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
News and Features
Business Office: 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: Lisa Prieto (FWEA) Prieto Environmental LLC Treasurer: Rim Bishop (FWPCOA) Seacoast Utility Authority
2019 Florida Water Resources Conference: Piecing Together Florida’s Water Future—Holly Hanson Mike Bailey to Lead FSAWWA in 2019 WEF Announces Fourth Year of Storm System Award Winners Register Now for 2019 Florida Water Resources Conference Contests! Water Main Integrity Programs: Budget-Friendly Triage for Water Utilities—Richard N. Davee From AWWA: Just Say “Yes”! Florida Teams Compete in Operations Challenge at 2018 WEFTEC Septic to Sewer Transition: A Guidance Document Paves the Way—Terri Lowery Florida Water Utility Director Named 2018 WEF Fellow The Secure Interconnect: Securing Remote Access and Data Exchange for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Networks—Bob George 51 News Beat 54 Project Measures Water, Nutrients, and Energy Recovered by U.S. Utilities 4 12 16 20 36 38 40 42 43 44
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.
Technical Articles 8 Capital Improvement Program Forecasting to Analytically Target Distressed Infrastructure—Pollop Phonpornwithoon, Joseph Lakner, and Jonathan Goldman 22 Use of Precorroded Linear Polarization Probes and Coupons for Conducting Corrosion Control Studies—Steven J. Duranceau, Angela B. Rodriguez, Carlyn J. Higgins, Rebecca Wilder, Samantha Myers-O’Farrell, Samantha J. Black, and Benjamin A. Yoakum
Education and Training 13 14 15 21 31 35 41 53 55
FSAWWA Membership Awards FSAWWA Training FSAWWA Water Equation Program FWPCOA Training Calendar TREEO Center Training AWWA/AMTA Membrane Technology Conference Florida Water Resources Conference FWPCOA Online Training CEU Challenge
Columns 18 Let’s Talk Safety 30 Test Yourself—Donna Kaluzniak 32 FWEA Chapter Corner: Southwest Chapter Holds Successful Charity Golf Tournament—Dustin Chisum 34 C Factor—Mike Darrow 39 FSAWWA Speaking Out—Bill Young 48 Contractors Roundup: What’s Next for Water?— Mark A. Kelly 50 Reader Profile—Kim Kowalski 52 FWEA Focus—Kristiana S. Dragash
Departments 56 Service Directories 59 Classifieds 63 Display Advertiser Index
ON THE COVER: Utility workers for the City of Pompano Beach install pipe for its system. (photo: Randy Brown)
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 • December 2018
2019 Florida Water Resources Conference: Piecing Together Florida’s Water Future Holly Hanson In April 2019 we will be returning to Tampa—city of entertainment, lights, museums—and, oh yes, the Florida Water Resources Conference (FWRC). Water professionals from around the United States will be on hand for and presentations knowledge-driven discussions on cutting-edge technological development. The exhibit floor will have the newest and best equipment and technology, with the most comprehensive array of products on display. The FWRC is ranked second in the U.S. in size for a joint water and wastewater event, with unparalleled access to more than 350 manufacturers and service providers. A joint conference of Florida’s three major water industry organizations: Florida Section American Water Works Association, Florida Water and Pollution Control Operators Association, and Florida Water Environment Association (Florida chapter of the Water Environment Federation), FWRC is scheduled for April 14-17, 2019, at the Tampa Convention Center. The conference, with a technical program, exhibits, awards luncheons, meetings,
contests and competitions, and other events, will offer something for everyone in the water and wastewater industry.
Tour South Cross Bayou Advanced Water Reclamation Facility On Sunday afternoon plan to tour the South Cross Bayou Advanced Water Reclamation Facility to view this 33-milliongallon-per-day wastewater treatment plant and learn about the importance of resource recovery from wastewater. The facility is described as a “factory” that produces reclaimed water, fertilizer, and energy. Focused on sustainability, the facility has produced nearly 3.5 billion gallons of reclaimed water for irrigation purposes and 6,000 tons of fertilizer through pelletization. This facility also has two independent and parallel disinfection methods: ultraviolet and chlorine. This green-energy plant tour will depart at the front of the convention center on Sunday, April 14, at 12:30 p.m., and return at 4 p.m.
Innovative Technical Program The technical program, with sessions, workshops, and discussions that integrate the
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
brain and the brawn, will provide an understanding of, and offer solutions for, the imposing daily challenges being faced by the water sector. Recognized water quality speakers, who are experts in their fields, will address the technical, managerial, regulatory, and environmental needs of today—and the challenges of the future. Utility managers, engineers, operators, chemists, engineers, product representatives, municipal and industrial regulators, administrators, academicians, and researchers will have an opportunity to interact with decision makers and problem solvers concerning such subjects as coastal water issues, water supply, wastewater treatment, disinfection and public health, distribution and collection systems, stormwater and green infrastructure, utility management, leadership, facility operations and maintenance, legislative and regulatory matters, sustainability and climate change, reclamation and reuse, resources recovery, potable water, conservation and management, contractor issues, laboratory practices, biosolids and residuals, nutrient removal, modeling/geographic information systems (GIS)/instrumentation, and much more. Continued on page 6
Continued from page 4
Exhibit Hall: Learning and Networking Featuring more than 350 exhibitors, FWRC is Floridaâ€™s marketplace for this multifaceted industry and provides access to the most cutting-edge technologies in the field, serves as a forum for domestic business opportunities, and promotes invaluable peer-to-peer networking. As the need for water increases, here you will find industry representatives willing to help you select the products and services you need to fill demands.
Other opportunities for excellent networking include: S Operators Showcase - A relaxed gathering to discuss both basic fundamentals and complex issues with other operators. S Young Professionals Reception - Established specifically for those just embarking on a water or wastewater career. S Contractors Council - A gathering of professional contractors discussing common issues. S Women of Water Forum - After a phenomenally successful second endeavor at the 2018 conference, leaders will again converge to discuss the pivotal role that women play in the water industry.
University Students: Floridaâ€™s Future Engineers Present Their Work As a forum to showcase the capabilities of students studying environmental engineering, the annual Student Design Competition will have several teams representing Florida colleges and universities presenting their synopses. Initiated in Florida, this competition has now become an international event at the annual Water Environment Federation Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC). Another venue for students is the Student Poster Contest, held on the exhibit floor, allowing attendees to view and discuss their project. Intended to promote education in a variety of water-related projects, this is an excellent opportunity for prospective employers and employees to connect. Winners of both events receive cash rewards and move on to national competitions.
Get Involved and Support the Industry Utilities can enter teams to compete in the Operations Challenge or the Top Ops Competition held during the conference. Winners from these events travel to the national competitions at WEFTEC and the American Water Works Association Annual Conference and Exhibition (ACE). The Best Drinking Water Contest, which will name the best water from a Florida utility, will also take place, as well as a fundraiser for Water For People.
Conference Information is Just a Click Away The Westin Waterside and the Embassy Suites Downtown, both located minutes from the convention center, will serve as the host hotels. Visit www.fwrc.org for more conference information and registration forms. Make plans now to attend this exciting conference and raise your career, your company, and the water industry to new heights! Holly Hanson is executive director of the Florida Water Resources Conference. S
December 2018 â€˘ Florida Water Resources Journal
F W R J
Capital Improvement Program Forecasting to Analytically Target Distressed Infrastructure Pollop Phonpornwithoon, Joseph Lakner, and Jonathan Goldman alm Beach County Water Utility Department (PBCWUD) owns and operates a wastewater collection system consisting of 1,250 mi of gravity sewer pipe, ranging in size from 4 to 30 in. in diameter, and 600 mi of wastewater force main that has been in operation for over 50 years, A program was recently initiated by PBCWUD to develop a desktop analysis approach to access these systems, and it determined that the analysis would help to best allocate inspection, maintenance, and replacement projects and project future capital improvement programs (CIPs). The PBCWUD contracted with CDM Smith to assist in the development of the analysis tool using existing geographic information system (GIS) data, determine infiltration within the systems, evaluate the systems, identify pipes for inspection, perform pipeline assessment certification program (PACP) inspections, rank inspected pipes, and develop design packages for identified pipes renewal. Renewal efforts by PBCWUD focused on combining four decision levels:
S Long-range planning or capital renewal needs estimating pipe-specific life expectancy for the next 100 years. S Risk-based pipe ranking using GIS software. S PACP inspection of gravity sewer systems and ranking of pipes from inspection. S Decision framework to optimize and schedule the pipe renewal cured-in-place pipe (CIPP).
Pollop Phonpornwithoon, EI, PMP, is a project manager with Palm Beach County Water Utilities. Joseph Lakner, EI, is an engineer with CDM Smith in Edison, N.J. Jonathan Goldman, P.E., is an associate with CDM Smith in Boca Raton.
Installed Pipeline Inventory
Service Life Curve Development
Table 1 lists the gravity and force main pipeline asset groupings used in the analysis, and the total mi of pipe installed as extracted from the GIS at PBCWUD. The polyvinyl chloride (PVC) material makes up the majority of the gravity and force main systems (92 and 65 percent, respectively), with ductile iron mains representing the majority of the remaining material for each system. It’s important to note this, as the assumptions regarding the service lives of these major materials will have the greatest impact on the results of the analysis. Figure 1 geographically locates vintage pipes by age.
The renewal modeling calculations used estimated pipe service life values to develop service life curves, indicating how the pipe assets will “survive” over time. These curves are developed using a three-point method: S The first point on the curve indicates the date at which the majority (i.e., 90 percent) of the pipes within that group is expected to be in service (before they have the potential to “fail”). S The second point on the curve is the point at which 50 percent of the pipes in that category are expected to be in service (assuming half also fail). S The third point on the curve is the date at which only 10 percent of the pipes are expected to remain in service, on average.
Table 1. Palm Beach County Water Utility Department Pipeline Materials and Lengths
This can similarly be related to human life expectancy curves, with the majority of people statistically surviving to middle age, some infant mortality, and some people living to very old age. The analysis utilizes an industry standard pipeline aging distribution function developed by R.K Herz in 1996 and used throughout a number of pipeline asset analysis software packages. The Herz distribution function is used to randomly select pipeline segments of each material type based on the service life curve values. The software then models the potential failure of each pipeline type over time, based on its installation year. By doing this, the software model generates a random distribution of potential pipeline failures to mimic real-world asset degradation. In order to develop the service life values for the PBCWUD systems, information gathered during previous nearby projects in Miami, Boca Raton, and Seminole County; Raleigh, N.C.; and
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
from discussions with other utilities was used. The latest guidance from American Water Works Association (AWWA) regarding water main service lives was also utilized. Table 2 lists the sewer main service lives by material type recommended by AWWA for utilities in the United States. Based on discussions with PBCWUD staff, it was determined that the AWWA service life value estimates might represent service lives that are too long for use in the more caustic wastewater pipeline environments. The agreed-upon pipe service life values shown in Table 3 were used in PBCWUD’s long-term renewal needs analysis. Long-Term Renewal Needs Results Using the pipe groupings and service life values in Table 3, the renewal needs model provided a year-by-year pipeline quantity (by material type) that should be targeted for replacement between 2016 and 2116 (100-year study period). The model output is a list of pipeline quantities by material (in mi) that reach their end-of-service life in a given future year.
Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the renewal needs for PBCWUD’s gravity sewer and force main pipeline networks for the next 100 years. The horizontal axis is the projected years 2016 through 2116; the vertical axis is the mi of pipe renewal needed by material per year based on the service life. The total renewal needs for the gravity main system is shown in Figure 2 in the “top” portion of the stacked bands, with the peak need of 29.5 mi of pipeline occurring in 2054, or 2.25 percent of the total 1,313 mi analyzed. The total renewal needs for the force main system is shown in Figure 2 in the “top” portion of the stacked bands, with the peak need of 16 mi of pipeline occurring in the Year 2052, or 2.4 percent of the total 668.7 mi analyzed. The width of each colored band indicates the estimated amount (in mi) of each material type that needs to be considered for renewal in each future year. The general industry guidance is to reach a “sustainable” renewal level per year. If 1 percent of the system were renewed each year, the entire system would be completed over 100
years and remain consistent with the average material service life (assumed to be 100 years). The dashed black line shown in Figures 2 and 3 represents the average renewal needs for each system over the 100-year analysis period, or 12.5 mi of renewal for the gravity system and 5.9 mi for the force main system. Each of those values is approximately 1 percent of the system per year. The solid grey line represents a recommended approach to stepping up the renewal amounts over the next 15 years for each system. These renewal rates and amounts were used in conjunction with the pipe-by-pipe risk ranking analysis to develop final recommendations for a multiyear capital plan.
Risk-Based Pipeline Asset Ranking The ranking approach used for the PBCWUD analysis assesses the gravity and force main pipeline assets involved in the use of GISbased software in calculating the probability and Continued on page 10
Table 2. American Water Works Association Service Life Values
Table 3. Palm Beach County Water Utility Department Pipe Service Life Values Used
Figure 1. Age of Gravity Mains Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Continued from page 9 consequences of failure for each pipeline. These factors are separated into groups by probability factors and by consequence of failure factors, which together represent the predicted risk of failure of the asset. Failure Risk Factor Data, Weights, and Analysis While there are multiple factors that can result in pipeline failure, this project considered 31 total risk factors that provided a clear difference between individual pipe segments within the two PBCWUD networks. Ensuring a clear difference between pipe segments is the key to ranking pipe assets for renewal. Most utilities can identify the small percentage of pipelines that are in poor condition and those that have higher consequences of failure within a system; however, once those assets are addressed, it’s often hard to logically determine the next set of critical pipelines for renewal to mitigate future pipeline degradation and failure. Probability of Failure Risk Factor Table 4 provides brief descriptions of each of the probability of failure factors used in the analysis. Each factor has been given a unique identifier number (P1 through P11) for easy reference and use within the final-ranking database table and all documentation developed for the project (note that not all factors apply to both the force main and gravity main systems). The table indicates the systems involved for each factor. Each factor utilized a scoring range to ac-
count for different factors, or ranges, of variation in the scoring, as well as an overall weight for each factor. For example, the probability of failure for pipelines based on the previous failures, or breaks (P2 factor), requires a range of scores based on the number of total breaks that the pipelines within the system have experienced; the individual pipelines were then scored based on the number of breaks each experienced. Each of the scores was then multiplied by the factor weight (5 being the highest weight and 1 being the lowest weight) to arrive at a final score for the P2 factor for each pipe. The weighting values provided PBCWUD staff with the ability to assign the importance (or rank) to each of the factors against one another. For each of the probability factors, a description of the factor’s intent in assigning a probability of failure, as well as the process and data used in calculating each factor, are discussed. In addition, a table and map illustrating the overall results for the corresponding pipelines within the system for that factor are shown (Table 4 and Figure 4). Each table describing the results includes the input value, the score value for each, the total score (score multiplied by the weight), the total mileage of pipeline for that input value, and the overall percentage of the collection system pipelines for that input value. Consequence of Failure Risk Factors The consequence of failure measures how disruptive or damaging a pipe failure can be. Risk factors associated with the consequence of pipe failure were developed and applied to the analysis as described. The consequence of failure factors have
Figure 2. Projected Gravity Sewer Main Pipeline Renewal Needs Through 2116 (in mi)
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
been given a unique identifier number (C1 through C20) for easy reference and use within the final-ranking database table and all documentation, user manuals, and tools for the project. Each factor utilized a scoring range for the different types of factors, or ranges, of variation in the scoring, as well as an overall weight for the factor. The weighting values (5 being the highest weight and 1 being the lowest weight) provide PBCWUD with the ability to assign importance, or rank, to each of the factors against one another. As with the probability of failure factors, each of the consequence of failure factor descriptions in this section provides the factor’s intent in assigning consequence of failure, as well as the process and data used in calculating each factor. A map and table illustrating the overall results for the pipelines within the collection system are then developed. System-Wide Risk Ranking Results In order to classify the results for the total consequence, probability, and normalized total risk into the best groups to use the results to drive renewal activities within the system, the use of the Jenks Natural Breaks classification method was recommended. This method of identifying the best breakpoints within a range of values utilizes data-clustering methodology to determine the best arrangement of values into different classes by seeking to minimize each class’s average deviation from the class mean, while maximizing each class’s deviation
Figure 3. Projected Force Main Pipeline Renewal Needs Through 2116 (in mi)
from the means of the other groups. This thereby reduces the variance within each class and maximizes the variance between classes. Ten scoring ranges were used in ranking pipeline assets (Figure 4), and the Esri ArcGIS software includes tools to categorize the results of the risk-ranking tools into scoring ranges using the Jenks methodology. The risk-ranking values are normalized to 1,000, where the maximum score is set to 1,000 and all others are divided by this value to create a consistent and comparable range of values.
Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Survey Plan and Sanitary Sewer System Analysis The highest-risk pipeline areas forming the analysis were prioritized into three areas of immediate need for field inspection. Closed-circuit television (CCTV) data were gathered and inspected using the GraniteNetTM inspection software platform. All located defects were coded in accordance with PACP standards, and all digital records were stored in both GraniteNet and PACP exchange formats for redundant record keeping (GraniteNet is the native inspection file specified by PBCWUD). Videos were reviewed in detail for each pipe, pipe segment coding, and scoring using PACP defect descriptions, which included:
S Structural Defect Coding – This group includes the type of defects where the pipe is considered to be damaged, ranging from a minor case defect to a more severe case, depicted as pipe failure. This group includes defects described as cracks, fractures, broken pipe, holes, deformities, collapsed pipe, joint defects, surface damage defects, weld failures, point repair codes, brickwork defects, and lining failures. S Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Coding – This group includes the various codes that involve the spectrum of defects that may impede the O&M of the sewer piping system, and is comprised of defects such as roots, infiltration, deposits and encrustations, obstacles/obstructions, and vermin. S Construction Features Coding – This group includes the various codes associated with the typical construction of the sewer piping system and is comprised of defects associated with taps, intruding seal material, pipe alignment codes, and access points. S Miscellaneous Features Coding – This group includes observation codes, such as water levels, detection of sags, pipe material changes, and dye testing notes.
a distinct code (1-5) for each structural defect and O&M defects observed during the CCTV inspection. The interface software used during CCTV inspections assigned the PACP codes and recorded them in an information database. The PACP system, however, does not account for factors like pipe material, depth, soil, or surface condition. The developed algorithm included pipe material, which PBCWUD identified as important due to specific maintenance problems associated with pipe types in the system. The pipe material algorithm ensures that all clay pipes will receive, at a minimum, a structural score of 3. Defects Identification The National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO) PACP version 6.0.1 classifies defects as either a structural or O&M type, with coding of 1 through 5 (1 being a minor defect and 5 being the most severe). Table 5 summarizes the found structural and O&M defects Continued on page 12
The PACP standard condition grading system was then applied to define inspected pipe segments with defects. The PACP system assigns
Table 4. Probability of Failure Factors
Figure 4. Map of Total Probability Failure Results: Gravity Mains Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Mike Bailey to Lead FSAWWA in 2019 On November 28, Mike Bailey became the 93nd chair of the Florida Section American Water Works Association at the section’s annual Fall Conference. He succeeds Bill Young. Mike is the utilities director and city engineer for Cooper City, which is a relatively small (for south Florida standards) municipality in south central Broward County. In 1987, after graduating from the University of South Florida with a bachelor of science degree in mechanical engineering, Mike started his career as an engineering inspector for the City of Margate. In 1988, he began working for the City of Fort Lauderdale as a utilities engineer, obtained his professional engineering license in 1992, and eventually worked his way up to assistant utilities director before taking on his current position in 2005. Mike joined FSAWWA in 1988. He credits his first bosses in Fort Lauderdale, Allen B. Roberts and Frank Coulter, for encouraging
Continued from page 11 that occur in each level for the inspected pipes. Structural defects are grouped into seven categories: broken, deformed, cracked, fractured,
him to attend the state and national conferences and get involved (meaning “voluntold”) with the organization. In fact, Allen took him to his first AWWA Annual Conference and Exhibition in Cincinnati in 1990. Over the years, Mike has progressively engaged with FSAWWA, first by volunteering for various events, and eventually becoming Region VI chair in 2008 and again in 2012. He was also honored with the Allen B. Roberts Jr. Award in 2006. “The section has been so valuable to me, both professionally and personally. I really credit the organization for much of the success I’ve had in my career and I’ve also made several friends through FSAWWA.” When asked about leading FSAWWA in 2019, Mike answered “I’m really proud of this organization and our industry in general, and am truly honored to be given the opportunity to continue the great work and progress of the past chairs. It’s humbling to think that I’ll be asked to fill the shoes of
hole, sag, and joint. Fractures, sags, and cracked pipe are the three most prevalent defects observed in the inspected system. The O&M defects are grouped into four categories: infiltration,
Table 5. Structural and Operation and Maintenance Defects in Gravity Sewer
folks like Allen and Frank, and so many other past chairs I’ve met in my 32 years in this business.” Mike lives in Weston with his wife, Jean, and together they have three wonderful children (Brooke, Brianne, and Brett), who are scattered across the United States! S
roots, tap, and deposits/obstructions. The most common O&M defect observed in the inspected pipes was infiltration, and the majority of infiltration was coded as level 4 and 5.
Results The goal of the PBCWUD 2017 collection system rehabilitation project was to prioritize lift station basins for rehabilitation, field-inspect the highest-priority lift station basins using standardized NASSCO methods, and identify pipes for rehabilitation. Sanitary sewer renewal and rehabilitation design packages are being developed from the pipes identified during this analysis. By using the GIS-based statistical desktop analysis, PBCWUD evolved from using a basic reactive method to proactive rehabilitation planning. The desktop analysis first reduced the areas to be inspected in the field, reducing mobilization and inspection costs incurred when the lift station basins in good condition are inspected. Field inspections, combined with the standardized pipe scoring, pinpointed the pipes for rehabilitation. Pinpointing individual pipes reduced the cost from the previous method of rehabbing the entire basin. S
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ December 2018
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ December 2018
WEF Announces Fourth Year of Storm System Award Winners Twenty-two high-performing municipalities received recognition in the fourth annual National Municipal Stormwater and Green Infrastructure Awards presentation. These awards celebrate administrators of municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) that perform beyond regulatory requirements. Developed and introduced in 2015 by the Water Environment Federation (WEF), in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), this yearâ€™s distinctions were awarded on October 1 to the winners during the annual Stormwater Congress Luncheon at WEFTEC 2018 in New Orleans. The awards recognize performance in the categories of innovation and program management, as well as combined high scores in both categories. Applications for the awards are reviewed by a broad work team of water sector experts. The awards are separated into two classifications based on the population of the communities they serve. The classifications are: S Phase I, which encompass cities with more than 100,000 customers S Phase II, which encompass smaller storm sewer systems outside of heavily populated urban areas The winners of the 2018 awards are: Phase I Winners S Lexington-Fayette (Ky.) Urban County Government, Division of Water Quality Program Management and Overall Highest Score S (Ky.) Metropolitan Sewer District - Innovation
Phase II Winners S City of Alexandria, Va. - Innovation and Overall Highest Score S City of Auburn, Ala. - Program Management In addition to the winners, the other applicants were categorized into levels signifying their status among other MS4 communities across the United States. Each MS4 received a certificate indicating either silver- or gold-level status in both program management and innovation. Silver Recognition in Innovation Phase I S Anne Arundel County, Md. S City of Dayton, Department of Water, Ohio S City of Glendale (Ariz.) Water Services Department S City of Los Angeles, Sanitation and Environment, Watershed Protection Division S City of Pensacola, Fla. S District Department of the Environment, Washington, D.C. S Fairfax County (Va.) Department of Public Works and Environmental Services, Stormwater Planning Division S Jefferson Parish, La. S State of Hawaii Department of Transportation, Highways Division, Oahu District Phase II S Capitol Region Watershed District, Minn. S City of Richmond (Va.) Department of Public Utilities
S S S S S S S
East Lampeter Township, Pa. Lake Havasu City, Ariz. Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District Sewerage and Water Board of New Orleans St. Tammany Parish Government, La. Town of North Hempstead, N.Y. Town of Yarmouth, Mass.
Gold Recognition in Program Management Phase I S Anne Arundel County, Md. S City of Dayton, Department of Water, Ohio S City of Glendale, Water Services Department, Ariz. S City of Los Angeles, Sanitation and Environment, Watershed Protection Division S District Department of the Environment, Washington, D.C S Fairfax County (Va.) Department of Public Works and Environmental Services, Stormwater Planning Division S Jefferson Parish, La. S State of Hawaii Department of Transportation, Highways Division, Oahu District Phase II S Capitol Region Watershed District, Minn. S City of Richmond (Va.) Department of Public Utilities S East Lampeter Township, Pa. S Lake Havasu City, Ariz. S Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District S Sewerage and Water Board of New Orleans S Town of Yarmouth, Mass. Silver Recognition in Program Management Phase I S City of Pensacola, Fla. Phase II S St. Tammany Parish Government, La. S Town of North Hempstead, N.Y. For more information about the MS4 to go program, recognition S www.wef.org/MS4awards.
December 2018 â€˘ Florida Water Resources Journal
LET’S TALK SAFETY This column addresses safety issues of interest to water and wastewater personnel, and will appear monthly in the magazine. The Journal is also interested in receiving any articles on the subject of safety that it can share with readers in the “Spotlight on Safety” column.
Listen Up to Protect Your Hearing wenty-two million workers are exposed to potentially damaging noise at work each year. In 2016, United States businesses paid more than $1.5 billion in penalties for not protecting workers from noise.
While it's impossible to put a number to the human toll of hearing loss, an estimated $242 million is spent annually on workers' compensation for hearing-loss disability. Short-term exposure to loud noises can cause a temporary change in hearing or a
ringing in the ears (tinnitus). Short-term hearing problems may go away in time; however, repeated exposures to loud noise can lead to permanent tinnitus and/or hearing loss.
Visualizing Hearing Loss A good analogy to explain how hearing loss occurs is to visualize a thick grassy lawn. As you walk across the grass, it bends down because of your weight; after you pass, the grass stands back up. The more you walk across the same area, the longer it takes for the grass to stand back upright. If you continue to walk across the same area, eventually the grass will die and the area becomes a dirt path. The same thing can happen to your hearing. When sound vibrations enter your ear, tiny hair cells in the inner ear change the vibrations into nerve impulses. The nerve impulses are then transmitted to the brain, where they are translated into the sound we hear. When the hair cells are subjected to excessive noise, they begin to lie down just like the grass does when it’s stepped on. After the noise subsides, the hair cells stand back up. Over time, the more noise the hair cells are exposed to, the longer it takes for them to stand back up. Eventually, they fail to return to normal, resulting in permanent hearing damage.
How Noisy is Your Workplace? What are the warning signs that your workplace may be too noisy? Noise may be a problem if: S You hear ringing or humming in your ears when you leave work. S You have to shout to be heard by a coworker an arm's length away. S You experience temporary hearing loss when leaving work. Noise below 85 decibels (dB) is considered safe to work in throughout an eight-hour day. Prolonged exposure to any noise above 85 dB can cause gradual hearing loss; the higher the The 2017 Let's Talk Safety is available from AWWA; visit www.awwa.org or call 800.926.7337. Get 40 percent off the list price or 10 percent off the member price by using promo code SAFETY17. The code is good for the 2017 Let's Talk Safety book, dual disc set, and book + CD set.
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
decibel level of noise you are exposed to, the shorter the time you are allowed to work around the noise. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention says that regular exposure to 110 dB for more than one minute risks permanent hearing loss, which is the level of sound an average chainsaw makes. An ambulance siren is about 120 dB. When noise levels vary, a mathematical calculation is used to determine a timeweighted average of the noise exposure (11 dB = 0.5 hour). If the sound level is a constant 95 dB, a worker could be in the noisy environment for a total of four hours out of an eight-hour work shift; if the sound level were a constant 100 dB, a worker could be exposed for a total of two hours.
A wide variety of noise sources may exist in the workplace. This graph provides examples of some common sources and their expected noise levels. (source: National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health)
Wear the Right Ear Gear The noise level in a work area can be reduced by wearing appropriate hearing protection, which must be labeled to show its effectiveness. The effectiveness is rated via the noise reduction rating (NRR); the higher the NRR, the more protection provided. If the outside noise is 110 dB, hearing protection with an NRR of at least 25 dB would be needed to keep the noise level at 85 dB (110 dB – 25 dB = 85 dB). Additional protection can be obtained by wearing an earmuff over earplugs. Don’t be fooled, however, into believing that the protection will be the total of both NRRs added together; the increased protection will only muffle about 2 to 5 dB. The highest NRR is provided by moldable earplugs—if they are worn correctly. The plugs can be made of foam, wax, silicone, or other materials and fit directly in the ear canal. The next highest NRR is the earmuff, which can be custom-fitted. The least-effective protection is semi-insert plugs, which are two earplugs held over the ends of the ear canal by a rigid headband. Remember—there can be a wide range of NRR ratings for the same type of protection. Read the label and follow the manufacturer’s recommendations for wearing and maintaining the products.
Hearing Conservation Program An effective hearing conservation program must be implemented by employers in general industry whenever worker noise exposure is equal to or greater than 85 dB for an eight-hour exposure, or in the construction industry when exposures exceed
90 dB for an eight-hour exposure. The program should strive to prevent initial occupational hearing loss, preserve and protect remaining hearing, and equip workers with the knowledge and hearing protection devices necessary to protect them. Key elements of an effective hearing conservation program include: S Workplace noise sampling, including personal noise monitoring that identifies which employees are at risk from hazardous levels of noise. S Informing workers at risk from hazardous levels of noise exposure of the results of the noise monitoring. S Providing affected workers or their authorized representatives with an opportunity to observe any noise measurements conducted. S Maintaining a worker audiometric testing program (hearing tests), which is a professional evaluation of the health effects of noise upon individual worker's hearing. S Implementing comprehensive hearing protection follow-up procedures for workers who show a loss of hearing
(standard threshold shift) after completing baseline (first) and yearly audiometric testing. Proper selection of hearing protection based upon individual fit and manufacturer's quality testing, indicating the likely protection that they will provide to a properly trained wearer. Evaluating hearing protector attenuation and effectiveness for the specific workplace noise. Training and information that ensures the workers are aware of the hazard from excessive noise exposures and how to properly use the protective equipment that has been provided. Data management of, and worker access to, records regarding monitoring and noise sampling.
