you didn’t already know; if you’re new at it, they can be intimidating. Good luck with your budgets.
FWPCOA Training Update As an association, FWPCOA’s primary purpose is to provide training to our members and the industry as a whole. We have faced many difficulties, resulting from the recent pandemic, to get classroom training going again. We hope to get our training programs out to our operators soon, but are moving cautiously as we monitor the phased openings to the public. One of the hurdles we have to overcome is finding venues that can and will accommodate our training classes. We feel that phasing in classroom training with smaller groups in a controlled environment is one of the ways to get training back out to our members and the industry. We are looking for our utilities to provide training rooms, and are also looking at other venues, like theaters, churches, hotel conference rooms, etc.
The following classroom training has been successfully completed to date: S Backflow Recertification: Gulfport - July, 14, 15, and 28 S Backflow Tester and Recertification: City of Bonita Springs in July (paid instructor class) S Backflow Tester and Recertification: Deltona - June 26 and July 21 S Backflow Tester and Recertification: City of Deland The training office is in need of proctors for online courses in all regions. If you are available to be a proctor, please contact the training office at 321-383-9690. In the meantime, and as always, our online Training Institute is up and running. You can access our online training by going to the FWPCOA website at www.fwpcoa.org and selecting the “Online Institute” button at the upper right-hand area of the home page to open the login page. You then scroll down to the bottom of this screen and click on “View Catalog” to open the catalog for the many training programs offered. Select your preferred training program and register online to take the course. That’s all I have for this C Factor. Everyone take care and, as usual, keep up the good work!
Get to Know ADS for I/I Assessment Answers ADS expertise, earned over 45 years, will help you nd and assess your I/I. Our turn-key approach with monitors, software, analytics, analysts, and local ﬃeld teams makes it easy and cost-e ective. Capture, Store, Integrate, Analyze
Acquire Data & Communicate
View, Prioritize, Report
See. Understand. Act.
ADS Environmental Services in Tampa, Florida
Contact Patrick Wootton Call: (813) 254-5510 or email: firstname.lastname@example.org
https://www.adsenv.com/ﬂoridasolutions Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
FWRJ COMMITTEE PROFILE This column highlights a committee, division, council, or other volunteer group of FSAWWA, FWEA, and FWPCOA.
Full STEA+M Ahead Robot Challenge for Youth Education Group Affiliation: FSAWWA Current chair: Jacqueline W. Torbert, manager—water division, Orange County Utilities. Also chair of the AWWA Diversity and Member Inclusion Committee (DMIC). Year group was formed: 2018 Background and scope of work: This group works to provide a sustainable water supply for future generations by focusing on the students of today and training them for the skills needed to step into the roles of tomorrow’s water industry professionals. The group’s work includes elementary, mid-
36 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
dle, and high school students, tailoring curricula to the grade level and Florida state education standards: S E lementary programs introduce young students to the concept and practice of water conservation. S M iddle school programs build on that foundation by focusing on groundwater concepts, including the aquifer, groundwater flow, and the water table. S H igh school presentations connect these concepts to careers in the water industry that are concentrated in the STEA+M subjects (science, technology, engineering, arts/architecture, and math). The challenge for teachers, parents, and other adults who want to engage students in these subjects is to make them relevant, inter-
esting, engaging, and hands-on. With the guidance of Jackie Torbert a group was formed, and the Full STEA+M Ahead Robot Challenge was developed as one of its programs. Recent accomplishments: For the second consecutive year, Orange County Utilities brought middle school students to the Florida Section AWWA Fall Conference to participate in the robot challenge. In December 2019, 25 students from Odyssey Middle School in Orlando attended the conference. The students worked in teams to build a robot, program it, and navigate an obstacle course. Each team had two opportunities to earn points: first, by finishing all the maneuvers in the obstacle course; and second, by demonstrating other important skills, such as teamwork, leadership, showing respect, and being inclusive (see photos). Current projects: The group was poised to recruit another group of students from a local chapter of the national After School All Stars program to participate in the robot challenge during the AWWA Annual Conference and Exposition (ACE20), but the conference cancellation is one of the many disruptions of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the meantime, the group has been working on a “how-to” manual that provides instructions for members in other states who want to bring this activity to their state conference. Future work: Future work of the committee includes: 1. Promote the STEA+M program throughout the state of Florida via the regions (hopefully inspiring a little regional competition). 2. S howcase the program at next year’s ACE21. 3. D evelop the program to be continued as a virtual program. 4. Secure sponsorships to ensure the longevity and permanency of the program. Group members: S Jessica Green - program coordinator, Orange County Utilities S Matt Blowers - program manager, Orange County Utilities S Gigi Hernandez - program coordinator, Orange County Utilities S Ryan Pesch - student intern, Orange County Utilities S Terri Thill- -program coordinator, Orange County Utilities S Hope Thomas - student intern, Orange County Utilities S Bridgett Tolley - environmental programs coordinator, Orange County Utilities S Jacqueline W. Torbert - manager—water division, Orange County Utilities; S AWWA Diversity and Member Inclusion Committee
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
FSAWWA SPEAKING OUT
Florida Pandemic Layoffs Send Customers Looking for Water Bill Relief Kim Kowalski Chair, FSAWWA
he coronavirus pandemic has affected everyone in the United States, including the country’s more than 50,000 public water utilities and their customers. While most utilities have had to slash budgets, defer infrastructure investment, and increase spending on things like employee overtime, personal protective equipment, and other hygiene protocol, they understand the challenges that many of their customers are also facing paying their water bills, especially when they’ve lost a job because of the pandemic. Many utilities are creating or expanding programs that have already been in place to offer customers financial help. I want to share the experiences of the Toho Water Authority and what it’s doing to assist the public. This originally appeared as an article in AWWA Connections and is reprinted here with permission. _____________________________________ It was a story that Toho Water Authority, based near Florida’s Walt Disney World, began to hear over and over again this spring. A theme-park employee, used to earning a good living, was suddenly laid off due to the COVID-19 outbreak and couldn’t afford one of the family’s most basic needs: water. Fortunately, Toho could refer many of those customers to the Toho Assistance Program, or TAP. “Many of our customers lost their jobs and
A customer discusses TAP assistance with a Toho employee. (photo:Toho Water Authority)
had no means to pay for water. They wanted to know, ‘How can we get help?’” said Mary Hewitt, Toho’s director of customer services. “This program has definitely been having an impact.” A utility member of the American Water Works Association (AWWA), Toho is located in central Florida’s Osceola County, and is the largest provider of water, wastewater, and reclaimed water in the county, serving more than 100,000 customer connections. The county is the gateway to Walt Disney World and several nearby theme parks, and its economy relies heavily on the tourism and service industries. When those businesses closed in midMarch to help slow the spread of COVID-19, thousands of residents were laid off. By summer, Osceola County’s unemployment rate topped 30 percent, the highest in Florida. Some of the parks were scheduled to re-open in July, although the number of coronavirus cases reported in the state remains high. That staggering statistic had a profound effect on Toho’s customers. Typically, the TAP program receives 20 applications a month from customers facing economic hardship. Due to the massive number of layoffs, the program is processing nearly 10 times that amount. “We’re working closely with quite a few people to help them get back on their feet,” said Todd Swingle, Toho’s executive director. “Everything is so unique in this response; there’s not a one-size-fits-all solution, but TAP represents one of those important tools.” The TAP program began in 2017 with a goal of helping customers with temporary financial challenges make their bills more manageable. The TAP funds are provided by Toho and managed by the Osceola Council on Aging, a nonprofit that has offered social service pro-
38 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
grams to the community for nearly 50 years. The program prioritizes income-eligible customers whose service is in the process of being disconnected, as well as households with elderly or disabled individuals or families with children under the age of 18. Typically, Toho contributes $50,000 each year to TAP, but its board approved an increase of $100,000 to help the growing need during the pandemic. Mike Sweeney, Toho’s deputy executive director, said some utilities are considering a flat-rate reduction to help customers during this nationwide economic downturn, but that doesn’t focus the help on where it’s needed most. “Targeting customers on the basis of need and income seems to have the greatest impact,” Sweeney said, “and even if rate increases are relaxed this year, infrastructure needs remain, making water more and more expensive for people who are the most vulnerable.” Noted Sweeney, “We have to adapt and find ways people can get the water they need and use it efficiently.” Like other utilities, Toho suspended water shutoffs through the beginning of August and is offering payment plans for customers who are struggling to pay. Toho has a tiered rate structure that offers a lifeline category supporting basic usage needs, and the utility is piloting a matching contribution program in which customers can donate to assistance programs on their bills. All of these tools will be important as Toho eases back into normal operations, balancing fiscal responsibility with the need to ensure that all customers have access to a natural resource they can’t live without. “The TAP program is one way for us to show our community and customers that we care,” said Swingle, who serves on AWWA’s Diversity and Member Inclusion Committee. “We can’t solve all the problems that exist from the coronavirus, but we are certainly able to demonstrate to our customers that we care about the challenges that exist for them.” _____________________________________ There are many other stories such as this that point to the commitment of the water industry to always provide the important resource we all need at all times. Please continue to stay safe and healthy!