For more information go to the Occupational Safety and Health Administrtion hearing protection program website at www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/noise/hcp/index.h tml. S
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Register Now for 2019 Florida Water Resources Conference Contests! Participants are encouraged to sign up for the Operations Challenge and Top Ops Competition, which will be held at the Florida Water Resources Conference on April 13-17, 2019, at the Tampa Convention Center.
team in the 2018 contest is especially encouraged to participate in next year’s event. For information and entry forms, contact Chris Fasnacht, Operations Challenge chair, at 407-709-7372 or email@example.com.
Operations Challenge Treatment plant operators from across Florida will compete in the 30th annual Operations Challenge. Participants will be timed in five separate operational competitions to determine the state’s representative for the national Operations Challenge at WEFTEC 2019 in Chicago. The Operations Challenge promotes team building, leadership, education, and pride within a utility. Any utility that didn’t have a
Top Ops Competition The annual statewide Top Ops contest will also be held at the 2019 conference. Top Ops is the “College Bowl” of the water industry. Teams of one, two, or three water operators or laboratory personnel from the FSAWWA regions compete against each other in a fastpaced question-and-answer tournament at the conference. A moderator poses a wide range of technical questions and math problems, and
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
the team scoring the most points in the final round is awarded the Florida Section AWWA Top Ops championship. The winning team will earn a trip to ACE19 in Denver, to compete with teams from other American Water Works Association sections in the national Top Ops contest. Utilities throughout the state are encouraged to enter. Teams do not have to consist of employees of the same utility, and multiple utilities can sponsor a team. No video, audio, or digital recordings will be allowed during the competition. For registration forms and the 2019 rules, contact Chris Wetz, Top Ops Committee chair, at firstname.lastname@example.org or 727-2153514, or visit www.fsawwa.org/topops. S
FWPCOA TRAINING CALENDAR SCHEDULE YOUR CLASS TODAY! December 10-14 ....Water Distribution Level 3 ..................Osteen ..........$225/255
UPCOMING 2019 CLASSES January 14-18 ....Wastewater Collection C ......................Pembroke Pines$225/255 14-18 ....Stormwater C ........................................Osteen ............$260/290 25 ....Backflow Tester Recerts*** ..................Osteen ............$85/115
............................................................ 4-8 ....Water Distribution Level 3 ..................Osteen ............$225/255 4-8 ....Reclaimed Water Distribution C ..........Osteen ............$225/255 18-21 ....Backflow Tester ......................................Osteen ............$375/405 22 ....Backflow Tester Recerts*** ..................Osteen ............$85/115
March 18-22 ....SPRING STATE SCHOOL ........................Ft. Pierce
April 1-5 ....Wastewater Collection C ......................Osteen ............$225/255 8-10 ....Backflow Repair ....................................Osteen ............$275/305 26 ....Test Retakes ............................................Osteen ............$80 26 ....***Backflow Tester Recerts ..................Osteen ............$85/115 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 email@example.com. * Backflow recertification is also available the last day of Backflow Tester or Backflow Repair Classes with the exception of Deltona ** Evening classes
You are required to have your own calculator at state short schools and most other courses.
*** any retest given also Florida Water Resources Journal â€¢ December 2018
F W R J
Use of Precorroded Linear Polarization Probes and Coupons for Conducting Corrosion Control Studies Steven J. Duranceau, Angela B. Rodriguez, Carlyn J. Higgins, Rebecca Wilder, Samantha Myers-O’Farrell, Samantha J. Black, and Benjamin A. Yoakum s water is transported through the drinking water distribution system, physical, chemical, and microbiological transformations may occur, possibly resulting in degraded water quality. These interactions occur in the bulk water phase and surfaces in contact with the water column. There are many causal factors that contribute to corrosion and tuberculation within drinking water distribution systems and customer home plumbing. Corrosion in water distribution systems typically involves the internal corrosion of pipe materials due to flow velocity, dissolved oxygen, pH, and minerals in the near neutral solution of potable water. Internal corrosion occurs either by abrasion, metabolic activity, electrochemical processes, dissolution, or a combination of these mechanisms. Treatment for corrosion control is typically intended to inhibit dissolution by altering water characteristics, such that chemical reactions between the water and the pipe surface favor the formation of a protective layer on the interior pipe walls. The ideal protective coating would be present throughout the distribution and home plumbing systems, be relatively impermeable and resistant to abrupt changes in water velocity, and be less soluble than the pipe material. The objective of corrosion control treatment is to inhibit the dissolution (release) of metals (such as lead and copper) from the pipe material to the potable water. Alteration of the water quality characteristics by a treatment method can extensively reduce some forms of corrosion activity, and to a lesser extent, the impact from other factors. Adjustments made to pH, alkalinity, calcium content, and use of proprietary inhibitors are commonly used to effectively reduce corrosion rates in water systems. Often it's common for water purveyors to feed a blended orthophosphate-polyphosphate inhibitor prior to the distribution system; silicates are less commonly used. The role of inhibitors is to form a protective film and to sequester metal ions. Excessive doses of inhibitors could create a build-up of metal complexes on the pipe wall causing the release of corrosion byproducts into the potable water or a combination of these two
circumstances. Testing is typically required to evaluate the plethora of available formulations. In this work, the use of precorroded linear polarization resistance (LPR) probes and coupons for conducting accurate and rapid corrosion control inhibitor screening studies is discussed. A corrosion control testing rack apparatus using two identical parallel flow loops was designed and constructed to house mild steel and lead and copper coupons used for weight loss analysis, as well as mild steel, lead solder, and copper electrodes used for LPR analysis. Unlike other studies, coupons and electrodes were precorroded to simulate existing distribution system conditions.
Water Distribution System Regulatory Considerations The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), pursuant to the requirements of the 1986 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), promulgated the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) on June 7, 1991, which established an action level (AL) of 0.015 mg/L for lead and 1.3 mg/L for copper in public water supplies[1,2,3]. The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40 Parts 141 and 142 present the requirements for the control of lead and copper in potable water systems (PWS). The rule was intended to minimize lead and copper in drinking water, primarily by reducing water corrosivity. This regulation required utilities to apply treatment techniques to meet the action levels in order to control lead and copper release from distribution systems into drinking water at the tap. The state of Florida administers the LCR per federal requirements specified under Title 40 CFR Part 141 (Subpart I) through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). The FDEP has published rules that adopt the national primary and secondary drinking water standards of the federal government, as well as create additional rules to fulfill state requirements. They are contained in Chapters 62-550, 62-555, and 62560, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). Chapter 62-550.800, F.A.C. (Control of Lead and Copper) presents details related specifically to the LCR requirements (detailed at the website
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Steven J. Duranceau, Ph.D., P.E., (to whom correspondence should be addressed) is professor in environmental engineering at the University of Central Florida (UCF) in Orlando. Angela B. Rodriguez, M.S., E.I., and Carlyn J. Higgins, M.S., E.I., are graduate research assistants at UCF. Rebecca Wilder, P.E., is assistant facilities manager for Jupiter Water and Stormwater Utilities. Samantha Myers-O'Farrell, M.S., E.I., is a project engineer at Jacobs in Jacksonville. Samantha J. Black, Ph.D., is a water/wastewater engineer with HDR in Raleigh, N.C. Benjamin A. Yoakum, Ph.D., E.I., is a project engineer with Wright-Pierce in Orlando. At the time this work was conducted, the co-authors were graduate research assistants at UCF.
(http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/drinkingwater/docs/62-550_800_1.pdf) as follows: S In-home tap sampling for large, medium, and small systems S Source water and water quality parameters sampling S Lead and copper action levels S Corrosion control treatment S Public education and notification The PWSs that are subject to compliance must demonstrate that either an “optimal” treatment technology has been implemented for the control of lead and copper, or existing concentrations of lead and copper at residential taps are below the respective action levels mandated by the LCR. It’s important to note that exceeding the lead or copper AL is not a violation of the LCR, although an exceedance does require that a utility take additional action to reduce lead and copper concentrations with its water distribution system and notify consumers. Under the LCR there are two major corrosion control treatment measures: water chemistry control or the use of corrosion inhibitors in water treatment.
Corrosion Study Methods and Techniques
Table 1. Metal Alloys and Respective Unified Numbering System Numbers
Coupons The most fundamental method for evaluating corrosion studies has been the “cook and look” method using metal coupons that can be manufactured in a number of shapes[4,5,6]. Metal coupons can be fabricated into any size, shape, or material required for testing. In the use of coupons, preweighed metal samples are exposed to a fluid medium (usually potable drinking water), and after the desired exposure period, are removed, cleaned of corrosion products, and reweighed. Weight loss can be converted to average corrosion rate of mils per year (mpy) using Faraday’s law. Using corrosion coupons for weight loss (corrosion rate) measurements are advantageous as they are simple and inexpensive, allowing analysis of corrosion products that can easily be done in a laboratory or on service equipment. This method, however, requires long-term exposures to be more accurate, as short-term tests can yield misleading information. Electrochemical Methods Alternative electrochemical methods have been evaluated for use since World War II to overcome the length of testing requirements in performing corrosion control studies. Today, linear polarization techniques used to rapidly study uniform corrosion represent one of the more widespread technologies used in the application of electrochemical measurements, both in the laboratory and the field[5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. The LPR is one type of electrochemical method used to monitor corrosion, as well as other processes, such as material polarization resistance. The LPR involves the monitoring of the existing relationship between the current and the electrochemical potential, allowing the measurement of corrosion rates. This method is widely employed in liquid solutions, where it has been found to be effective. The measurement of the corrosion rate provides a means for operators to generate immediate feedback and has been used for more than 50 years due to its efficiency. The use of the "polarization resistance" for measuring corrosion rates has one particularly important advantage: The potential range investigated is close to the corrosion potential and the applied currents are generally smaller than the corrosion current. Thus, the nature of the surface is not changed significantly, and the reactions that proceed during polarization are those that actually occur during the corrosion process. This is not necessarily the case when a corroding surface is markedly polarized, since under such conditions, Continued on page 24
Figure 1. Corrosion Loop Test Rack Design Example (Maui, Hawaii) (photo: Angela Rodriguez)
Figure 2. Example of Corrosion Loop Test Rack Design Schematic
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Figure 3. Metal Coupon Test Rack Component Use of coupons provides an average weight loss value. Coupons can also be analyzed for surface characteristics [“cook and look”]. (photo: Benjamin A. Yoakum)
Continued from page 23 the subsequent corrosion rate may be affected for some time after polarization has been discontinued. The use of these electrochemical techniques does not mean that they are without complications; the effects of scan rate, solution resistance, and changing surface conditions must be controlled using sophisticated equipment to minimize complications. Corrosion Testing Applications The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) developed a pipe loop system for determining the effectiveness of corrosion control chemicals in potable water[12,13]. The USACE used the recommended design demonstrated at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland (circa 1990), several years prior to the promulgation of the SDWA’s LCR. In addition, the Water Research Foundation (WRF) had developed a soldered copper tubing test loop for use in conducting corrosion control studies. Few utilities have relied to any great extent on the USACE and WRF methods to conduct corrosion studies since the implementation of the LCR. Moreover, municipal water supply corrosion control studies have typically focused on the water distribution system and not within the actual water treatment process clearwells, process transfer stations, and appurtenances. Duranceau and colleagues investigated the use of electrochemical noise corrosion monitoring for water purveyors. Electrochemical noise (EN) involves the monitoring of instantaneous fluctuations in corrosion current and corrosion potential normally observed between nominally identical electrodes of the material of interest in the environment of interest. The EN corrosion monitoring estimates corrosion rates from naturally occurring fluctuations of potential and current where no applied voltages or currents are
Figure 4. Linear Polarization Probe Test Rack Component The change in resistance of the electrochemical probe over time is measured; the rate of change is directly proportional to the corrosion rate in mils per year. (photo: Benjamin A. Yoakum)
used; however, EN methods (like the USACE and WRF methods) are not uniformly used or accepted by mainstream municipal water purveyors due to cost, complexity, and application limitations. The LPR methods are more commonly accepted by a far wider audience. Additionally, prior municipal corrosion control studies have historically relied on virgin components during implementation of the studies. These methods do not account for existing system conditions and rely on “cook and look” or “concentration” data to ascertain corrosion methods. Corrosion testing by weight loss methods generally requires extended testing periods that do not necessarily produce satisfactory results. This is particularly true when the corrosion rate changes with time. Consequently, the University of Central Florida (UCF) has conducted research that has focused on overcoming some of the challenges posed when conducting chemical-based treatment evaluations used for internal corrosion control evaluations. A corrosion control testing program that served as the basis for the development of the testing rack methods is described herein. The results of initial corrosion control assessments for one municipal water supply has been reported elsewhere, and since that time, UCF has further enhanced the testing rack concept, modifying the design and procedures for intent and focused implementation[16,17,18]. This article describes the testing apparatus and methods used, and reviews applications as case studies.