Is Your Sewer Resilient?
Covered by patent number:10,392,281
When sea levels rise, both gravity sewer and septic systems allow untreated wastewater to commingle with seawater and stormwater. That endangers public health and the environment. Prelos™ Sewer is the answer for building resilient, secure, economical sewer infrastructure. • Pressurized liquid-only sewer • Engineered to be watertight
Every system factory-and field-tested to allow for zero leakage.
• Primary wastewater treatment at the source • Shallow-buried systems
For details about Prelos™ Sewer, call Orenco Systems at (800) 348-9843, scan the QR code above, or visit us at www.orenco.com/sealevelrise ®
• Equipment typically located above flood elevation • “Surgically” deployed to address failing septic systems
PROTECTING THE WORLD’S WATER 814 Airway Ave., Sutherlin, OR 97479, USA • 1-800-348-9843 • 1-541-459-4449
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
Developing Partnerships and Timely Communication Among Clients, Contractors, and Designers Courtney Dantone Establishing a partnership from the beginning among the key parties can ensure a successful project. No matter the type of contract, whether it be bid-build, design-build, construction management at risk (CMAR), public-private partnership (P3), or otherwise, it’s important for the client, contractor, and designer to meet, discuss, and agree upon methods of communication, common goals, and expectations for the project. Every client is different and is motivated by different things. Most clients in the industry are more familiar with the bid-build model and have a level of comfort with this tradition, which may be evolving with the risk transference seen in other contract models. On contract models with shifts in risk allocation, the team needs to review and address the differences in risk responsibility and understand how seemingly reasonable adjustments can have
major impacts in cost or schedule to one party or another. If parties are unfamiliar with the contract method used (i.e., first design-build project after years of performing bid-build work), providing training on the contract model may be needed to understand everyone’s role on the team early on and to encourage continued productive conversations throughout the project. Regardless, with the evolving nature of the contract models, it’s essential to realize that trust and communication among all participants will establish a partnership that can make or break a project.
Communication Tools Zipper Plan An easy communication tool is the creation of a zipper plan among the main players or decision-making parties. A zipper plan is where each company involved names its team in levels of hierarchy and then aligns the personnel with the other companies at the same level. It’s important to identify the right people
40 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
in the right roles for each level on the project and for all parties to understand who their counterparts are. This type of planning leads to open communication, facilitates decision making, and helps to resolve issues quickly and at the lowest possible level. When a resolution is not found, a zipper plan allows problems to be elevated to the next level to avoid frustration and delays to the project. Document Control Plan Another system of communication to use on a project is establishing a document control plan to manage information. It’s key to plan with the end in mind and to be consistent throughout the project. Although it may appear that this is the contractor’s responsibility, it’s important to have the client’s and designer’s input and concurrence to make this successful. Some considerations include: S What is required by the contract S Electronic versus hard copy documentation S What documentation is required for startup and turnover
S W hat are the appropriate nomenclature of files and submittals S W ho is responsible for reviewing and approving documentation versus providing the information It‘s helpful for the early identification of the end users to ensure that turnover protocols are established at the beginning of the project and for the collection of information throughout the job, instead of filing paperwork to be found later. For example, being sure that appropriate naming conventions are reviewed and approved by the right people for the tagging of equipment that’s compatible with existing tagging for the plant, or possibly, for all facilities under that client to prevent issues when procuring equipment and programming instrumentation and controls.
Timely Project Planning While it’s important for the contractor to properly plan the work, communicating that plan to the client, and sometimes the designer, can often mitigate risks before an operation starts. Planning can greatly affect the safety, quality, and production of an operation, and often, the plan is established based on past experiences or lessons learned. Reviewing work plans can possibly identify unknown utility impacts and recognize, for instance, areas that may be shut down due to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Discussions will help to identify access and material laydown options that benefit all parties, discover environmental or safety concerns, and ascertain when and by whom quality inspections are needed. The maintenance of plant operations (MOPOs) are typically reviewed with the plant for utility tie-ins and equipment start-ups as well. Visual aids can easily express to all parties what is intended for the operation and clearly communicate the end result. Depending on the length of the project, reviewing and adjusting the plan periodically due to personnel changes, or to address processes that aren’t effective, may be required. Every company, whether it’s the client, contractor, or designer, has general (or even specific) protocols and standards set in place as the way to do business. It’s crucial, however, to establish open relationships and communication methods early, thereby building essential trust and setting mutual expectations and procedures to ensure a project’s success. Courtney Dantone is a project engineer with Kiewit Water Facilities Florida Company, currently working in Clearwater.
NEWS BEAT Maia McGuire, Ph.D., will lead the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) Extension and continue the engagement of Florida Sea Grant Maia McGuire with the public and stakeholders on coastal issues around the state. McGuire’s work with Florida Sea Grant began in 2001, serving as a multicounty UF/ IFAS Extension agent in northeast Florida. She added the interim Florida Sea Grant program leader role to her responsibilities in November 2019. Now, in her new role, she will dedicate all of her time to help facilitate Florida Sea Grant-related UF/ IFAS Extension programming that reaches regional, state, and national audiences. “Dr. McGuire brings to this position nearly 20 years of experience as an Extension agent, her work as a teacher, and her education in, and love for, Florida’s coastal environments,” said Sherry Larkin, Florida Sea Grant director. “I am so glad that she has accepted this role and I look forward to growing and strengthening the Florida Sea Grant program with her help.” “The first thing I want to do is learn even more about the agents, their programing and challenges, and how I can help,” McGuire said. “It’s a really exciting time as we all work together to figure out the new directions that Florida Sea Grant can take.” McGuire earned her doctorate in marine biology and fisheries at the University of Miami in 1997, with a research focus on coral reproduction, and her bachelor’s degree in marine biology from the Florida Institute of Technology in 1989. McGuire is a highly awarded professional and brings extensive experience in coastal and marine issues education to this role. In 2005, she received the Marine Science Educator of the Year award from the Florida Marine Science Educators Association, in 2014 she was given the Don Sweat Award by Florida Sea Grant, and in 2015 she was named Conservation Educator of the Year by the Florida Wildlife Federation. In 2015, McGuire was awarded a marine debris outreach and education grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to start the Florida Microplastic Awareness Project. This citizen science project raises awareness
of the sources and threats of microplastics in the coastal environment and teaches residents how to reduce their contribution to the plastics problem. The project has grown to include 27 regional coordinators around Florida and has gained over 3,000 pledges from citizens who vow to reduce their plastics waste. “Florida Sea Grant has one of the top-rated Extension programs nationally and we have to keep trying to find ways to be innovative,” McGuire said. “COVID-19 has really thrown a wrench in how we work and required us to think long term about how we may need to do things differently. Brainstorming ways to think about that and how we can grow is in the front of my mind right now.”
Richard Adams, utilities director of City of Palm Coast, has retired after 43 years with the company. He is the second longest-serving city employee in Palm Coast’s history. Adams began working for International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) Corp., Palm Coast’s original developer, in 1977 as an engineering technician, sizing Richard Adams future water and wastewater pipelines and pumping systems. This became the basis of the city’s 30-year utility master plan. In 1982, he transferred to ITT’s subsidiary, Palm Coast Utility Corp., while pursuing a bachelor’s degree in business administration. In 1999, Florida Water Services Corp. bought Palm Coast Utility, and Adams became the system manager. Finally, in 2003, Palm Coast bought the utility, and Dick Kelton, the city manager at that time, hired Adams as utility director. “It’s been an exciting and rewarding career and I’ve been very fortunate to have wonderful people to work with; without them, I could not have succeeded,” Adams said. “Some of these people I have worked with almost my entire career, and some only a short while, but nonetheless, they are all the best in the business and have made me look good.” To recognize his service and honor his retirement, city directors purchased a special glass recognition award to present to him. Continued on page 53
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
F W R J
Biochar-Amended Modified Bioretention Systems for Livestock Runoff Nutrient Management Md Yeasir Arif Rahman, Nicholas Truong, Sarina J. Ergas, and Mahmood H. Nachabe
lorida is ranked thirteenth in the United States for cow inventory, providing more than 1 mil metric tons of milk and generating approximately 133,000 kg/year of nutrients (nitrogen [N] and phosphorus [P], USDA-NASS 2016). Livestock operations are a major nonpoint source of pollution to fresh and marine surface waters, groundwater, and springs in Florida. Improper management of cattle manure contributes to eutrophication, excessive growth of nuisance and harmful algal blooms, fish kills, economic losses, and nitrate (NO3-) contamination of drinking water supplies. The most common livestock waste management strategy in the state is treatment in settling basins or lagoons, followed by agricultural irrigation or direct discharge to surface waters (Prasad et al., 2014); however, these systems are inadequate for nutrient management. For example, a study of waste lagoons at nine dairy farms in north Florida found dissolved total ammonia nitrogen (TAN) concentrations ranging from 22 to 230 mg/l, with a median of 160 mg/l. The Florida Watershed Restoration Act (FWRA) established both structural and nonstructural best management practices
(BMPs) for livestock operations. The FWRA guidelines require systematic waste collection and BMP implementation, especially in the Lake Okeechobee drainage basin. Alternative BMPs for managing runoff from livestock waste include constructed wetlands, vegetative buffer strips, and bioretention systems (Mantovi et al., 2003; Giri et al., 2010). Among these systems, bioretention is a promising technology for nutrient management (Mahmoud et al., 2019; Ergas et al., 2010). Conventional bioretention systems include a gravel drainage layer, engineered sand filtration medium layer, a planted zone with topsoil and mulch, and an optional underdrain pipe (Figure 1a). Nitrogen removal in these systems relies on: S P lant uptake S F iltration of N-containing solids S A dsorption of NH4+ to negatively charged sites in the filtration medium S M icrobial N-species transformations of • a mmonification (dissolved organic N [DON] g NH4+), • nitrification (NH4+ g NO3-) in aerobic zones and • d enitrification (NO3- g N2) in anoxic zones
Figure 1. Schematic of two different bioretention systems: (a) conventional and (b) modified.
42 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Md Yeasir Arif Rahman is a Ph.D. candidate, Sarina J. Ergas is a professor and graduate program coordinator, and Mahmood H. Nachabe is a professor, in the department of civil and environmental engineering at the University of South Florida in Tampa. Nicholas Truong is an undergraduate student in the department of chemical and biomedical engineering at the University of South Florida in Tampa.
In conventional bioretention systems, nitrification is promoted in the aerobic filter media layer; however, total nitrogen (TN) removal is typically low because the systems lack the conditions needed for denitrification (Li et al., 2014); therefore, modified bioretention systems have been developed (Figure 1b) that include an internal water storage zone (IWSZ), with a slow-release solid electron donor, such as wood chips, to promote denitrification (LopezPonnada et al., 2020). Although modified bioretention systems achieve high TN removals in studies with urban runoff, limited TN removal was observed in prior studies treating dairy farm runoff (Ergas et al., 2010). Dairy runoff has high DON and TAN concentrations compared with urban runoff. During storm events, these pollutants are transported through the bioretention media with the runoff and are not retained long enough for complete ammonification and nitrification; therefore, research should be carried out to overcome these limitations by amending sandbased bioretention media with adsorbent materials that have a high adsorption capacity for DON and TAN. One of the most promising low-cost adsorbent materials for this purpose is biochar (Suliman et al., 2016; Laird et al., 2010; Rahman et al., 2020). Biochar is the byproduct of pyrolysis of waste organic materials, such as wood waste, rice hulls, grasses, or manure, at temperatures Continued on page 44
Many of our live courses are filling up fast. Don’t wait, register today! For a full course schedule, visit www.uftreeo.org
Backflow Prevention Courses Backflow Prevention Recertification
Backflow Prevention Assembly Repair and Maintenance Training & Certification
Sept. 23-24, 2020 | Fort Myers, FL Sept. 24-25, 2020 | Davie, FL Oct. 1-2, 2020 | Marathon, FL Oct. 15-16, 2020 | Pensacola, FL
Oct. 5-7, 2020 | Altamonte Springs, FL Oct. 7-9, 2020 | Orlando, FL Oct. 19-21 ,2020 | Gainesville, FL
Cross-Connection Control Program Manager Series Introduction to Backflow Prevention
Backflow Prevention Assembly Tester Training & Certification
Sept. 14, 2020 | Gainesville, FL
Sept. 21-25, 2020 | Pensacola, FL Sept. 28- Oct. 1, 2020 | Marathon, FL Oct. 7-10, 2020 | Fort Myers, FL Oct. 10-18, 2020 | Tampa, FL Oct. 12-16, 2020 | Davie, FL
Cross Connection Control: Survey & Inspection Sept. 15-16, 2020 | Gainesville, FL
Cross Connection Control: Ordinance & Organization Sept. 17-18, 2020 | Gainesville, FL
Water/Wastewater Courses Wastewater Class C Certification Review
Sequencing Batch Reactor Operation, Make it Work for You
Sept. 14-18, 2020 | Live Virtual Course
Sept. 29-30, 2020 | Live Virtual Course
Water Class A Certification Review
Wastewater Class A Certification Review
Sept. 21-25, 2020 | Live Virtual Course
Oct. 12-16, 2020 | Live Virtual Course
Online Courses • Asbestos Refresher: Contractor/Supervisor • Backflow Prevention Assembly Tester Training & Certification • Introduction to Backflow Prevention • Florida Water Conservation Coordinator Introductory Course • Hazardous Waste Regulations for Generators
• Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations Class C Training Course • Water Distribution Systems Level 2 & 3 • Water Treatment Plant Operations Class C & B Training Course • Wastewater Class C Certification Review • Water Class C & B Certification Review
• Wastewater Collection Systems
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
Continued from page 42 between 300 and 1000°C in an oxygen-limited environment. Properties of biochar include a high specific surface area (SA), cation exchange capacity (CEC), porosity, and water-holding capacity. Biochar has been widely used as an agricultural soil amendment (Laird et al., 2010) and for water treatment (Mukherjee et al., 2011). Several prior studies showed that amendment of bioretention media with biochar improved their performance for treatment of urban runoff (Tian et al., 2016; Afrooz et al., 2017; Rahman et al., 2020). The high SA and CEC of biochar help to retain DON and NH4+, allowing a longer residence time for microbial transformations (Tian et al., 2016). In addition, the higher water and nutrient retention capacity of biochar-amended bioretention media enhances microbial activity and plant growth. The overall goal of this research is to understand N removal mechanisms and develop guidelines for amending modified bioretention systems, with biochar for treatment of dairy runoff. Four pilot-scale modified bioretention systems were set up in the botanical gardens at the University of South Florida (USF), with and without biochar, and with and without plants. The systems were operated with semisynthetic dairy runoff and monitored for N-species and organic carbon transformations.