Methods and Materials Corrosion Test Rack A corrosion control testing rack apparatus was designed and constructed for use in research conducted by UCF, as depicted as an example in
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Figure 1. The testing apparatus housed mild steel, lead and copper coupons, and LPR electrode probes. Coupons and probes were inserted in the order of least noble to most noble. Electrodes were fastened to LPR probes, which were inserted into the corrosion apparatus. To evaluate corrosion control chemicals in a comparison mode, one side of the apparatus, referred to as the “control condition,” was supplied potable water that did not contain corrosion control chemicals, while the identical parallel side of the corrosion apparatus, termed the “test condition,” was supplied potable water that had been dosed with a corrosion control chemical (i.e., pH adjustment, calcium, alkalinity, or inhibitor addition). Water flow to the apparatus was controlled with an on/off timer to represent variations in the system and in homes. Test conditions were maintained by controlling flow and chemical dosage within a predetermined target range. The corrosion rates of mild steel, lead, and copper electrodes are measured routinely (typically twice per day) using a portable corrosion data logger. This data logger instrument measures the change in resistance of the electrochemical probe over time and displays the result in mpy. The rate of change is directly proportional to the corrosion rate. The test apparatus is comprised of two parallel flow-through pipe loops equipped with chemical injection ports, in-line static mixers, LPR probes, flow meters, sampling ports, LPR data loggers and transmitters, precision flow control valves, and automatic flow on/off control. The LPR data are monitored with two identical sets of probes; one set of probes is for mild carbon steel, lead, and copper monitoring that are installed on each side of the test rack. Lead probe tips for this application are manufactured by applying a thin film of 50:50 tin:lead solder over a copper elecContinued on page 26
Continued from page 24 trode to simulate soldered joints in a copper water line. Coupons are typically comprised of cartridge brass, while electrodes are manufactured using red brass. Probe tips and coupons can be acquired from several corrosion vendors; however, for the work described in this article, Metal Samples Company (P.O. Box 8, 152 Metal Samples Rd., Munford, Ala. 36268) was used. After the assessment of each chemical treatment method (in this case, an inhibitor) is completed, coupons and electrodes can be shipped to Metal Samples Company (or a similar entity) to conduct a post analysis evaluation. Table 1 presents the metal materials used in the testing rack. The metal types shown represent distribution system materials of construction found in homes and residential service lines. Figure 2 presents a layout of a wall-mounted rack design to illustrate an example layout of piping components[16,17,18], although mobile designs can be made available. Figure 3 presents a pipe loop showing placement of metal coupons within the apparatus. Figure 4 presents a pipe loop showing placement of linear polarization probes so that the metal component is in the middle of the flow pattern, representing home piping. Operating Procedures After installation of the corrosion rack, the test rack is flushed with potable water at a rate of 8 to 10 gal per minute (gpm) to remove any material debris that may be attached to the interior surface of the piping and appurtenances. While the system is flushing, the rack is checked for proper operation of flow meters, timers, and valves, as well as pipe leaks. The chemical metering pumps are frequently checked and calibrated for proper dosage operation. After flushing and calibration, LPR probes and metal coupons are inserted into the test rack. The timer is programmed for proper operation. The LPR probes and metal coupons are handled using latex gloves to avoid leaving fingerprint residues that could influence the corrosion activity and the accuracy of the corrosion measurement. The LPR probes and electrodes are securely placed in the racks in the order of iron, copper (or brass), and lead (based on metal nobility). The LPR is the key tool used to obtain “instantaneous” corrosion rate data, which are collected using a handheld meter (MS1500E) that plugs into each probe installed on each rack. The device reads corrosion rate and pitting index. The corrosion rate is determined by measuring the current from a small applied electrical potential difference between two measurement electrodes of each material. The pitting index is a qualitative measurement of an alloy’s tendency to corrode uniformly across its surface. Approximately 20
millivolts (mV) are applied between the test and auxiliary electrodes, for a predetermined time cycle, and the polarizing current at the end of the cycle is stored. The applied potential is then automatically reversed, and the equilibrium polarizing current value is again stored. The average value of the polarizing current, in the forward and reverse polarizations, is then automatically used to calculate and display the corrosion rate as mpy.
corroding surface potential (Ecorr) within the linear response range between the current versus voltage curve. Polarization resistance is measured from the slope of this line and has resistance units. The measured polarization resistance is converted to a corrosion rate by application of a conversion constant derived from the Stern and Geary equation, as shown in Equation 3.
Measuring Techniques The gravimetric method, or weight loss method, analyzes the net average effect of corrosion over a specific time period, but does not directly determine the corrosion rate. Stern and Geary[8,9] found that a region of linear dependence of potential on an applied current can be described for a corroding electrode by treating it in a manner analogous to that for a noncorroding electrode. According to Porter and Ferguson, the LPR technique measures electrochemical current of an electrode surrounded with the water under consideration. When using the gravimetric method, as shown in Equation 1, it can be used to calculate the corrosion rate.
where, W=weight loss (g) D=density of the metal (g/(cm3 ) A=area of test specimen (in2) T=exposure time (hours) K=5.34 x 10^5 The LPR method allows corrosion rates to be measured directly, and is based on the principle that, at relatively low corrosion potentials, the rate of corrosion is a linear function of polarization resistance. Equation 2, a modified version of Faraday’s law, can be used to calculate the corrosion rate[8,9,18,20]. (Equation 2)
where, C=corrosion rate (mpy) ICORR=corrosion current generated by the flow of electrons E=equivalent weight of the corroding material (g) A=area of corroding electrode (cm2) D=density of corroding metal (g/cm3) A linear polarization measurement involves a single short-duration (less than 60 seconds) polarization offset close to the freely
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
where, icorr = corrosion current density, A/cm2 Rp = polarization resistance (Ep/i) Ep = polarization offset (<0.01 V) i = measured current density, A/cm2 Ba = anodic Tafel constant Bc = cathodic Tafel constant Wilcoxon-Signed Ranks Test According to Wysock and colleagues, utilizing the Wilcoxon-signed ranks test for corrosion monitoring can statistically show if one treatment method is more effective than another. Consequently, the Wilcoxon-signed ranks test was conducted on the corrosion rates measured for corrosion research performed by UCF. The Wilcoxon-signed ranks test was used to compare test and control conditions prior to and after treatment (chemical or proprietary inhibitor). (Equation 4)
where: T+= sum of the ranks of positive differences between test and control conditions n = number of observations If the Z-value falls outside of the critical region determined by a 95 percent confidence interval, the null hypothesis can be rejected. Alternatively, if the calculated Z-value falls within the range specified by a 95 percent confidence interval, then the null hypothesis will not be rejected. Two Wilcoxon-signed ranks tests are recommended to be conducted on each metal for the assessment of each inhibitor: one during the precorrosion phase (a two-tailed test), and another during the inhibitor-effectiveness phase of testing (a one-tailed test). The null hypothesis for each metal before inhibitor addition is that the test and control conditions corroded at equal rates. Failure to reject the null
hypothesis implied that the corrosion rates in the test and control conditions were equal. The alternative hypothesis of the precorrosion phase was that the test and control corrosion rates were different. As both sides of the corrosion apparatus received the same water, it was not expected that corrosion rates should differ. In theory, if one condition was corroding at a faster rate than the other prior to inhibitor addition, it would be difficult to compare results after inhibitor addition. The Wilcoxon-signed ranks test was found useful when evaluating corrosion rack data.
Results and Discussion Corrosion control within the water treatment facility and distribution system is imperative to the long-term performance of a water purveyor’s infrastructure. Internal corrosion can lead to deterioration of the system infrastructure and water quality, leading to taste, odor, and microbial growth problems. Changes in water conditions without changes in corrosion control treatment can impact lead, copper, and iron release, thus compliance, and operating and maintenance costs; if not properly selected, use of an incompatible corrosion control treatment method may result in regulatory noncompliance. Because corrosion is an electrochemical process, monitoring methods that take advantage of electrochemical processes are typically very rapid, as compared to the traditional methods of weight loss coupons, and include electrical resistance probes or direct inspection by visual or surface analytical means. Although existing distribution system plumbing materials are already at least partially corroded, many corrosion studies cited in the literature evaluated corrosion rates using virgin coupons and electrodes. Subsequently, the method developed in research conducted by UCF assessed the corrosion inhibitors’ ability to reduce mild steel, lead, and copper corrosion rates under precorroded conditions. At the start-up of each inhibitor evaluation, mild steel, lead, and copper components experienced high corrosion rates, eventually stabilizing to a relative steady state (corrosion fluctuations remain; however, a baseline can be statistically determined). Use of parallel test racks allows a direct comparison of test versus control conditions. It’s acknowledged that the use of coupons provides limited value when conducting screening studies of short duration. Although mpy measurements in these cases may not be accurate, evaluation of surfaces using X-ray spectrophotometric techniques may provide beneficial perspectives on corrosion morphologies.
Figure 5. Example Graph Displaying Corrosion Rate (mils per year) Versus Time [10,11]
Water Plant Infrastructure Corrosion Control Example Unlike previous studies, this research assessed the corrosion inhibitors’ ability to reduce mild steel, lead, and copper concentrations under precorroded conditions. Prior research indicates that corrosion inhibitors are a viable option to reduce mild steel, lead, and copper release within the distribution system. Findings demonstrate that orthophosphate- and polyphosphateblended inhibitors are largely successful in inhibiting and sequestering lead and copper in home taps. Duranceau and colleagues indicated that corrosion inhibitors can be added to membrane permeate to prevent scaling and corrosion in pipes and other appurtenances. Phosphatebased inhibitors, including blended orthophosphate:polyphosphate (ortho:poly) inhibitors, are available in a variety of compositions. According to Cantor and researchers, polyphosphates are used to minimize the sequestering of metals, while orthophosphate is added to protect against scale formation. These researchers[22,23,24] recommended that water purveyors conduct controlled monitoring evaluations of corrosion inhibitors prior to implementation. Figure 5 provides a representative graphical display of corroding mild steel probes, followed by a stabilization period, then a response after chemical treatment for permeate water blends of nanofiltration and reverse osmosis processes[16,17]. The graphical display illustrates mild steel corrosion rates before and after the addition of a phosphate-based chemical corrosion control inhibitor as a function of operating time. In this example, it is noted that during the precorrosion phase, mild steel corrosion rates decreased in both the test and
control conditions. Subsequently, after the inhibitor was added to the test side of the corrosion apparatus, mild steel corrosion rates began to increase in the test condition, yet continued to decrease in the control condition. Although not shown, this water supply responded favorably to corrosion control treatment for copper and lead materials, and hence was recommended for use in this example water system[16,17,18]. This example serves to demonstrate that inhibitor use for lead and copper may have slight adverse effects on iron-based components (such as cast iron pipe) in the distribution system. Distribution System Infrastructure Corrosion Control Example Figure 6 provides another example, in a graphical display, for groundwater supply and corroding copper probes. As in Figure 5, the initial corrosion period is followed by a stabilization period, then a negative response after chemical treatment. The graphical display illustrates copper corrosion rates before and after the addition of a phosphate-based chemical corrosion control inhibitor as a function of operating time. In this example, it's noted that during the precorrosion phase, copper corrosion rates decreased in both the test and control conditions. Subsequently, after the inhibitor was added to the test side of the corrosion test rack, copper corrosion rates began to increase in the test condition, but decreased in the control condition. In this example the corrosion rates for copper were low, without the need for chemical treatment. For this water, a phosphate-based corrosion control inhibitor would not be recommended. Continued on page 28
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Continued from page 27 Figure 7 provides a representative graphical display of the corrosion rate response of mild steel probes, exposed to changing disinfectant cycles, in a surface water chloramine system. Average baseline-measured corrosion rates were 1.5 mpy for mild steel, 0.3 mpy for copper, and 0.4 mpy for lead solder. Conversion to chlorine disinfection did not have an effect on copper and lead solder corrosion rates, but did increase the mild steel corrosion rate significantly. The increase in the mild steel corrosion rate under chlorine disinfection was positively correlated to the total chlorine residual concentration. The threshold total chlo-
rine residual concentration, past which mild steel corrosion rates did not return to baseline after switching back to chloramines from chlorine, was 5.0 mg/L as Cl2. In addition, the unusual mild steel and copper baseline corrosion curve shape (logarithmic instead of exponential) was theorized to be due to high organic acid content forming a protective layer on the metal surface. The weightloss-based calculated corrosion rates for the copper and lead solder coupons were found to be lower than the LPR measurements. Scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-ray analysis of the mild steel coupon tuberculation layer found that its structure and
appearance could be attributed to organic/biological influences. The findings from this one example study shed light on the morphological and elemental differences of tuberculation layers from a chlorine and chloramine system, and also elucidated the sensitivity of corrosion rates to changes in disinfectant type. This is particularly important for chloramine systems that practice regular chlorine maintenance cycles to control nitrification problems in their distribution systems.
Opinion of Probable Corrosion Test Rack Cost and Water Quality One complete set of replacement probe tips and coupons approximated $2,500, with testing period intervals that approximate two months. Metal coupons, holders, probes, and other miscellaneous wands approximated $3,900, while an LPR probe, handheld meter approximated $1,400, providing an opinion of probable construction costs of close to $11,000. Water quality parameters evaluated in this research include pH, temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, alkalinity, total chlorine, chloride, calcium and total hardness, and orthophosphate. Also, pH, temperature, chlorine, and orthophosphate are recommended to be measured twice per weekday, while other water quality parameters can be evaluated twice per week (or at a different frequency, as desired).
Figure 6. Representative Plot Illustrating Metal Release for Incompatible Inhibitor Type
Figure 7. Representative Plot Illustrating Metal Release for Changing Disinfectant Type
December 2018 â€˘ Florida Water Resources Journal
The use of precorroded LPR probes and coupons for conducting accurate and rapid corrosion control inhibitor screening studies has been demonstrated. A corrosion control testing rack apparatus using two identical parallel flow loops was designed and constructed to house mild steel, lead, and copper coupons used for weight loss analysis, as well as mild steel, lead solder, and copper electrodes used for LPR analysis. Coupons and electrodes were precorroded to simulate existing distribution system conditions. Although existing distribution system plumbing materials are already partially corroded, many corrosion studies cited in the literature evaluated virgin coupons and electrodes. The test rack was found useful for conducting studies for corrosion control chemical selection, distribution system blending studies, and clearwell and process infrastructure studies. Alkalinity addition, pH adjustment, and use of inhibitors were found to be beneficial for lowering corrosion rates in water system infrastructure. Additional findings included: S Different water supplies may respond differently to differing corrosion control chemicals; consequently, corrosion control pipe loop test-
ing is recommended prior to selection of an appropriate chemical control method, whether for permeate or any water supply. At times a change in disinfectant type can cause a permanent and negative corrosion rate change, and in one of the studies presented herein, the threshold parameter was found to be the total chlorine residual concentration that was exposed to the metal. Blended orthophosphate-polyphosphate corrosion inhibitors were found to reduce lead and copper corrosion in the distribution system, but varied by manufacturer, blend formulation, and water supply; mild steel rates were at times adversely affected. Silicate inhibitor addition offered mixed results and altered pH significantly. It’s important to compare average corrosion rates prior to and after inhibitor addition, where applicable, to evaluate the performance of a selected inhibitor; note however that corrosion rates as a function of time should also be evaluated to observe how corrosion rates change throughout inhibitor assessments. The use of precorroded LPR samples allows for the rapid evaluation of changes and can screen alternative treatments comparatively. Studies can be completed in as little as 10 weeks using LPR. The use of coupons provides limited value when conducting short duration studies, and although mpy measurements in these cases may not be accurate, evaluation of surfaces using X-ray spectrophotometric techniques may provide beneficial perspectives on corrosion coupon morphologies. A comparison between the control and test conditions can be analyzed statistically using the Wilcoxon-signed ranks test, which compares control and test conditions since the distribution of data are dependent and nonparametric. The use of the test for statistical analysis during corrosion monitoring is found to be a useful technique. Metal coupons, holders, probes, and other miscellaneous wands approximated $3,900, while an LPR probe, handheld meter approximated $1,400, providing an opinion of probable construction cost of close to $11,000. A set of replacement probe tips and coupons approximated $2,500, with testing period intervals that approximate two months.
Acknowledgments This work would not have been possible without the support of Jupiter Water Utilities (Jupiter, Fla.), RosTek Associates Inc. (Tampa, Fla.), Kimley Horn & Associates Inc. (West Palm Beach, Fla.), Pulama Lanai Utilities (Honolulu, Hawaii),
Aqua Engineers Inc. (Kalaheo, Hawaii), Brown & Caldwell (Wailuku, Hawaii), and the County of Maui Department of Water Supply (Wailuku, Hawaii). Funding was provided through UCF Contracts 16208083, 16208114, 16208134, 16208138 and 16208168 with the aforementioned agencies. Special thanks go to the UCF drinking water research team members who supported the graduate students in conducting corrosion control research over the years. Reference to any specific commercial product, process, or service, or the use of any trade, firm, or corporation name is for the information and convenience of the public, and does not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by UCF or its board of governors.