Materials and Methods Dairy Runoff Preparation Fresh liquid dairy manure was collected
from South Tampa Farm in Tampa. Manure was mixed with stormwater from a stormwater pond on the USF campus in a 200-L tank and allowed to settle overnight. Supernatant was screened through a 0.25 mm mesh, mixed with additional pond water (60 percent supernatant/40 percent pond water) and stored in a 250-L rain barrel. Target concentrations of N-species and E. coli were 35 mg/l NH4+-N, 1 mg/l NO3--N, 45 mg/l DON, and 1x106 colony-forming units (CFU) E. coli/100 ml, which was similar to livestock runoff composition in prior studies (Ergas et al., 2010; Hu et al., 2011; Andrews, 1992). Porous Media Detailed information on the sand and biochar used in this study was published previously (Rahman et al., 2020). Briefly, masonry sand, with a hydraulic conductivity of 13.2 cm/hour, was purchased from Seffner Rock and Gravel in Tampa. Biochar was generously donated by Biochar Supreme (Loveland, Colo.). Physicochemical properties of biochar, including SA, CEC, pore volume, bulk density, and porosity are presented in the results section. Modified Bioretention Systems Four modified bioretention systems were constructed (Figure 2): S Sand media (S) S Sand media with plants (SP) S Biochar-amended sand media (B) S Biochar-amended sand media with plants (BP)
Figure 2. Cross-sectional diagrams of (a) sand modified bioretention cell with plants (SP), (b) sand modified bioretention cell (S), (c) biochar-amended sand modified bioretention cell with plants (BP), and (d) biochar-amended sand modified bioretention cell (B). Units are in cm.
44 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
The total depth of each bioretention system was 102 cm. From the bottom there was: S 7 .6 cm downgraded white river gravel (3/4 in.) S 30.5 cm IWSZ S 45.7 cm filter medium S 2.5 cm gravel layer (½ in.) S 15.2 cm free board as a ponding layer at top A filter fabric was placed in between the drainage layer and IWSZ layer to avoid washout of fine particles from the system. A perforated polyvinyl chloride (PVC) underdrain pipe, with an upturned outlet elbow, was used to create an IWSZ. Note that the IWSZ did not contain wood chips due to the high dissolved organic carbon (DOC) content (737±200 mg/l) of the dairy runoff. For the B and BP systems, the biochar fraction was 35 percent in the filtration media and 45 percent in the IWSZ. The SP and BP systems were planted with Muhlenbergia (Muhly grass), which was purchased from a local nursery. Muhly grass is a native Florida perennial that attracts wildlife and has favorable light and moisture requirements, growth rate, and mature plant height and spread. After planting, the systems were watered periodically for three months for the growth of roots and biomass before performing dairy runoff experiments. Experimental Design Dairy runoff experiments reported in this article were performed at a hydraulic loading rate (HLR) of 0.98 cm/minute (flow rate of 222 ml/minute). This HLR was selected by assuming a 0.25-in. rainfall event over four hours and that the bioretention surface occupied 5 percent of the drainage area. All experiments reported were carried out at a seven-day antecedent dry period (ADP), which is the time between two successive runoff events. Water Quality Analysis Influent and effluent samples were analyzed using Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA et al., 2018). The TAN and NOx (NO3--N+NO2--N) were measured using a Timberline Ammonia Analyzer (Timberline Instruments; Boulder, Colo.). The TN and total organic carbon (TOC) were measured with a Shimadzu TOC-V CSH TOC/ TN Analyzer (Shimadzu Scientific Instruments; Columbia, Md.). The DON was calculated by subtracting total inorganic nitrogen (TIN = TAN+NOx) from TN. Method detection limits for TAN, NOx, TN, and TOC were 0.05 mg/l, 0.05 mg/l, 0.03 mg/l, and 0.11 mg/l, respectively. The pH and conductivity were measured using a multiparameter meter and calibrated probes. Effluent flow rates were measured volumetrically to assess the hydraulic performance.
% Removal (DON)
% Removal (NOx)
% Removal (TN)
% Removal (TAN)
% Removal (TOC)
Figure 3. Overall N-species removal efficiency (a: TAN, b: NO3-, c: DON, d: TN, and e: TOC) for four modified bioretention systems (BP: biochar with plant bioretention, B: biochar-amended bioretention, SP: sandamended bioretention with plants, and S: sand bioretention system).
Results and Discussion Biochar Characteristics The feedstock used for biochar production was shredded wood chips, which was pyrolyzed at ~900ºC. Analysis of the biochar elemental composition showed that it was composed of 80 percent carbon, 0.4 percent nitrogen, and 9.6 percent oxygen. Due to its high ash content (5.8 percent), the biochar had a high pH (10.12±0.2), which is favorable for nitrification. The biochar had high surface area (537±60.15 m2/g) and CEC (10.57 cmol/kg), which favors DON and NH4+ adsorption. It also had a low bulk density (0.10 g/cm3) and high water holding capacity (874 gH2O/100 g biochar). The high pore volume 0.36 cm3/g included 0.19 cm3/g micropore volume and 0.15 cm3/g mesopore volume. Overall Performance of Modified Systems Average influent concentrations of N-species in semisynthetic dairy runoff were: S TAN: 26.1±9.5 mg/l S NOx: 0.063±0.04 mg/l S DON: 42.7±18.1 mg/l S TN: 68.8±19.2 mg/l Relatively higher influent TOC concentrations (737.5±199.4) were observed,
compared to prior studies. The N-species removal efficiencies for the four modified bioretention systems are shown in Figure 3. Higher TAN removal was observed in biocharamended systems, compared with unamended systems, with the highest (90.6 percent±6.5) and lowest (68.2 percent±20.8) removal efficiencies observed in BP and S systems, respectively. The high CEC of biochar likely resulted in TAN retention, allowing more time for nitrification when compared with the unamended systems. Lower average effluent NOx concentrations were observed for biochar-amended systems (0.721.18 mg/l) than for sand systems (2.09-3.15 mg/l). As influent dairy runoff had high organic carbon content, it was hypothesized that TOC retained in the IWSZ due to adsorption onto biochar was utilized as an electron donor for denitrification. In S and SP, the lack of adsorbed TOC in the IWSZ likely limited denitrification. The DON removal largely depends on either adsorption or ammonification, followed by nitrification. As biochar enhances soil microbial activity due to its high surface area and porosity (Anderson et al., 2011), enhanced adsorption and ammonification resulted in higher DON (<99 percent) removal in B and BP. Average effluent DON concentrations for biochar-amended bioretention systems were 0.07-0.16 mg/l, which
was lower than unamended systems (5.03-5.67 mg/l). The N removal was limited in S (76.89 percent±18.2) and SP (76.26 percent±17.72) bioretention systems compared to B and BP due to low TAN and DON adsorption and limited denitrification. Pollutant Breakthrough During Storm Events Effluent TAN and TN concentration profiles over time for the four bioretention systems for a four-and-a-half-hour storm event are shown in Figure 4. As discuss previously, TAN removal mainly depends on media adsorption, nitrification, and plant uptake. During the dry days between successive runoff events, pore water was replaced by oxygen in the unsaturated zone of the bioretention systems; thus, the adsorbed TAN was nitrified to NO3-, resulting in low effluent TAN concentrations. During the first 90 minutes, both B and BP had low average effluent TAN concentrations (0.93-0.97 mg/l) compared with S (17.3 mg/l) and SP (2.02 mg/l). Ergas et al. (2010) also observed limited nitrification in modified sand bioretention systems treating dairy runoff that included a sandbased unsaturated zone. Once the pore water in the IWSZ was flushed from the systems (90-270 minutes), effluent TAN concentrations in SP Continued on page 46
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
Continued from page 45 increased and were almost similar to S by the end of the experiment. The saturated condition that developed in the aerobic layer for the last hour of the runoff experiments due to water accumulation in the ponding zone resulted in limited nitrification, and therefore, higher effluent TAN concentrations were observed in S and SP. The B and BP systems, however, maintained relatively low effluent TAN concentrations throughout the experiment due to the high affinity of biochar to adsorb positively charged NH4+ ions. Effluent TN concentrations for B and BP systems followed the same breakthrough trends. During the ADP between two rain events, adsorbed TOC was bioavailable in the IWSZ and denitrifying bacteria utilized the desorbed TOC for denitrification; hence, in B and BP during the first 90 minutes, effluent TN concentrations were low and then slowly increased until the end of the experiment. The S and SP had higher effluent TN concentrations from the beginning of the experiment, indicating that limited TOC availability in the IWSZ resulted in lower NO3removal. In addition, DON adsorption and ammonification were low (data not shown).