Code of Federal Regulations. Title 40 CFR Part 141 (Subpart I). 56 Federal Register, 26548, June 7. 2 USEPA (2003) Revised Guidance Manual for Selecting Lead and Copper Control Strategies. EPA-816-R-03-001, Office of Water, Washington, D.C. 3 USEPA (2008) Lead and Copper Rule: A Quick Reference Guide. EPA816-F-08-018, Office of Water. 4 Banerji, S.K., J.E. Bauman, and J.T. O’Conner (1987). Evaluation of Silicate and Phosphate Compounds for Corrosion Control. EPA/600/s2-87/031, June 1987. USEPA Water Engineering Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268. 5 Ahmad, Z. (2006). Principles of Corrosion Engineering and Corrosion Control. Elsevier. 6 Roberge, P.R. (2000). Handbook of Corrosion Engineering, McGraw-Hill, 1140 pages. 7 NACE. (1999). Techniques for Monitoring Corrosion and Related Parameters in Field Applications. NACE International Publication 3T199; Item No. 24203. 8 Stern, M. and A.L. Geary (1957). Electrochemical Polarization: I. A Theoretical Analysis of the Shape of Polarization Curves. Journal of the Electrochemical Society, Vol. 104, No. 1, 56-63. 9 Stern, M. (1958). A Method for Determining Corrosion Rates from Linear Polarization Data. Corrosion, Vol. 14, No. 9, 440t-444t. 10 Mansfield, F. (1976). “The Polarization Resistance Technique for Measuring Corrosion Currents.” Advances in Corrosion Science and Technology, Vol. 6, ed. by M.G. Fontana and R.W. Staehle, Plenum Press, New York. 11 ASTM International. (2015). ASTM G59 97(2014) Standard Test Method for Conducting Potentiodynamic Polarization Resistance Measurements. ASTM Int., 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, Penn. 19428-2959.
Prakash, T.M., et al. (1988). Development of the Pipe Loop System for Determining the Effectiveness of Corrosion Control Chemicals in Potable Water Systems. Technical Report N88/12/ADA200105, U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Labs (USACERL), August 1988. Scholze, R.J., K.A. Pontow, G. Kanchibhatia, and B.T. Ray (1994). Using the CERL Pipe Loop System (PLS) to Evaluate Corrosion Inhibitors That Can Reduce Lead in Drinking Water. Fort Belvoir, Va.: U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Facilities Engineering Applications Program. Water Research Foundation. (1990). Lead Control Strategies. Denver, Colo.: AWWA. Duranceau, S.J., D. Townley, and G.E.C. Bell (2004). Optimizing Corrosion Control in Water Distribution Systems. Denver, Colo.: Awwa Research Foundation and AWWA. 271 pages. Wilder, R. (2012). Evaluating Corrosion Control Alternatives for a Reverse Osmosis, Nanofiltration, and Anion Exchange-Blended Water Supply. Orlando, Fla.: University of Central Florida (Thesis). Jeffery, S. (2013). In-Plant and Distribution System Corrosion Control for Reverse Osmosis, Nanofiltration, and Anion Exchange Process Blends. Orlando, Fla.: University of Central Florida (Thesis). Wilder, R.J. and S.J. Duranceau. (2012). Evaluating In-Plant Infrastructure Corrosion After Replacing Lime Softening With Nanofiltration and Blending with Reverse Osmosis and IonExchange Process Water. Florida Water Resources Journal. 64(10); 42-55. Metal Samples Company. P.O. Box 8, 152 Metal Samples Rd., Munford, Ala. 36268. Porter, R.; Ferguson, J. (1995). Improved Monitoring of Corrosion Proc. Journal American Water Works Association, 87(11), 85-95. Crittenden, J.C., R.R. Trussell, D.W. Hand, K.J. Howe, and G Tchobanoglous. Water Treatment Principles and Design, 3rd ed., New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2012. Wysock, B. M., Sandvig, A. M., Schock, M.R., Frebis, C. P., and Prokop, B. (1995). Statistical Procedures for Corrosion Studies. Journal American Water Works Association, 87 (7), 99112. Cantor, A.F., Denig-Chakroff, D., Vela, R.R., Oleinik, M.G., and Lynch, D.L. (2000). Use of polyphosphate in corrosion control. Journal American Water Works Association, 92 (2), 95102. Duranceau, S.J., Wilder, R.J. & Douglas, S.S. (2012). Guidance and Recommendations for Post-Treatment of Desalinated Water. Journal American Water Works Association, 104 (9), E510-E520. S
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Distribution and Collection Systems Mixed Bag Donna Kaluzniak
1. Per the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) document, Requirements for Community Public Drinking Water Systems, dead-end water mains shall be flushed how often? a. Annually or in accordance with a written flushing program established by the supplier of water. b. Monthly or in accordance with a written flushing program established by the supplier of water. c. Quarterly or in accordance with a written flushing program established by the supplier of water. d. Weekly or in accordance with a written flushing program established by the supplier of water. 2. Per Requirements for Community Public Drinking Water Systems, systems with 350 or more persons or 150 or more service connections shall have and maintain an up-to-date a. computerized maintenance management system. b. map of the distribution system. c. list of high-use customers. d. record of customer names. 3. Per Requirements for Community Public Drinking Water Systems, each supplier of water serving 3,300 or more persons shall take at least one grab sample at a point representing the maximum residence time after disinfectant addition, and then measure and record the concentration. How often must this be done? a. Each day the supplier serves water to the public or at least five days per week, whichever is less. b. Each day the supplier serves water to the public or at least four days per week, whichever is less. c. Each day the supplier serves water to the public or at least three days per week, whichever is less. d. Each day the supplier serves water to the public or at least two days per week, whichever is less. 4. Per Florida Administrative Code (FAC) 62602.650, Water or Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant Operators and Distribution System
Operators, a water distribution system operation and maintenance (O&M) log must be kept for each distribution system. Electronic logs may be kept if approved by the FDEP district office or approved county health department. To obtain approval, the water supplier must demonstrate adequate data storage and backup, date/time stamping of entries, and a unique a. access code for each distribution system. b. electronic signature for each operator. c. GPS location for each activity. d. notification identification for reporting violations. 5. Per FAC 62-550, Drinking Water Standards, Monitoring, and Reporting, public water systems shall collect total coliform samples at sites that are representative of water throughout the distribution system. If a routine distribution system sample is total-coliform-positive, the public water system shall collect a set of repeat distribution system samples within 24 hours of being notified of the positive result. The system must collect at least one sample from the tap that was total-coliform-positive, plus one sample upstream and one downstream. The upstream and downstream samples must be how far away? a. Within two service connections b. Within five service connections c. Within seven service connections d. Within 10 service connections
must be protected from physical damage by the 100-year flood. The pumping station shall be designed to remain fully operational and accessible during what level flood? a. Five-year flood b. 15-year flood c. 25-year flood d. 50-year flood 9. Per EPA’s Guide for Evaluating Capacity, Management, Operation, and Maintenance (CMOM) Programs at Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems, a CMOM program is a set of best management practices designed to a. allow utilities to obtain grants for collection system improvements. b. meet the regulatory requirement that all collections systems must have an FDEP-approved CMOM program. c. prevent cross connections between potable and nonpotable water. d. proactively prevent and respond to sanitary sewer overflows. 10. Per EPA’s Guide for Evaluating Capacity, Management, Operation, and Maintenance (CMOM) Programs at Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems, a quick and inexpensive method to detect sources of inflow in sewer systems is a. dye testing the entire collection system. b. sending a written survey to residents. c. sewer-main cleaning and televising. d. smoke testing. Answers on page 62
6. Per FAC 62-604, Collection Systems and Transmission Facilities, sewer mains and force mains shall be laid at least what distance horizontally from water mains? a. 3 ft b. 5 ft c. 10 ft d. 15 ft 7. Per FAC 62-604, after construction of a new, permitted collection or transmission system, what must be done before placing the system into service? a. The FDEP must inspect the construction site and verbally authorize the system’s use. b. Permittee must submit request for approval from FDEP to place the system in use and await clearance. c. Permittee must submit sewer main videotapes and contractor pay requests to FDEP as proof of construction completion. d. Utility must receive approval of system use from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 8. Per FAC 62-604, electrical and mechanical equipment at wastewater pumping stations
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
References used for this quiz: • FDEP Requirements for Community Public Drinking Water Systems (https://floridadep.gov/sites/ default/files/CDRP-Req-CWS.pdf) • U.S. EPA Guide for Evaluating Capacity, Management, Operation, and Maintenance (CMOM) Programs at Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems (https://www3.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/cmom_guide _for_collection_systems.pdf) • FAC 62-550, Drinking Water Standards, Monitoring, and Reporting • FAC 62-604, Collection Systems and Transmission Facilities
Send Us Your Questions Readers are welcome to submit questions or exercises on water or wastewater treatment plant operations for publication in Test Yourself. Send your question (with the answer) or your exercise (with the solution) by email to: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ December 2018
FWEA CHAPTER CORNER Welcome to the FWEA Chapter 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 for your chapter, send details to Megan Nelson at email@example.com.
Southwest Chapter Holds Successful Charity Golf Tournament Dustin Chisum
First-place team (left to right): Dominic Spears, Dennis Morgan, Tom Meyers, and Jack Uecker.
On Friday, October 12, the FWEA Southwest Chapter and Florida Section AWWA Region V hosted their 17th annual Charity Golf Tournament. The afternoon turned out to be perfect golf weather for the 15 teams that came out in support of the event. In addition to the golfers, the event had a record 22 sponsors, which resulted in net proceeds exceeding $5,000. All of the money raised will be distributed in support of the FWEA Norm Casey Scholarship, the FSAWWA Roy W. Likins Scholarship, and the FWEA Southwest Chapter Florida Gulf Coast University Scholarship. A huge thank you goes out to all of those who helped make this year’s tournament a huge success! Dustin Chisum, P.E., is project manager I-water, with AECOM in Fort Myers. S
Second-place team (left to right): Brett Carner, Mark Heath, Ben McDorman, and Jon Pratt.
Third-place team (left to right): Andrew Schmidt, Tyler Evenson, Mark Stefanacci, and Butch Moore.
Last-place team (left to right): Bill Sperry, Jason Sciandra, Tony Leporatti, and Paul Pinault.
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Matt Devlin, Scott Johnson, and Greg Chomic (left to right) mimic “Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima,” an iconic photograph taken by Joe Rosenthal on Feb. 23, 1945, which depicts six United States Marines raising a U.S. flag atop Mount Suribachi during the Battle of Iwo Jima in World War II.
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ December 2018
Thank You for Your Service! Mike Darrow
ell, my first term as president of the operators association is nearly completed, and what a quick year it’s been! When I started out, with some help from our past president, Scott Anaheim, I had a small list of goals for the association, but I wasn’t really sure how to move it forward. My initial list was to bolster support for our instructors to serve our members, try to increase the involvement of our membership in the regions, and continue to grow the association. Instructors are so important to the association and its training program; we want to expand our instructor base for more training opportunities for certifications and continuing education units (CEUs) to offer our members. Members are so vital to FWPCOA. We’re trying to increase support for regional members with activities, outings, and training at the regional level. We all are trying to make improvements using new technology to help increase the efficiency of the programs and improve our training courses. We like working on behalf of operators, mechanics, coordinators, and technicians to move the profession forward, representing them across the state on important issues to further our industry. All of this will hopefully help grow membership and everyone’s involvement.
Association Highlights Some highlights for the association this year are: S Contributed to the Puerto Rico hurricane relief fund for water and wastewater. S Continued development of the class B wastewater treatment operator prerequisite course for the state exam. S All membership and most training registrations are now administered through www.fwpcoa.org. S Two subcommittees under the Education Committee got new leadership this year: Bob Case now chairs the Utilities Maintenance Committee, and the Stormwater Committee is chaired by Brad Hayes. Thank you both! S Executed multi-year agreements with Indian River State College for FWPCOA short schools
and supporting hotels, promoting long-term stability. Membership increased from 4,705 on January 1 to 5,415 as of August 31—a growth of over 15 percent in just eight months. Created and filled two honorary life member positions for Tom King and Walt Symser. Congrats to you both! Hosted a Florida Department of Environmental Protection operator certification office presentation announcing a return to computer-based testing. Recruited instructors for more training available to members. Hosted March and August short schools at Indian River State College in Ft. Pierce, with record-setting attendance at the latter.
Committees: The Backbone of the Organization Committees are where it happens internally in the association. We in this association have had a lot of help in moving the cart forward with the involvement from different committees and the talented members who are working on behalf of the membership. I thank all of you who have worked hard to contribute to our success. Education Committee This committee did a great job under the leadership of Art Seay, and now Tom King has continued its great work. Art did a wonderful job of keeping this committee on track over the years. The committee's responsibility is to ensure the quality of the association's training programs and instructors, and it supplies oversight and guidance to the training coordinators. The committee looks to develop new classes and update the curriculum of some others. Tom King has led focus groups this year on improving training to our members and trying to increase our instructor base–this is a good thing! We’ve added new courses and changed some others to now include the California State University at Sacramento water program manuals in the training. This year’s shorts school enrollment trained over 350 students in March and August, with total training for the association up 10 percent for the year. Shirley Reaves, our training coordinator, has done a good job and we hope to provide even more
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
training in 2019. Thank you, Shirley! Backflow Committee This subcommittee of the Education Committee continues to provide excellent backflow prevention training across the state under the direction of Glenn Whitcomb. The committee has given numerous backflow testing, repair, and recertification classes to many of our membership. This program continues to grow. System Operators Committee This Education Committee subcommittee continues to shine under the leadership of Ray Bordner. The committee set up and instructed multiple wastewater collection and water distribution classes at our state spring and fall short schools. We’ve conducted many on-the-road classes (where training comes to your utility). This year, 13 weeklong classes were given in the system operator disciplines of wastewater collection A, B, C, and water distribution 1, 2, 3 coursework. We’re looking forward to providing more of these classes in 2019. Awards Committee The Awards Committee is a staple of our association, giving out multiple awards and recognition to our membership. Renee Moticker continues to do a great job researching and presenting awards at the Florida Water Resources Conference and the August short school awards luncheon. This year over 35 awards were given out to outstanding members—congrats to you all! Renee wants me to remind you that the deadline for submittals for the 2019 training year is Dec. 31, 2018. A region can submit two recipients, who must be members in good standing, for at least a year. The region selects the award recipients, not this committee. Membership Committee Thanks to the outstanding work of Darin Bishop and Walt Sysmer, technology has helped us be more accessible and user-friendly. In turn, our members have found it easier to enroll in coursework and sign up for membership. As I mentioned before, our membership total is currently 5,415, which is 710 new members added since last year. The more than 700 members are net members from the end of last year, but we've actually gained 1,278 new, not reactivated or previous members. The rise is directly attributed to two factors: 1) the
ever-increasing popularity of our programs, as training is the major driving force of our membership; and 2) the combined usage of Club Express (an association management software system) by the regions and Shirley Reaves. As nonmember students register for classes at each level, they are nearly instantly converted to members. We no longer have membership paperwork changing hands a few times (utility, to region or state, to membership office) via traditional mail, which can greatly slow the membership process down. This has allowed members to obtain their benefits, such as this magazine and reduced training costs, much quicker.
S S S S
Water Towers: Lighthouses of the Landscape Your Region Needs You! Your Signature is Your Seal Lift Stations: Key to Sanitary Sewer Overflow Prevention S Thank You for Your Service! I want to thank all the leadership and hardworking members in our organization. We are moving some things forward nicely. We still need to improve at the regional level for more involve-
ment, more instructors in different disciplines, and increased local training opportunities. The goals I originally set are still relevant looking forward to 2019. I wish you continued success: for you professionally, and for your utility, company, or firm. Together we can make a difference for our industry. Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to you all! S
Online Institute Training The Online Institute, under the direction of Tim McVeigh, has done a spectacular job of developing and managing our online training to anyone who wants knowledge or CEUs and has limited access to local classes. Tim started this program a few years back and it has now grown and continues to serve our members at any time of the day or night. New courses have been developed for: S Certification (83 courses, including short courses) S Stormwater C, wastewater collection C, and water distribution levels 2 S Drinking water treatment plant operator class C and B S Wastewater treatment plant operator class C S Treatment plant operators We’re currently developing a wastewater treatment plant operator class B course for early 2019. Check out our website for your training needs
Water Heroes Many of our members recently worked in the Florida Panhandle to restore and maintain the water and wastewater systems that were damaged after Hurricane Michael. A big thanks goes to those actively involved in the process of getting the utilities in north Florida and in Georgia back up and running. Water employees really are first responders!
A Year of Columns Many of the columns that I wrote this year for the magazine touched on some of my goals. This year’s topics were: S Go with the Flow—the Flow of Knowledge S Willing and Able S Ethics: The Foundation of Our Profession S Conservation and the Future of Water S A Guide to Successful Operations S Emergency Response Planning Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Water Main Integrity Programs: Budget-Friendly Triage for Water Utilities Richard N. Davee Water infrastructure systems across the United States are aging rapidly, with 23 percent of systems projected to be classified as in “very poor” condition and 9 percent as “life elapsed” by 2020.1 Increased consumer demand and aging water distribution systems are a potent combination, leaving some utility owners at a loss on how to address a problem that will only be escalating every year. Water system degradation certainly isn’t an isolated issue. It’s common for water mains to be more than a century old, replaced only when their age and failure rate prove insurmountable. An estimated 240,000 water main breaks per year occur in the U.S., as pipes that were laid in the early to mid-20th century reach the end of their 75- to 100-year lifespans.2 Emergency repair of system failures, contamination, and increasing costs of labor and supplies will cause water costs to skyrocket if problems are left unaddressed. In the meantime, more than 6 billion gallons of treated water—14 percent of the nation’s daily water use—are lost daily due to leaky, aging pipes.3 The challenge of replacing so many aging pipes is unprecedented. In 2012, the American Water Works Association (AWWA) estimated that restoring existing water systems and
expanding them to serve a growing population would cost at least $1 trillion over the ensuing quarter-century.4 The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) had an equally dire outlook in its 2013 “Report Card for America’s Infrastructure,” giving drinking water infrastructure a D, which is a grade that was echoed in its 2017 report card.5 According to a more recent study, break rates have increased 27 percent in the last six years, with breakages in cast iron pipe alone up 43 percent since 2012.6 Looking past these seemingly overwhelming obstacles, there’s hope for rehabilitation, which oftentimes proves to be a cost-effective option to mitigate ongoing water losses. The ASCE report card rankings for the U.S. rose between 2009 and 2013, indicating that investments in the nation’s infrastructure are a promising step.7 The implementation of a methodical water main integrity program (WMIP) prior to attempting a systemwide rehabilitation or replacement can save utilities substantial amounts of capital, while still making much-needed improvements to water infrastructure overall.
Water Main Integrity Program: Purpose and Recommendations The purpose of a WMIP is fourfold: S Determine which water pipes in the distribution system are considered the greatest risk.
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
S Use objective rankings to determine which water pipes should be targeted for further investigation. S Compare the WMIP with the results of a water distribution hydraulic model to adjust the priority of pipes to be repaired or replaced. S Use the WMIP in conjunction with road capital improvement programs (CIPs) to ensure efficient use of construction funding. The WMIPs are based on the concept of risk exposure (RE), which accounts for both likelihood of failure (LoF) and consequence of failure (CoF). Water segments with the highest RE ratings are those that warrant further investigation, so the use of a robust geographic information system (GIS) to collect and analyze data proves a significant advantage. Although many communities already possess the variables needed to perform an RE analysis in their preexisting GIS databases, completing an RE analysis can conversely lay the groundwork for a water distribution system GIS in smaller communities. The LoF may consist of four key factors, the first of which is age of the given pipe segment, or the asset life that’s already been consumed. Of course, remaining asset life doesn’t necessarily mean the oldest sections of a water system would be the first in line for replacement; age alone isn’t a reliable indication of whether a pipe has degraded. In fact, pre-1952 cast iron pipe classes are particularly thick and can be prime candidates for rehabilitation, which is why pipe material is the second consideration in LoF. A system’s repair history is the third factor in LoF calculations and is in fact one of the best indicators that a pipe is likely to fail. As GIS information typically doesn’t present pipe segments in equal length, it’s advisable to consider break history as equal subdivisions for an accurate RE analysis. Soil corrosivity is the fourth and final aspect of LoF, but this is only a factor if the pipe in question is metallic (e.g., ductile or cast iron, galvanized, steel, etc.). Although the likelihood of system failure is a vital component of RE, the real value is in CoF, which can similarly be broken down into four factors: S Pipe diameter - Large pipes typically have more negative impacts if they fail. S Loss of service - Taking into account the number of customers affected if a water pipe breaks and flow is rerouted.
S Proximity to commercial/industrial zones Providing an indication of the extent of negative impact beyond the raw number of service points affected. S Traffic impacts - Indicating the level of effort to repair a system failure in a given location. The WMIP customization therefore involves working with the utility owner to assign values to each of the aforementioned values. The RE for each pipe segment is determined by multiplying LoF and CoF, with the highest-ranked pipes being the immediate candidates for further analysis. As such, WMIP recommendations generally include the following: S Physical inspection of the highest-ranked pipes S Monitoring of high-risk pipes S Comparison of hydraulic modeling results with a pipe segment’s RE rating S Comparison of road reconstruction and/or mill and overlay programs Understanding assets and their condition helps utility owners make an educated decision as to whether to rehabilitate or replace buried pipes. While rehabilitation can extend a pipe’s useful life, it’s only cost-effective if the pipe in question is a good candidate—and that vital distinction is where a WMIP truly proves its worth.
remaining factor of safety can be estimated by comparing the results to the minimum factor acceptance failure load, with a 2.5 factor of safety. When this information is taken in conjunction with pipe class, soil corrosivity, and hydraulic capacity, utility owners can make an informed decision regarding system maintenance, while staying within budgetary restrictions.
Rehabilitation Candidates Determining a prime candidate for pipe rehabilitation means considering several elements of a pipe’s makeup and its surrounding environment. The pipe’s class or thickness is an excellent starting point; the higher the class, the thicker the pipe, and the longer its anticipated life span. Class can be obtained from record drawings or physical examination, while tap coupons or pipe samples can be retrieved from failed pipes. The pH of a given subsurface environment should also be regarded when weighing whether to repair or replace pipes. Water mains that have become externally corroded due to soil properties should be replaced with polywrapped ductile iron pipe or materials suitable for corrosive soils. In terms of capacity, a hydraulic analysis should be conducted to identify water mains that are undersized and provide inadequate flow, such as those used in fire protection. Existing water mains with diameters of 6 inches and greater with adequate hydraulic capacity are good candidates for rehabilitation. A final approach to determining repair versus replacement is pipe crushing, which is performed on footlong pipe samples to measure the load applied at failure. The
Although a WMIP isn’t a golden ticket to solving water infrastructure challenges currently facing the U.S. and its estimated million miles of drinking water pipes, it provides a pathway to considerable progress. Averaging a pipe replacement rate of 0.5 percent per year, full system replacement would take about two centuries—far outstripping the remaining life spans of most of the country’s pipes.8 In the meantime, developing a WMIP is a viable way for utility owners to address ongoing water main losses, while cutting costs and planning for future treated water needs.
EPA. “The Clean Water and Drinking Water Infrastructure Gap Analysis” (2002). Office of Water, EPA-816-R-02-020. Available: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dock ey=901R0200.TXT. Accessed 10/24/2018. ASCE. “2017 Infrastructure Report Card” (2017). American Society of Civil Engineers. Available: https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/. Accessed 10/24/2018. The Johnson Foundation at Wingspread. “Financing Sustainable Water Infrastructure” (2012). Charting New Waters Convening
Report; Racine, Wisconsin. Available: http://www.johnsonfdn.org/sites/default/file s/reports_publications/WaterInfrastructure. pdf. Accessed 10/24/2018. AWWA. “Buried No Longer: Confronting America’s Water Infrastructure Challenge” (2012). American Water Works Association. Available: https://www.awwa.org/Portals/0/files/legreg/ documents/BuriedNoLonger.pdf. Accessed 10/24/2018. ASCE. “2013 Infrastructure Report Card” (2013). American Society of Civil Engineers. Available: https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/m aking-the-grade/report-card-history/2013report-card/. Accessed 10/24/2018. Folkman, Steven. “Water Main Break Rates In the USA and Canada: A Comprehensive Study” (2018). Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Faculty Publications, Paper 174. Available: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/maefacpub/174. Accessed 10/24/2018. Billitzer, B. “A Report on America’s Failing Infrastructure” (2013). Right of Way Magazine, May/June, p20-24. Available: http://eweb.irwaonline.org/eweb/upload/we b_mayjune13_ReportCard.pdf. Accessed 10/24/2018. ASCE, 2017.
Richard N. Davee, P.E., is vice president with Wright-Pierce in Maitland. S
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
AWWA Section Services provides sections with content for their publications. These articles contain brand new information and will cover a variety of topics.
Just Say “YES”! Use your expertise to make an impact in your community Bravo to the AWWA teams of volunteers who are paving the way for the Community Engineering Corps, which is an alliance that includes AWWA, American Society of Civil Engineers, and Engineers Without BordersUSA. The alliance combines the strengths of the three organizations to provide technical expertise to underserved communities in the United States and ensure that the water and wastewater infrastructure meets the needs of those who live there. Thanks to the many volunteers, the program has hosted 12 AWWA volunteer teams, bringing valuable expertise to communities in seven states in the U.S. The program has come a long way, but the work is not finished and the organization needs everyone’s help! With so many options to getting involved, it may be a challenge to know where to start. From identifying potential community partners to engaging volunteers in your section, the first step is simple: just say “yes.” The Rocky Mountain Section’s first “yes” came from a volunteer, Dave Pier. Dave saw the value of the program and realized that good work could be done in his home state of Colorado. Knowing that the needs were vast, Dave set out to identify a potential community partner. He worked with his contacts at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, as well as the Rural Community Assistance Corporation (RCAC). The RCAC knew of just the place to approach, and it
$47,000, well under the state average. With limited financial assets and elevated sensitivity regarding the homeowners’ water rates, MaryAnne has a mountain to climb, at the base of which is prioritizing the system’s issues and advocating for the best solutions.
Climbing That Mountain connected Dave with a small community 50 miles west of Fort Collins, Colo.
Meet MaryAnne DellaFera The RCAC put Dave in touch with MaryAnne DellaFera, president of the board of directors of the High Country Estates Homeowners Association in Red Feather Lakes, Colo. A member of the “new” board, MaryAnne is committed to long-term planning for her water system. She’s prepared for positive disruptions, having taken the reins from the previous board, which had been less diligent in its duties and had left her with limited financial reserves. MaryAnne lives in one of the 12 full-time residences that form part of a total of 23 households in Red Feather Lakes. A neighboring restaurant, Basil at the One Eighty One, serves as a local meeting place and has been a long-term business tenant in the area. Most of MaryAnne’s neighbors are over the age of 50, and the median income for the community’s population is approximately
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
The community is served by two wells that provide up to 12.63 acre-feet of water for domestic use. The water distribution and sewer system networks are composed of polyvinyl chloride pipes that run together in a single corridor, which is divided into chambers: the water pipes run in one chamber and sewer pipes in another. In addition, at every house, the water and the sewer pipes exit the corridor together, with no separation between them, and utility boxes house both the water and the sewer shutoffs. Sewer pipe leaks can contaminate the utility boxes and corridor chambers where the water pipes run. Water and sewer pipe breaks have occurred in the area, and because the utility boxes are so shallow, the likelihood of drinking water becoming contaminated is a common problem. In the first ten months of 2016 there had been four major water main breaks that left the community vulnerable and without safe water for weeks at a time. Although MaryAnne is prepared to set the community on the right path, with better planning and increased financial reserves, this
FSAWWA SPEAKING OUT situation is still difficult for many of the residents.
A Note of Appreciation
A Helpful Hand From Local Experts The Rocky Mountain Section and Community Engineering Corps are helping the community, and there is a young professional from the water industry who is leading the work to help the community. Marina Kopytkovskiy is an engineer volunteering as the project team leader for the Red Feather Lakes project. She met Dave at the 2016 conference of the Rocky Mountain Section when he was recruiting team members. Networking at the section event paid off for both Dave and Marina, and she agreed to be the project leader— another “yes.” As the lead, Marina is managing a diverse team of volunteers. Because of the scope of the project, she’s working with two technical experts: one engineer in charge of the drinking water aspects, and another dedicated to the wastewater components of the project. Her core project team is fleshed out with a distribution expert and, of course, Dave as a key communicator. Because she understands the value of a wellrounded group, Marina has also included among her team of volunteers members who have experience with financial resources, public communication and outreach, and water rights. Marina and her group have been working closely with MaryAnne, her board, and their community. The team has just completed a scope of work and a schedule that meets the community’s needs and will establish a path to success over the coming months. When their project is completed, the volunteers will have equipped MaryAnne and the Red Feather Lakes community with the information and resources needed to ensure that their water and wastewater systems are functioning properly.