TAN Conc. (mg/l)
35 30 25 20 15
10 5 0
90 120 150 180 Sampling Time (min)
TN Conc. (mg/l)
60 50 40
30 20 10 0
90 120 150 180 Sampling Time (min)
Figure 4. Pollutant breakthrough curve of (a) TAN and (b) TN for four modified bioretention systems considering 222 ml/minute flow rate for four-and-a-half hours of dairy runoff experiment.
Effect of Plants The effect of plants on N-species removal for bioretention systems, with or without plants, can be seen in Figures 3 and 4. Both systems with plants achieved higher N-species removal efficiencies, compared to systems without plants. Prior research with planted and unplanted bioretention systems also showed that both TAN and NO3- are taken up by plants (Zhang et al., 2011; Lea et al., 2001). Denitrification is also favored by enhanced microbial activity and the availability of organic carbon in the rhizosphere due to the presence of root exudates and sloughed-off root tissues (Havlin, 2013). As shown in Figure 5, after 10 months of operation, the biochar-amended BP had higher biomass growth compared to SP. It has been shown in prior agricultural studies (Karhu et al., 2011) that biochar helps to promote plant growth by retaining moisture and nutrients and stimulating the activity of beneficial microorganisms. Future studies will be carried out to quantify the plant biomass and root growth after dismantling the bioretention systems.
Figure 5: Two modified bioretention systems: (a) sand with plant, and (b) biochar with plant after twelve runoff experiments.
46 September 2020 â€˘ Florida Water Resources Journal
Nitrogen removal mechanisms were investigated in modified bioretention systems, with and without biochar amendment and with and without plants. Addition of biochar enhanced the TAN and DON removal during infiltration. Higher TOC adsorption in the IWSZ in systems
with biochar favored denitrification, resulting in higher TN removal. Due to high moisture and nutrient retention, better plant growth was observed in the biochar-amended system with plants, which also influences N-species removal. Current research is focused on investigating N-species and E. coli removal in these systems under varying HLR and ADP.
Acknowledgments This research was supported by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS), United States, under grant number 025851. The authors would like to thank Steve Youssef for his assistance with sample analysis.
References • A PHA Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association. 23rd Edition. APHA, AWWA, WPCF, Washington, D.C., 2018. https://store.awwa.org/store/productdetail. aspx?productid=65266295. • Andrews, William J., 1992. “Reconnaissance of Water Quality at Nine Dairy Farms in North Florida,” 1990-91. Vol. 92, no. 4058. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, 1992. • Anderson, C. R.; Condron, L. M.; Clough, T. J.; Fiers, M.; Stewart, A.; Hill, R. A.; Sherlock, R. R., 2011. “Biochar-Induced Soil Microbial Community Change: Implications for Biogeochemical Cycling of Carbon, Nitrogen and Phosphorus.” Pedobiologia. 54(5-6), 309-320. • Ergas, S.J.; Sengupta, S.; Siegel, R.; Pandit, A.; Yao, Y.; Yuan, X.; 2010. “Performance of
Nitrogen-Removing Bioretention Systems for Control of Agricultural Runoff.” J. Environ. Eng. Giri, S.; Mukhtar, S.; Wittie, R., 2010. “Vegetative Covers for Sediment Control and Phosphorus Sequestration from Dairy Waste Application Fields.” T. Asabe., 53(3), 803-811. Havlin, J.L., 2013. Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences. Elsevier. Hu, Y. S.; Kumar, J. L.G.; Akintunde, A. O.; Zhao, X. H.; Zhao, Y. Q., 2011. “Effects of Livestock Wastewater Variety and Disinfectants on the Performance of Constructed Wetlands in Organic Matters and Nitrogen Removal,” Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 18(8), 1414. Karhu, K.; Mattila, T.; Bergström, I.; Regina, K., 2011. “Biochar Addition to Agricultural Soil Increased CH4 Uptake and Water Holding Capacity: Results From a Short-Term Pilot Field Study.” Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 140(1-2), 309-313. Lea, P. J., Morot-Gaudry, J. F. (Eds.), 2001. Plant Nitrogen. Springer Science & Business Media. Li, M. H.; Swapp, M.; Kim, M. H.; Chu, K. H.; Sung, C. Y., 2014. “Comparing Bioretention Designs with and Without an Internal Water Storage Layer for Treating Highway Runoff.” Water Environ, Res., 86(5), 387-397. Mahmoud, A.; Alam, T.; Rahman, M.Y.A.; Sanchez, A.; Guerrero, J.; Jones, K.D., 2019. “Evaluation of Field-Scale Stormwater Bioretention Structure Flow and Pollutant Load Reductions in a Semi-Arid Coastal Climate.” Ecol. Eng. X 1, 100007. https://doi. org/10. 1016/j.ecoena.2019.100007. Mantovi, P.; Marmiroli, M.; Maestri, E.; Tagliavini, S.; Piccinini, S.; Marmiroli, N., 2003. “Application of a Horizontal Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetland on Treatment of Dairy Parlor Wastewater.” Bioresour. Technol. 88(2), 85-94.
• M ukherjee, A.; Zimmerman, A.R.; Harris, W.; 2011. “Surface Chemistry Variations Among a Series of Laboratory-Produced Biochars.” Geoderma. 163, 247–255. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.geoderma.2011.04.021. • Nabiul Afrooz, A.R.M.; Boehm, A.B., 2017. “Effects of Submerged Zone, Media Aging, and Antecedent Dry Period on the Performance of Biochar-Amended Biofilters in Removing Fecal Indicators and Nutrients From Natural Stormwater.” Ecol. Eng. 102, 320–330. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2017.02.053. • Prasad, R.; Hochmuth, G.; Wilkie, A.C., 2014. “Anaerobic Digesters for Manure Management at Livestock Operations.” EDIS #SL402; UF/ IFAS Extension: Gainesville, Fla. • Rahman, Y. A.; Nachabe, M. H.; Ergas, S. J., 2020. “Biochar Amendment of Stormwater Bioretention Systems for Nitrogen and Escherichia Coli Removal: Effect of Hydraulic Loading Rates and Antecedent Dry Periods. Bioresour.” Technol. 123428. • Tian, J.; Miller, V.; Chiu, P.C.; Maresca, J.A.; Guo, M.; Imhoff, P.T., 2016. “Nutrient Release and Ammonium Sorption by Poultry Litter and Wood Biochars in Stormwater Treatment.” Sci. Total Environ. 553, 596–606. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016. 02.129. • U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Services (NASS), 2016. Florida Cattle Facts, Mark Hudson, State Statistician, Southern Region, 2290 Lucien Way, Maitland, Fla. www.nass.usda.gov/fl. • Zhang, Z.; Rengel, Z.; Liaghati, T.; Antoniette, T.; Meney, K. “Influence of Plant Species and Submerged Zone With Carbon Addition on Nutrient Removal in Stormwater Biofilter.” Ecol. Eng. 2011, 37 (11), 1833–1841.