Bill Young Chair, FSAWWA
his is the article where I tell you how quickly a year goes by. I’ve read this somewhat cliché statement many times but as I approach the end of my term, I know this is no cliché—this year has truly flown by! I believe the section has definitely had a very solid, productive year. Most importantly, we survived a year without your chair “blowing anything up” and actually setting things up pretty well for Mike Bailey. I look forward to assisting Mike and the other Executive Committee members moving forward. I have come to know Mike very well over the past 12 to 15 months and I know his calm, collaborative, and thoughtful approach to section business will serve us well. As I look back on this year I’m very appreciative and honored to have been named the section chair, and I am especially proud to be the first Likins Scholarship winner to become the chair. This did not happen without the encouragement of past chairs, Peggy Guingona and her staff, and the many friends I have made in our section. I also need to recognize St. Johns County, my employer and hometown, for its complete support over this year, and the years before. There have been many highlights in the past year. In March we had one of the most successful business practices workshops I can remember. Like the other section old-timers, I came away energized and very impressed with the passion of our future leaders. Obviously, the April Florida Water Resources Conference was a positive experience for our section, and we were also well represented at several AWWA events: the Annual Conference
and Exhibition (ACE18) in Las Vegas; the regional meeting of section officers in Charleston, S.C.; and the annual summer workshop held in Denver. This year also brought us a new home, as our section staff moved into a new building in St. Cloud that facilitates all the great work achieved by Peggy, Jenny, Donna, and Casey! Another long-awaited success is the completion of our website update. Peggy and Anna Maria Gonzalez have worked especially hard to see this through, and I think you will agree it’s a wonderful site. As chair, I was able to attend several regional meetings, drinking water contests, and local government meetings where city or county commissioners recognized the professionalism of their distribution and operational staff. The section has also continued its role of helping others. In addition to our annual giving to Water For People, we also continue to change lives through the Roy Likins Scholarship Fund. This year, we handed out over $25,000 in scholarships and also commissioned a timely analysis of the fund’s direction in future years. This longterm strategic business plan was first discussed at our past chairs summit and will be extremely valuable in setting our course for the next decade. Hurricanes have become an unfortunate part of our lives in Florida recently, but as expected, AWWA and the Florida Section were there to help. The association awarded an annual utility membership to an impacted city, and your section sent a $5,000 check for recovery efforts to the devastated community of Mexico Beach. These are the most recent examples of how we make a difference, and again, why I am so proud of our organization. Thank you all very much for allowing me to serve as your Florida Section chair. I am honored and humbled, and will always consider 2018 as a highlight of my career! Good luck, Mike—it will fly by! S
How Will You and Your Section Respond? Do you want to partner with a local community? Would you like to engage with enthusiastic volunteers? You can also say “yes.” For more success stories and information on volunteering for the organization, visit www.communityengineeringcorps.org or contact Stephen Barr at firstname.lastname@example.org. S
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Florida Teams Compete in Operations Challenge at 2018 WEFTEC
Fecal Matters team with Chris Fasnacht, Florida Water Resources Conference Operations Challenge chair (second from right).
As in past years, the 2018 Operations Challenge, held during the Water Environment Federation Technical and Exhibition Conference (WEFTEC) in New Orleans at the end of September, featured five events that showcase the knowledge and expertise of wastewater treatment plant operators: laboratory, process control, safety, collection systems, and maintenance. Two teams representing the state of Florida—Orange County Outlaws and Jacksonville Fecal Matters—participated in the event. The Orange County Outlaws brought their own cheering section, the Mrs. Outlaws. The teams competed in the laboratory and process control events on the first day, and then collections, safety, and submersible pump repair events on day two. The Texas TRA CReWSers took Division 1, and the Pooseiden, also from the Texas Water Environment Association, won Division 2 in the 2018 contest. While not placing, the two Florida teams enjoyed the experience and camaraderie with the other teams from around S the United States.
Orange County Outlaws team.
Outlaws team members in action.
Wives of Orange County Outlaws team members.
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Septic to Sewer Transition: A Guidance Document Paves the Way Terri Lowery With an estimated 2.6 million septic systems in operation in Florida, the state contains 12 percent of all septic systems in the United States. About 30 percent of the state relies on septic systems for wastewater disposal. While septic systems can be a safe and effective option for wastewater disposal when they are properly sited and well-functioning, conventional septic systems are not
effective in removing nutrients. Septic systems have been identified as a significant source of nutrients for several impaired water bodies throughout the state. Regulatory and legislative pressure to address septic tanks in environmentally sensitive areas continues to build. A significant step forward was taken with the passage of the Florida Springs and Aquifer Protection Act (SB552) by the state legislature in 2016. The law requires the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Department of Health (DOH), and local governments and utilities to develop onsite sewage treatment and disposal system (OSTDS) remediation plans in priority focus areas (PFAs) of outstanding Florida has FDEP where springs determined that septic tanks account for more than 20 percent of the nutrient loading to the spring. Springs, however, are not the only waters that are being impacted by nutrient loading from septic systems. Septic systems have been
Septic tank sites in Florida.
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
identified as significant nutrient sources and OSTDS remediation plans have been or need to be developed for water bodies around the state, such as the Indian River Lagoon, Charlotte Harbor, and the St. Johns River. While FDEP may take the lead in coordinating these plans for firstmagnitude springs, successful implementation relies primarily on local governments and utilities. Development and successful implementation of an OSTDS remediation plan is a significant challenge and requires coordination with many stakeholders, including FDEP, the state’s water management districts, DOH, local governments legislators, utilities, and environmental groups, propertyrights advocates, builders, realtors, homeowners associations, and individual homeowners. While determining the most appropriate technical solution requires careful thought, the biggest challenges that must be addressed for a successful transition from septic to sewer are financial, political, and public perception issues. To assist in addressing these Water Florida the issues, Association Environmental (FWEA) Utility Council (at the request of FDEP) has developed a septic to sewer guidance document. This document helps local governments navigate some of the financial, political, and public perception issues that they may encounter in transitioning their communities from septic to sewer by collecting thoughts, ideas, and resources from multiple sources in a single location. The document includes information on technical alternatives for septic to sewer conversion, ideas for customer incentives, public education ideas, funding alternatives (both internal and external), and a variety of sample documents.
Additionally, the document includes case studies from communities around the state with insights into the barriers that have been faced, and what has worked (and what hasn’t) in different communities.
Financial Insights Many factors influence the cost of transitioning from septic to sewer. Logistical considerations in evaluating the feasibility of eliminating septic systems in a region may include whether water service already exists, distance from treatment facilities, population density, and numerous design considerations. On average, the cost of transitioning a septic system to a centralized sewer system is in the range of $20,000 to $25,000. Experience shows that residents are often willing or able to pay only a portion of the total cost, with local governments stepping in to subsidize the balance. There are multiple options for governments to fund septic to sewer programs, which include springs funding through Legacy Florida, community development block grants, U.S. Department of Agriculture rural development funding, economic development funding, and legislative options, among other possibilities. It’s important for governments to build relationships with funding agencies and make certain that legislators have details regarding proposed projects. The most-often used funding strategy is a combination of sources.
Political Considerations and Public Perception Converting from septic to sewer can also be a political hot potato, and there tends to be against interests significant
c i i c r r
g o e a c u p e p p a t g w V e t
Florida Water Utility Director Named 2018 WEF Fellow Environment Water The Federation (WEF) recently announced 15 distinguished members as the 2018 WEF Fellows recipients, including Michael Sweeney, Ph.D., from the Florida Water Environment Association, who is the deputy executive director with Toho Water Authority in Kissimmee. This prestigious designation recognizes members and their achievements, stature, and contributions in the water profession. “The impressive accomplishments of this year's WEF Fellows have made a profound impact on the water profession,” said Eileen O’Neill, WEF executive director. "We are honored to recognize their efforts to preserve and enhance the global water environment.” This recognition program underscores WEF’s role as a valuable water quality resource,
changing the status quo. This can include community residents impacted by the transition due to cost and inconvenience, as well as realtors, builders, and propertyrights activists. It’s incumbent on local government agencies to work with other advocates, such as environmentalists, elected officials, and state and federal regulators to clearly demonstrate the unacceptable damage caused by problematic septic systems. It’s also essential to communicate with the public before, during, and after a planned project to engage those affected by a septic to sewer transition. The public should be given facts in a timely manner and a way to interact and ask questions. Visuals can be very helpful in explaining the complex elements of the issue. While quality of life disruptions do get the public's attention, the main issue will always
which is due in large part to the diverse its of expertise membership. The WEF Fellows are recognized in various areas of expertise, including but not limited to, design, education, operations, regulation, research, and management, utility leadership. The other 2018 WEF Fellows are: S Joseph Bonaccorso, New Jersey Water Environment Association S David Clark, Pacific Northwest Clean Water Association S James Courchaine, New England Water Environment Association S Andrew Englande Jr., Ph.D., Louisiana Water Environment Association S Mary Evans, Water Environment Association of Texas S Michael Kyle, Pennsylvania
S S S S S
Water Environment Association Peter Laughton, Water Environment Association of Ontario Dr. Helen Littleton, New Jersey Water Environment Association/ Chesapeake Water Environment Association Robert O’Dette, KentuckyTennessee Water Environment Association Robert W. Ramey, Rocky Mountain Water Environment Association Reynold D. Richwine, Pacific Northwest Clean Water Association Cordell Samuels, Water Environment Association of Ontario Charles Stevens, Missouri Water Environment Association/Iowa Water Environment Association
S Peter Strom, Ph.D., New Jersey Water Environment Association The 2018 recipients were recognized during WEFTEC 2018, WEF’s 91st annual and exhibition technical conference, which was held September 29 to October 3 in New Orleans. For more information about the program, visit http://www.wef.org/weffellowsS program/.
be financial. It’s imperative that local governments and utilities concisely explain the costs, how these expenses are shared between the government/utility and homeowners, and the availability of any hardship programs to assist those in need. It’s important to make these changes to preserve the environment and provide a permanent solution to a pressing need, but a portion of the residents impacted by the transition will not be pleased. The number of unsatisfied residents will depend on how well the entire issue is managed from start to finish.
Conclusion For successful septic to sewer transition, it’s important for local governments and utilities to not only have a comprehensive strategy to address the issue, but to build ongoing relationships and trust
with the communities they serve. The intent of the guidance document is to help generate ideas and provide insights to assist in developing a road map for a utility’s project. The guidance document can
be downloaded at http://jonesedmunds.com/s2sguid ance/. Terri Lowery is senior vice president with Jones Edmunds & Associates Inc. in Gainesville. S
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
The Secure Interconnect: Securing Remote Access and Data Exchange for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Networks Bob George
Despite rapid advances in computer and network security in recent years, supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) and industrial control system (ICS) integrators have been slow to incorporate security functionality into their designs. Both SCADA and ICS networks have traditionally been viewed as a separate entity to be isolated from the perils of the Enterprise Information Technology network. As pressures have increased to share data between SCADA/ICS and external Enterprise applications, system owners increasingly find themselves under pressure to relax security to facilitate data exchange. Operational concerns and staffing restrictions add additional pressure to allow remote access from the Enterprise and other remote locations using a variety of connectivity options. Meanwhile, the risks associated with allowing such access have become ever more apparent. Recent cyber threats either specifically target SCADA/ICS or impact it as collateral damage. Given the long life cycle of a typical SCADA/ICS system—typically10 to 15 years—it’s vital that any access to or from SCADA/ICS be adequately secured and managed.
This article presents a method to secure SCADA/ICS based on existing cybersecurity guidance and strategies for incorporating emerging technologies into a comprehensive approach to securing SCADA/ICS networks. It’s intended to provide the basis for securing SCADA/ICS after a security assessment.
The Evolution of SCADA/ICS Networking In the early days of SCADA and ICS, the challenge of connecting systems was straightforward: It couldn’t be done. Whether due to proprietary technology or basic incompatibilities between protocols, there was no straightforward way for systems to communicate. This changed in the 1990s as SCADA/ICS manufacturers increasingly began using standards-based technologies such as Ethernet and Transmission Control Protocol/ Internet Protocol (TCP/IP). Reluctantly, manufacturers began providing products that could interoperate and, with a bit of luck, communicate reliably. Throughout the early 2000s, the value of incorporating SCADA/ICS data into the Enterprise applications was recognized. This data significantly expanded the value of asset management and computerized maintenance
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
and management systems. The “age of the dashboard” saw the rise of SCADA/ICS data sharing, along with increased capabilities to remotely view and operate systems. Unfortunately, in the rush to share data and access, security exposures and threats increased. The importance of separating SCADA/ICS from the Enterprise was gradually understood and reasonable protections developed. Today there’s a similar technology gold rush, with new, powerful, and affordable technologies promising a wealth of affordable and enhanced capabilities, and yet, they're not incorporated into a uniform, tested, and architecture. security comprehensive cloud-based as such Technologies, computing, Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT), virtualization, and mobile access are often being applied as spot technology solutions, ignoring the painful lessons learned with previous technology generations.
Defining Critical SCADA/ICS In order to secure a SCADA/ICS network, it’s important to clearly define the critical components that impact SCADA/ICS operation. Increasingly, SCADA/ICS is used to control cyber-physical systems (CPS) that not only gather and process data, but also directly impact the physical world. The SCADA itself is used to control pumps, valves, chemical feeds, and other mechanisms that have direct impacts well beyond the data. In many cases, SCADA controls the production of chemicals that can adversely impact human health; in others, it controls the flow of water and wastewater products that can directly impact the surrounding environment, including potential spills into sensitive environmental areas that can disrupt the flow of urban traffic. Identifying those parts of the system that affect critical functions is the key to building a cost-effective solution. Critical SCADA/ICS components can be defined as “the computers, programmable logic controllers (PLCs), field devices, and supporting network infrastructure used to monitor and control critical processes.” This definition can be interpreted in fairly broad
r y ,
terms, but should be restricted to those assets—computers, equipment, networks, and communications—necessary to operate a process. This includes: S SCADA servers S Human-machine interface (HMI) computers S SCADA historians S PLCs S Field devices and sensors In order to avoid “scope creep,” the definition of critical SCADA/ICS should be limited to those assets necessary for actual monitoring and control of the system. Supporting applications or systems, such as Enterprise Historians, should be considered external. The precise meaning of “critical” expands well beyond the scope of this article, but can be interpreted as “any asset without which the organization incurs significant operational, compliance, or safety liabilities.” The goal then is to identify what parts of the system need to be protected to reliably operate the system.
The Secure Interconnect Having identified the critical parts of a SCADA/ICS system, a simple approach can be used to secure any remote access or data exchange. Rather than attempting to define specific products or technologies, the simplified policy can be applied as follows: Anything that is not a critical SCADA/ICS asset should be separated from SCADA. A “secure interconnect” should be the sole means of exchanging data with, or accessing SCADA/ICS from, any other location. The interconnect itself can consist of a variety of hardware and technology and may span multiple physical locations. The key is that it’s defined by an architecture that supports well-defined policies governing who or what is allowed access into the sensitive environment and by what means.