NEW PRODUCTS PowerTech Water recently introduced ElectraMet as an advanced solution for removing metals from water streams. The product’s technology includes an electrochemical filter that uses activated carbon electrodes and small amounts of electricity to attract, immobilize, and filter metals with 99 percent selectivity and no sludge production for 100 percent water recovery. It’s energy efficient, high-temperature tolerant (up to 176°F), and acid and alkali tolerant. The energy requirement of the system is less than 0.1 kWh/m3. No chemicals are required, and the system uses no membranes. The technology delivers up to a 90 percent reduction in capital and operating expense with its low energy usage, easy setup
and maintenance, and small footprint that facilitates retrofits. Automated operation and trackable filter life enable ease of operation. The proven technology removes heavy metals from industrial wastewater streams, including lead, copper, iron, manganese, nickel, zinc, chromium, and cobalt. The electrochemical process also uses carbon electrode technology to actively attract, immobilize, and filter metals with 99 percent selectivity, no sludge production, and up to a 90 percent reduction in operating expenses. (www.powertechwater.com)
The Dynasonics TFX-5000 ultrasonic clamp-on meter from Badger Meter accu-
rately measures the volumetric flow of clean liquids and those with small amounts of suspended solids or aeration, such as surface water or raw sewage. It’s ideal for water and wastewater applications, such as lift stations, booster pump station, and water mains. The meter provides accuracy up to plus or minus 0.5 percent and flow rates ranging from 0.07 to 33,000 gpm on pipes from 1/2 to 48 in. Designed to clamp onto the outside of pipes, the meter does not contact the internal liquid, allowing for installation without shutting down operations in new and retrofit applications. It’s equipped with an internal clock and built-in 8-GB data-logging capabilities to log water flow down to one second. (www.badgermeter.com)
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
National Survey Shows High Confidence in Tap Water, Lower Satisfaction Among AfricanAmerican, Hispanic Respondents Four in five Americans served by a water utility (77 percent) say the quality of their tap water is excellent or good, although AfricanAmerican and Hispanic respondents report a lower level of satisfaction, according to a survey conducted by Morning Consult on behalf of the American Water Works Association (AWWA). The June 2020 poll, titled “Public Perceptions of
Tap Water,” included 1,940 respondents served by water utilities. “It’s encouraging to see that overall confidence in tap water is high in the United States,” said David LaFrance, AWWA chief executive officer. “We hope this survey helps water professionals better understand consumer perceptions—both positive and negative—so they can
48 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
continue to address concerns and strengthen public trust.” Fewer than one in 10 Americans believe that their water quality has decreased over the past five years, according to the poll, and 78 percent served by water utilities say they are “satisfied” with their tap water. The poll, however, showed lower satisfaction among African-American and Hispanic respondents, and among respondents with household incomes less than $100,000. Higher-income earners (over $100,000) were more likely to report high levels of safety with their water. White respondents were more likely than AfricanAmerican and Hispanic respondents to report that their water is “very safe.” “The survey underscores that there is still a lot of work to do to earn trust among AfricanAmerican and Hispanic water consumers, and among people with low and middle incomes,” said Melissa Elliott, AWWA president. “Developing solutions to affordability challenges, swiftly addressing water quality issues in disadvantaged communities, and improving communications are key to building confidence in tap water.” The survey showed that consumers who recall receiving communication from their water utility in the last year are more satisfied with their water (85 percent), are more likely to rate their water quality as “excellent” (34 percent “excellent” versus 23 percent “excellent” among those who did not recall communication), and perceive their water as safer (86 percent safe) than those who did not recall any communication (77 percent safe). Despite the fact that water utilities are required to provide annual reports on water quality to consumers each year by mail or online, only 28 percent of respondents served by a water utility recalled receiving any communication from their utility. “It seems clear that consistent communication from utilities is important in strengthening public trust in tap water,” Elliott said. “We need to do a better job of reaching water consumers in ways that are meaningful to them, listening to their concerns, and communicating through the channels they prefer.”
When Experience Matters
Local Site Visits Available WATER TECHNOLOGIES
ACTIFLO® is a proven drinking water clariﬁcation technology in Florida, treating over 200 MGD of surface water in Melbourne, Tampa, and Okeechobee. The ACTIFLO® system has a 20 year performance history of effectively removing turbidity, organics, algae, cryptosporidium, and giradia from surface waters. ACTIFLO® is exclusively represented in Florida by MTS Environmental. Robert Bierhorst, Jr. Wesley Chapel, FL 813-929-4454
W. Wade Wood III, P.E. Tampa, FL 321-299-2395
Eric Peters, P.E. Lakewood Ranch, FL 941-773-5051 Visit us at mts-florida.com
Additionally, ACTIFLO® is an established solution in wastewater treatment, treating wet weather ﬂows; providing primary and secondary clariﬁcation for TSS and BOD removal; and tertiary clariﬁcation for removing phosphorus. email@example.com www.veoliawatertech.com
FWPCOA TRAINING CALENDAR SCHEDULE YOUR CLASS TODAY! Please go to the FWPCOA website
for the latest updates on classes September
14-18...... Reclaimed Water Field Site Inspector...... Orlando.............. $350/380 14-18...... Wastewater Collection C........................... Deltona............... $325 21-23...... Backflow Repair.......................................... Osteen............... $275/305 21-24...... Backflow Tester*......................................... St. Petersburg..... $375/405 25...... Backflow Tester recerts***......................... Osteen............... $85/115
5-9...... Reclaimed Water Field Site Inspector...... Osteen............... $350/380 19-23...... Backflow Tester.......................................... Osteen............... $375/405 30...... Backflow Tester recerts***......................... Osteen............... $85/115
16-18...... Backflow Repair*........................................ St. Petersburg..... $275/305 16-20 ...... Water Distribution Level 3.......................... Osteen............... $225/255 16-20...... Reclaimed Water Distribution Level C...... Osteen............... $225/255
7-11...... Backflow Repair.......................................... Osteen............... $275/305 Course registration forms are available at http://www.fwpcoa.org/forms.asp. For additional information on these courses or other training programs offered by the FWPCOA, please contact the FW&PCOA Training Office at (321) 383-9690 or firstname.lastname@example.org. * Backflow recertification is also available the last day of Backflow Tester or Backflow Repair Classes with the exception of Deltona ** Evening classes *** any retest given also
50 September 2020 â€¢ Florida Water Resources Journal
You are required to have your own calculator at state short schools and most other courses.
WEF Selects 2020 Fellows for Contributions to Water Profession The Water Environment Federation (WEF) has announced 15 distinguished members as the 2020 WEF Fellows recipients. This prestigious designation recognizes member achievements, stature, and contributions in the water profession. “The organization salutes these outstanding individuals and the profound impact they have made on the global water environment,” said Jackie Jarrell, WEF president. “The accomplishments of the 2020 WEF Fellows are a testament to the remarkable dedication and passion of our members.” The WEF Fellows Recognition Program underscores WEF’s role as a valuable water quality resource, which is due in large part to the expertise of its diverse membership. The WEF Fellows are recognized in various areas of expertise, including but not limited to, design, education, operations, regulation, research, utility management, and leadership.
Eligibility Criteria The criteria for eligibility for the program are: S Member of WEF for a minimum of five consecutive years. S Completed and signed WEF Fellows application providing: • Documentation for a minimum of 20 years of professional experience. • Documentation of at least 10 years of professional achievement/ stature and contributions to preserving and enhancing the global water environment in the practice areas served by WEF. S Documented contributions to the member’s profession through active participation in WEF, its member associations, other professional organizations, and community involvement. Include examples of work that convey the impact made in the practice area. (Note: All presentations, papers, and cited works must be properly documented to show ownership.)
S Supporting letters from WEF members, (maximum of five/minimum of three). Two letters must be from peers in the nominee’s practice area and not employed at the same organization as the applicant.
2020 Fellows S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S
The 2020 WEF Fellows are: James Burks, Missouri Water Environment Association Paul Causey, California Water Environment Association Burt Curry, Ohio Water Environment Association Dr. Joel Ducoste, North Carolina Water Environment Association Dr. Val Frenkel, California Water Environment Association Robert Kukenberger, New York Water Environment Association Dr. Larry Moore, Clean Water Professionals of Kentucky and Tennessee Dr. Jan Oleszkiewicz, Western Canada Water Environment Association Dr. Eileen O’Neill, Virginia Water Environment Association Michael Pollen, Alaska Water Wastewater Management Association Charles Tyler, New England Water Environment Association Dr. John Willis, Georgia Association of Water Professionals Keith McCormack, Michigan Water Environment Association Thomas Meholic, New Jersey Water Environment Association Gary Sober, Water Environment Association of Texas
The 2020 WEF Fellows will be recognized on October 7 at 5 p.m. at the WEF awards ceremony during WEFTEC Connect. For more information about the WEF Fellows program, visit http://www.wef.org/weffellowsprogram/.
Water Environment Federation ®
the water quality people
CLASSIFIEDS CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING RATES - Classified ads are $20 per line for a 60 character line (including spaces and punctuation), $60 minimum. The price includes publication in both the magazine and our Web site. Short positions wanted ads are run one time for no charge and are subject to editing. email@example.com
CITY OF WINTER GARDEN – POSITIONS AVAILABLE The City of Winter Garden is currently accepting applications for the following positions:
City of Titusville - Multiple Positions Available
Industrial Electrician, Technical Services Foreman, Maintenance Mechanic, Crew Leader, Equipment Operator, Service Worker, Treatment Plant Operator. Apply at www.titusville.com
EXPERIENCED & TRAINEES/LABORERS - Collection Field Tech – I, II, & III - Distribution Field Tech – I, II, & III - Public Service Worker II - Stormwater Please visit our website at www.cwgdn.com for complete job descriptions and to apply. Applications may be submitted online, in person or faxed to 407-877-2795. Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
Seacoast Utility Authority INSTRUMENTATION & SCADA TECHNICIAN To see full job description, please visit the Seacoast Utility Authority website at https://www.sua.com/employment. https://www.sua.com/employment Excellent benefits to include employer paid health, dental, life, short & long term disability and retirement. Rate of pay: $21.69 to $41.97 HR
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATORS
U.S. Water Services Corporation is now accepting applications for state certified water and wastewater treatment plant operators. All applicants must hold at least minimum “C” operator’s certificate. Background check and drug screen required. –Apply at http://www.uswatercorp.com/careers or to obtain further information call (866) 753-8292. EOE/m/f/v/d
Open until filled. Please submit your resume and application to: Seacoast Utility Authority Human Resources Department 4200 Hood Rd Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Phone: 561-656-2258
Reiss Engineering delivers highly technical water and wastewater planning, design, and construction management services for public agencies throughout Florida. Reiss Engineering is seeking top-notch talent to join our team!
Available Positions Include:
Client Services Manager Water Process Discipline Leader Senior Water/Wastewater Project Manager Wastewater Process Senior Engineer Project Engineer (Multiple Openings)
U.S. Water Services Corporation is now accepting applications for maintenance technicians in the water and wastewater industry. All applicants must have 1+ years experience in performing mechanical, electrical, and/or plumbing abilities and a valid DL. Background check and drug screen required. -Apply at http://www.uswatercorp.com/careers or to obtain further information call (866) 753-8292. EOE/m/f/v/d
Utilities, Inc. Water & Wastewater Operators
Utilities, Inc. of Florida, a Corix Company, is accepting applications for Water and Wastewater Operators. Applicants must possess a minimum Florida Class C Water or Wastewater license. Applicants must have a valid Florida driver’s license with a clean record. To view and apply for positions please visit our web site, www.myuiflorida.com. Under “Contact Us”, click on Employment Opportunities.
To view position details and submit your resume: www.reisseng.com
Are you a Wastewater Treatment Operator Rockstar? Then come join our incredibly awesome team at one of the fastest growing areas in Central Florida. Must hold at least a Class “C” license and a valid driver’s license. Starting Pay Range: $35,000 $37,000yr – 10% more if you have a dual license or a Class A or B. Applications online www.wildwood- fl.gov or City Hall, 100 N. Main St, Wildwood, FL 34785 Attn: Melissa Tuck. EEO/AA/V/H/ MF/DFWP.
52 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
LOOKING FOR A JOB? The FWPCOA Job Placement Committee Can Help!
Contact Joan E. Stokes at 407-293-9465 or fax 407-293-9943 for more information.
NEWS BEAT Continued from page 41 In a recent AWWA Water Science article, Caitlin Proctor and colleagues synthesized available, peer-reviewed literature on the implications of water stagnation in plumbing systems and practices to resolve issues created by the stagnant water. The coronavirus pandemic has necessitated the closure of many buildings, which in turn has led to water stagnation in building across the United States and in other nations. Water quality degrades under stagnant water conditions and can pose a health concern for building occupants. The open-access article, “Considerations for Large Building Water Quality After Extended Stagnation,” aims to inform ongoing efforts to create building recommissioning guidance. The authors are Caitlin R. Proctor, William J. Rhoads, Tim Keane, Maryam Salehi, Kerry Hamilton, Kelsey J. Pieper, David M. Cwiertny, Michele Prévost, and Andrew J. Whelton. “We don’t design buildings to be shut down for months. This study focuses on the consequences and could help building owners make sure that their buildings are safe and operational when occupants return,” said Andrew Whelton, an associate professor of civil engineering and environmental and ecological engineering at Purdue University, in a press release. Understanding the science behind when and how stagnation impacts water quality for building occupants, and knowing the steps that can be taken to remediate it, are essential to developing sound protocols for building owners, plumbers, and workers. See the COVID-19 and waterborne pathogen water resource pages at www.awwa. org for additional information.
Large harmful algal blooms of M. aeruginosa are now annual occurrences in Lake Okeechobee and can persist during most of the year because of favorable environmental conditions. To address these environmental and health concerns, the Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute at Florida Atlantic University received a $2.2 million grant from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection as a result of a competitive application process in response to the office of ecosystem projects harmful algal bloom innovative technology program. The project team will develop a comprehensive sensing and information visualization package that will augment
the state’s existing monitoring programs. It will expand water, sediment, and biological measurements using innovative harmful algal bloom detection and environmental characterization technologies. This system will allow the pinpointing of problem areas prior to or early on when harmful algal blooms are emerging. More information can be found at http:// www.fau.edu/newsdesk/articles/habs-lakeokeechobee.php).
The American Water Works Association (AWWA) and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service have jointly published “Protecting Drinking Water at the Source.” This brochure provides a concise overview and suggests ways water utilities can partner with the Forest Service to protect an invaluable natural asset. The Forest Service manages nearly 200 million acres of land across the U.S., and close to 20 percent of its population’s water supply comes from national forest system lands. Utilities forming partnerships with the Forest Service to plan and implement ecosystem-based management can help water utilities ensure water quality and quantity for their customers. It can also help support the protection of headwaters, which is important because of the connections between the forest cover/forest health, stream health, water treatment costs, and long-term reliability of the drinking water source. The brochure can be found on the AWWA source water protection resource page at www.awwa.org. The AWWA) Manual M75 Elastomers for Waterworks: Pipes, Valves, and Fittings, First Edition manual is also now available. The manual helps operators, technicians, and engineers gain a comprehensive overview of the use and selection of elastomers and understand their mechanical properties and chemical resistance. It also provides critical information on their storage, handling, maintenance, and inspection. The manual presents the history and general application of elastomers in waterworks pipes, valves, and fittings, as well as the principles used for evaluating, selecting, testing, and maintaining various seals. It provides guidance on generally available elastomers and their application. The manual can be purchased online in the AWWA Store and is also available as a PDF download and as a PDF download and print set.
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has awarded a $125,000 resiliency grant to improve the management of Sarasota County beaches. This funding will aid the development of a comprehensive vulnerability study and subsequent resilience plan that will allow federal, state, and local officials to collaboratively and strategically plan for sea level rise along sandy shorelines of the county. The FDEP is making it a priority to support coastal communities in the planning and preparation for the two to three feet of sea level rise that Florida is expected to experience by 2060. The county is home to nearly 35 miles of sandy shorelines, of which 24.2 miles have been designated as critically eroding. The county does not currently have a resilience plan for coastal management that addresses current conditions, existing management strategies, and projected sea level rise. “I’m pleased to celebrate this historic step for beach management in Sarasota County and across our state,” said Sen. Joe Gruters at a recent meeting. “Beaches are economic drivers for the state and are part of our way of life, and recognizing this, we continue to make restoration of our beaches a priority. It’s no surprise that this region will be leading the way in addressing the importance of incorporating sea level rise into our beach management strategy.” A comprehensive study has never been completed that focuses specifically on the effects of sea level rise on future coastal management practices. The strategic plan that will be developed with the aid of this funding, combined with existing coastal management practices, will allow partner agencies to build resilient beach and dune systems that will continue to provide recreational and natural resource benefits to residents and visitors, and reduce flooding and storm erosion damage to upland property. A countywide resilience plan will also outline roles and responsibilities for the four main local coastal management sponsors. The grant will pay for the county to research how sea level rise will affect the local shoreline and to develop a plan to adapt to the changes. According to a department spokesperson, the county can either use the money to conduct the study itself or hire external staff. The county has until July 2020 to use the funds.
Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2020
SERVING FLORIDA’S WATER AND WASTEWATER INDUSTRY SINCE 1949
Test Yourself Answer Key From page 33
January..........Wastewater Treatment February........Water Supply; Alternative Sources March.............Energy Efficiency; Environmental Stewardship April...............Conservation and Reuse May.................Operations and Utilities Management June...............Biosolids Management and Bioenergy Production July................Stormwater Management; Emerging Technologies August...........Disinfection; Water Quality September.....Emerging Issues; Water Resources Management October..........New Facilities, Expansions, and Upgrades November......Water Treatment December......Distribution and Collection Technical articles are usually scheduled several months in advance and are due 60 days before the issue month (for example, January 1 for the March issue). The closing date for display ad and directory card reservations, notices, announcements, upcoming events, and everything else including classified ads, is 30 days before the issue month (for example, September 1 for the October issue). For further information on submittal requirements, guidelines for writers, advertising rates and conditions, and ad dimensions, as well as the most recent notices, announcements, and classified advertisements, go to www.fwrj.com or call 352-241-6006.
Display Advertiser Index ADS Enviro�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 35 Blue Planet�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 55 CEU Challenge�������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 21 Data Flow����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19 FSAWWA Water Equation���������������������������������������������������������������11 FSAWWA Fall Conference��������������������������������������������������������� 12-17 FWPCOA Online Institute��������������������������������������������������������������� 22 FWPCOA Training Calendar���������������������������������������������������������� 50 Grundfos������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5 Heyward��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2 Hudson Pump �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 31 Infosense����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 37 J&S Valve���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 29 Krausz���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 28 Lakeside Construction��������������������������������������������������������������������� 7 Orenco��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 39 Stacon������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 2 UF Treeo Center������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 43 Water Science Associates������������������������������������������������������������� 27 Violia������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 49 Xylem����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 56
54 September 2020 • Florida Water Resources Journal
1. D) significant industrial users.
Per the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) pretreatment program website, “Pretreatment is the removal, reduction, or alteration of pollutants in industrial wastewater prior to discharge or introduction into a domestic wastewater treatment facility (WWF). . . In general, a pretreatment program may be required if a publicly owned WWF receives discharge from significant industrial users and the WWF discharges to either surface waters of the state or various reuse systems in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 62-610, F.A.C.”
2. C ) pass through the WWF inadequately treated.
Per FDEP’s pretreatment program website, “The goals of a pretreatment program are: • To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the WWF that will cause interference with its operation; • To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the WWF that will pass through the WWF, inadequately treated, into waters of the state; • To provide protection for both public health and welfare and WWF workers; and • To promote beneficial reuse and recycling of domestic wastewater and residuals from WWFs.
3. B) control authority.
er FAC 62-625.200(5), Definitions, “‘Control P authority’ means any public utility that administers a pretreatment program that has been approved by the department in accordance with the requirements of rule 62-625.510, F.A.C. In cases where categorical or significant noncategorical industrial users discharge to domestic WWFs that are not included in an approved pretreatment program, the department shall function as the control authority until an approved pretreatment program has been established by the public utility.”
4. C) sewer use ordinance.
Per FDEP’s FGM, Chapter 3, “Regardless of whether the control authority is a single municipality or a regional sewerage authority composed of several jurisdictions, its legal authority derives from state law (general statutes). This broad legal authority allows the local pretreatment program to be tailored to individual circumstances, while, at the same time, satisfying minimum federal program requirements. When the control authority is a municipality, the basic implementation and enforcement requirements of its pretreatment program are detailed in a sewer use ordinance. Typically, this ordinance is part of the city or county code.”
5. C) 5 mgd
Per FAC 62-625.500(1)(a)3, Pretreatment Program Development and Submission Requirements, “The public utility owns or operates one or more WWFs with a total design flow greater than 5 million gallons per day (mgd). The department shall also require that a public utility that owns or operates one or more WWFs with a design flow of 5 mgd or less to establish a pretreatment program if it finds that the nature or volume of the industrial influent, treatment process upsets, violations of WWF effluent limitations, contamination of domestic wastewater residuals, or other circumstances require a pretreatment program in order to prevent interference with the WWF or pass through.”
6. B) 25,000 gal per day
er FAC-62-625.200(25)(a) and (b) Definitions, P “(25) “Significant industrial user” means, except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d), the following: (a) Categorical industrial users; and, (b) Any other industrial user that discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to the WWF (excluding domestic wastewater, noncontact cooling and boiler blowdown wastewater); contributes a process waste stream which makes up 5 percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the treatment plant; or is designated as such by the control authority on the basis that the industrial user has a reasonable potential for adversely affecting the WWF’s operation or for violating any pretreatment standard or requirement in accordance with paragraph 62-625.500(2)(e), F.A.C.”
7. D ) Part III and Part V Groundwater Recharge and Indirect Potable Reuse.
Per FAC 62-610.330(1), “A pretreatment program shall be developed and implemented, in accordance with Chapter 62-625, F.A.C., for reuse projects regulated under Parts III or V of Chapter 62-610, F.A.C., or under Rule 62-610.525, F.A.C., if the wastewater facility receives discharges from significant industrial users, as defined in Rule 62-625.200, F.A.C. Pretreatment program requirements apply only to public utilities, as defined in Rule 62625.200, F.A.C.”
8. A) Annually
Per FDEP’s FGM, Chapter 5 Industrial Waste Surveys, “Florida regulations [subparagraph 62-625.500(2)(b)1., F.A.C.] require public utilities to identify and locate all possible industrial users (IUs) that might be subject to the pretreatment program. . . In addition (as part of their annual report), paragraph 62625.600(8), F.A.C. requires a control authority to update its list of IUs annually and to detail standards that apply to each IU (including SIUs). To comply with these requirements, the public utility must develop and implement sound procedures to conduct an industrial waste survey.”
9. B ) an emergency situation or violation.
Per FDEP’s FGM, Chapter 7, Inspections and Sampling of IUs, “Demand sampling and industrial inspections are usually performed in response to a complaint, an emergency situation, or a violation. A control authority may receive complaints from the public or reports from other agencies concerning discharges to the WWF by an IU. Demand sampling and inspections should also be initiated if control authority personnel notice changes in the influent characteristics of the treatment plant or an upset or interference of treatment plant processes.”
10. C) $1,000 per day per violation.
Per FDEP’s FGM, Chapter 9, Enforcement, “Civil penalty amounts are generally limited through state or municipal laws. However, the general pretreatment regulations require control authorities to have the legal authority to seek or assess civil or criminal penalties of at least $1,000 per day for each violation. The control authority should consider the range of options available under state law to collect penalties.”
LETâ€™S MIX PERFORMANCE WITH ADJUSTABILITY
The Flygt 4320 submersible mixerâ€™s revolutionary design couples a high-efficiency mixer with an integrated variable frequency drive. The 4320 simplifies variable speed mixing and eliminates the need for an external VFD. A variety of ratings and propeller options meet a broad range of thrust requirements. And with motor efficiency comparable to the Super Premium Efficiency IE4 levels and fully adjustable speed, the Flygt 4320 delivers the lowest life cycle mixing energy costs. Superior mixing with adjustability and simplicity, for unsurpassed energy savings. For more information contact your local Xylem product sales professional. Xylem Products 2152 Sprint Boulevard Apopka, FL 32703 407-880-2900
Emerging Issues and Water Resources Management