Current Cybersecurity Standards and Best Practices Current cybersecurity standards and best practices provide a solid foundation for this approach based on past experience. Guidance applicable to water and wastewater includes: S National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework. A general approach to assessing system security and establishing a cybersecurity program. S National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-82
Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security. Focusing on securing industrial systems. S International Society of Automation (ISA)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 62443 (formerly ISA99). Focusing on securing industrial systems. S American Water Works Association (AWWA) Cybersecurity Guidance and Tool. Guidance and assessment tool for voluntary used by water and wastewater utilities. S North American Electrical Reliability Council (NERC) Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP). Mandatory guidance for the electrical industry. Although these standards vary somewhat in terminology and approach, they share many foundational concepts: S Defense-in-Depth. Incorporating multiple, overlapping, and complementary layers of protection configured so that a compromise of one layer will not defeat the others. It’s implemented using firewalls and demilitarized zone (DMZ) networks and other monitoring and control mechanisms. S The Principle of Least Privilege. Communications between SCADA/ICS is limited based on “need to know,” allowing only that access that is explicitly required. All other access is blocked. S Network Segmentation. Providing clear delineation between SCADA/ICS and the Enterprise networks and providing security controls between them. S Zones and Conduits. Separating SCADA/ICS assets based on functionality (zones) and providing well-defined communications paths (conduits) implemented as firewall rules between zones. S Jump Boxes/Pivot Servers. Implemented as hardened DMZ-based servers providing a protocol break between internal and external networks. All traffic flows through
a jump box, with no direct access permitted between SCADA/ICS and any other network. In most cases, existing guidance is focused on traditional multitiered and wired networked environments, with varying degrees of coverage for remote, wireless, or other emerging technologies. Fortunately, other established secure practices from other sectors can be incorporated into the secure interconnect architecture that focus not only on the technology aspects of system usage, but also on human factors. Many of these techniques overlap, increasing the effectiveness of defense-in-depth. Securing the User Established guidance provides clear direction on securing user access from any non-SCADA/ICS location: S Separate SCADA/ICS domain credentials should be used for each individual. The same usernames and passwords should not be used on Enterprise and SCADA/ICS systems. Shared user credentials (and the inevitable associated never-expiring password) should not be used. S Multifactor authentication should be used to protect against credential compromise (via shoulder surfing or poor password security) or device loss or theft (via credentials saved on a device). Securing the Device Additional protections can be applied to portable devices, such as laptops or tablets, which might be carried outside of the SCADA/ICS environment and subject to loss or theft: S Storage encryption can render sensitive data stored on a device inaccessible to unauthorized users. While the device itself is lost, sensitive information it contains will not be compromised. S Host identity products can be used to Continued on page 46
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Continued from page 45 ensure that remote access is granted using only authorized devices. These products use cryptographically protected keys to uniquely identify every device, ensuring that only properly secured devices are used for connection. Securing Data Exchange While user and device restrictions limit who and what can access the system, additional protections can be provided to ensure that only authorized changes to data can be made: S Multitier architectures can be implemented to eliminate direct access into SCADA/ICS from external locations. Internal database servers can be configured to feed a subset of data to a DMZ-based Enterprise Historians server, for example, and external users limited to querying it. S Unidirectional gateways can be implemented to allow only a one-way transfer of data from inside SCADA/ICS to the Enterprise. S Device authentication can be used to restrict what devices can access what data.
Emerging Technologies Some technologies that are only now finding their way into the world of SCADA/ICS networks have been used for some time in commercial and Enterprise settings; others are still new and very much in the early stages of real-world testing. While not every technology will be appropriate for every SCADA/ICS setting, a secure interconnect architecture can be flexible enough to include protections for such technologies in the future when and if required: S Wi-Fi is increasingly ubiquitous throughout Enterprise and compelling cases are being made for introducing it into traditionally closed SCADA/ICS settings. In many cases, significant operational efficiencies can be gained by untethering operators from traditional wired desktops. Rather than treating wireless access as an exception to policy, it should be treated as any other remote access. Restrict the access using encryption, robust devices and user authentication, separate logical and physical network infrastructure, and DMZ-based jump boxes with limited internal access. Treat wireless as an external network rather than a trusted internal network. S Mobile access options are extending connectivity options well outside of the
physical perimeter of the facilities. Here again, rather than treating these as trusted internal networks, treat mobile access as remote access, applying the same restrictions as described for Wi-Fi. S Internet of Things (IoT) and IIoT are low-cost computing, combining inexpensive communications, and low power requirements to allow monitoring of essentially anything from anywhere. The IIoT is focused on replacing wired infrastructure with a variety of wireless technologies, and inexpensive wireless technologies are providing accessibility heretofore only practical with expensive low-speed wireless infrastructure. While IoT and IIoT devices themselves tend to provide limited security features, they can be protected by gateway products that isolate the simple devices from the outside and incorporate advanced protective features. If a device can’t be protected to the standard established, it should be isolated and not fully trusted. S Virtualization and hyperconvergence are blurring the line between physical systems, collapsing traditional servers, storage, and networking into a single rack (virtualization) and even a single chassis (hyperconvergence). Although virtualized systems may be required to run on common hardware for budgetary or support purposes, logical separation can still be enforced to mirror the physical separation provided for the rest of the SCADA/ICS system. S Cloud-based computing is providing compelling opportunities for system redundancy and allowing smaller utilities to run sophisticated systems without large support staffing. In most cases, an appropriate mix of “on-premises” and “offpremises” infrastructure can be configured to maintain an organization’s security architecture; however, this must be carefully designed and will typically require additional services. Cloud computing will not be “cheap and easy” for a secure SCADA/ICS deployment.
Develop a Secure Interconnect Cybersecurity Strategy When considering a secure interconnect, whether it be for simple historical data sharing or advanced IIoT deployments, a few basic strategies can be used to ensure that security is maintained for most essential assets. Define Use Cases Clearly define what access is required.
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
The Five Ws from grade school can be used to define who, what, when, where, and why access should be granted. Rather than just “opening things up” and hoping to secure the system after deployment, define specific use cases: S Who (or what application) will be granted access. S What they specifically need to access any other parameters. S Times for authorized access can determine when access should be granted. S Identify where connections will terminate based on network addresses or domain names, or at least, geographical restrictions. S Why should define the business case and be strong enough to support the additional risk and complexity it introduces. The answers to these strategies can form the basis of the remote access and data exchange policies, which are described, as well as identify the “conduits” to be built using firewall rules. Well-defined use cases are invaluable for communicating access requirements to the firewall support team. Define Access Policy In a perfect world, any access technology implementation would be an expression of an organization’s cybersecurity policy; unfortunately, policy is often addressed only after the fact, if at all. Yet, it’s the only security control that protects a company’s most vital asset: people. A policy should be developed that clearly describes what authorized access is provided in nontechnical terms. Guidelines should be provided for dealing with contingencies in ways that don’t require staff to violate written policy. Working backwards with use cases to develop policies for the use of new technologies (based on the use cases) can expedite this process. Defining Criticality Although the NERC CIP standards for power are cumbersome and comprehensive, they have embraced one important principle: Not everything is critical. The SCADA/ICS network has unfortunately often become the dumping ground for a variety of systems that aren’t part of the vital control and management function. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) and voice and video systems are often deployed on SCADA networks because “that’s where the fiber goes.” Strive to isolate these systems, ideally physically—at the very least, logically— within the SCADA/ICS environment. If physical infrastructure must be shared, make
sure the concept of the secure interconnect is used to isolate these systems from actual control functions. Within SCADA/ICS itself, identify what is truly critical. Group the assets based on the impact that the loss of access will have on: S Operational Efficiency. How long can the system operate without the asset incurring operational problems or staffing issues? How long can it be operated manually? S Compliance Monitoring and Reporting. In many cases, a compliance violation can result in fines and penalties that exceed the cost of the entire control system. Consider the cost of a single or repeated violation if monitoring data are lost. S Environmental Impact. The SCADA/ICS can impact the real world. An otherwise uneventful spill that impacts wildlife or influential communities can cause a public relations nightmare. S Health and Safety. All too often, SCADA/ICS is seen as unimportant compared to finance or public safety, but loss of control can result in hazardous conditions that can poison plant personnel with a leak, or turn a simple spill into a midwinter skating rink on a busy intersection. Be sure to consider the potential impacts of these events when evaluating criticality. S Classify Assets Based on Criticality. Develop a hierarchy of impacts and protect SCADA/ICS assets accordingly. Some facilities or processes may be relatively unimportant, while others may be surprisingly crucial. Focus efforts on securing and isolating the parts of the system(s) that are most critical, then work outwards to less critical areas.
Conclusions There is an unfortunate tendency to deploy new technologies in a reactive mode based on new demands. The result is often a “bolt on” spot solution in which security is often an afterthought or poorly implemented. By identifying the critical parts of the systems, and defining what access is required and how such access can be secured, most new deployments can be planned and integrated into a secure network architecture without requiring significant re-engineering. The concept of a secure interconnect can be effectively used as the basis for developing secure access and data exchange solutions. Bob George, CISSP, is the director of cybersecurity and network infrastructure services with Tetra Tech in Pasadena, Calif. S Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
What’s Next for Water? Mark A. Kelly
s I reflect on the past two years as the Contractors Council chair, I wonder: What’s next for water? I wrote an article for this magazine in December 2011, wondering when the market would ever get any better. Well, with today’s market, we can all attest to how strong it is. Many might question if the market is too good and decide to prolong muchneeded upgrades or rehabilitation work. With the recent events this year involving Hurricanes Florence and Michael, we continue to struggle with water. Whether it’s a hurricane, drought, regulations, or funding, the future of water is always changing. The need to continue moving toward a “one water structure” that en-
compasses drinking, waste, reclaimed, and storm waters will provide the best long-term solution in managing this valuable and important resource. This approach will ensure we maximize its use in the most economical way possible. To hear and discuss more about this topic, I recommend you attend the 2018 Florida Section AWWA Fall Conference session, “Innovative Opportunities and Funding for Water Resources and Utility Resiliency Challenges,” on November 27, from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. You’ll hear from utilities, federal and state agencies, and private entities about water resources and resiliency challenges facing our state, how to obtain funding, and other solutions to get your project started. The Contractors Council is closing its tenth year as part of FSAWWA, and I am grateful to have been involved since the beginning. I want to thank the section for having the vision to see the contractor’s value in making a difference in
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Florida’s utility market. The council’s focus is to educate and share the contractor’s perspective, as well as act as a resource to the section, its utilities, and its members regarding constructionrelated topics and issues. I would like to extend my thanks to Mike Alexakis for his efforts this year in leading the coordination for the council’s educational event and organizing the incoming chairs BBQ, which will also be held at the conference. For 2019-2020, our council chair will be Mike Alexakis and the co-chair will be Jonathan Fernald. If you would like the Contractors Council to provide assistance on a specific topic, have suggestions for future workshops, or would like to join our council, please contact Mike at email@example.com. Mark A. Kelly, is director of business development/marketing at Garney Construction Company in Orlando and is chair of the FSAWWA Contractors Council. S
Florida Water Resources Journal â€˘ December 2018
FWRJ READER PROFILE half years; before I took this position I was a sales territory manager for 15 years. My father started this company in 1983; I remember putting catalogs together for him in the garage when I was in high school and have been involved in some capacity since 1988.
Kim Kowalski Wager Company of Florida Inc., Longwood Work title and years of service. Currently I am the operations manager and have been in this position for eight and a
What does your job entail? I am involved with overseeing, planning, directing, and coordinating the operations of Wager Company. It’s my responsibility to improve the performance, productivity, efficiency, and profitability of all departments within the company in order to meet the expectations and needs of our customers. What education and training have you had? I received a bachelor of science degree in agricultural business management from the University of Florida.
What do you like best about your job? I get to work with great customers, and no two days are ever the same; each day brings a new set of challenges. It’s very satisfying knowing that at the end of the day Wager Company has helped to supply materials to improve infrastructure, roadways, and safe drinking water. What professional organizations do you belong to? I’m a member of FSAWWA, Warehouse Management Professionals, and Water Distribution Systems Professionals. How have the organizations helped your career? The networking opportunities have allowed me to meet industry experts who have helped further my knowledge of products and services in the industry. The volunteering that I have done
Sporting shades at ACE14 in Boston are (from left) Mark Lehigh, Kim, Peggy Guingona, Rick Ratcliffe, and Richard Anderson.
Kim with husband, Scott, at the 2016 FSAWWA Fall Conference officers dinner.
Florida Section members gather at the AWWA Annual Conference and Exhibition (ACE) in Chicago in 2016 with Rick Ratcliffe accepting the George Warren Fuller Award. Front row (from left): Kim Kunihiro and Ratcliffe; second row: Peggy Guingona, Richard Anderson, Jeff Nash, Helen Ratcliffe, Grace Johns, and Kim; back row: Mark Lehigh, Pat Lehman, and Jacqueline Torbert.
Kim (center) congratulates Rick Ratcliffe (far left) at the FSAWWA Executive Committee meeting held at the 2018 Florida Water Resources Conference for receiving an award in appreciation of his long service to the section.
a g r
Trevi Fountain in Rome.
within the organization has also helped me to come out of my shell, which has helped me in dealing with customers, vendors, and municipalities.
The Toho Water Authority board of directors and staff welcome their new executive director, Todd Swingle to the organiTodd Swingle zation. Swingle succeeds the organizations founding executive director, Brian Wheeler. Swingle has more than 25 years of experience serving in various environmental and utility roles. Some of his experience includes serving as the deputy director of utilities for Orange County Government, director of environmental strategy with global manufacturing company Cummins Inc., and director of environmental utilities and public services administrator for the City of St. Cloud. Swingle holds bachelor’s and master’s degrees in environmental
engineering from the University of Central Florida and an MBA from the University of Florida. He is also a registered professional engineer.
Mead & Hunt, a national architecture-engineering consulting firm, has opened its third Florida office in Tampa, further expanding its water and wastewater services. The new office will be led by Ed Balchon, who brings more than 25 years of Florida water/wastewater engineering experience to the firm. Mead & Hunt established an office in Port Orange in August 2017 and one in Tallahasee in April 2018. The Tampa office opened late in July 2018. Balchon joined with the purpose of expanding Mead & Hunt’s presence in Florida. He will be active in adding staff to address clients’ needs and deliver sustainContinued on page 52
What do you like best about the industry? The people! I have met so many great people and have developed many lasting friendships. I cannot say enough about the people that I work with at Wager Company, my customers, and especially Kim, Scott, and their daughter the people within Regan at Mt. Fuji in Japan. FSAWWA. I have learned so much about myself that I would not have discovered without all of their help along the way. What do you do when you’re not working? My favorite hobby is traveling. Our family loves to travel the world and we have been fortunate enough to be able to do so; we love to explore different countries and cultures, and especially new cuisine! We have been able to travel to Singapore, Thailand, Japan, Italy, Vienna, and Germany, to name a few. Experiencing new cultures has definitely given my whole family a better appreciation for what we have. My favorite volunteer activity is with FSAWWA, in particular with our Annual Fall Conference. I have been involved with the conference for 17 years, having many different responsibilities to help create successful conferences. I have volunteered alongside some incredible folks and their dedication to the success of the conferences has kept me engaged! I am also involved with the Executive Committee of FSAWWA as vice chair, which has been an incredible experience. I have to thank my dad for getting me involved in FSAWWA, and Rick Ratcliffe, who helped me realize that I can achieve anything! S Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
A Season of Successful Seminars Kristiana S. Dragash, P.E. President, FWEA his month I’d like to focus on a couple of recent FWEA activities that were successful and altogether wonderful events. In October of last year the Wastewater Process Committee held a seminar at the First Harvest Food Bank in Orlando, with over 70 attendees. I personally wasn’t able to attend, but everyone I spoke to had nothing but great things to say about it. Big congratulations to Yanni Polematidis and Bartt Booz for organizing and planning this great event. To kick off November this year, the Utility Management Committee, in conjunction with the Florida Benchmarking Consortium, held its annual seminar in Tampa. If you’ve never been to a benchmarking seminar, I highly suggest attending one in the future; it's always well-attended and has outstanding content. Thank you to the committee for your hard work and consistent high-performance habits, always delivering a fantastic program and event. Lastly, I am really excited to report that the Treasure Coast Chapter is back in action! The
News Beat Continued from page 51 able, successful engineering solutions with landmark projects. “We have the depth of senior, skilled personnel with local Ed Balchon experience to address this environmentally sensitive region,” said Balchon. “The infrastructure needs in Florida are growing rapidly and so is Mead & Hunt, especially in the water and wastewater market.”
William D McGowan, president of Florida General Environ-
members recently held their first lunch meeting and plant tour in years and it was a sold-out event! If you miss the action at the end of 2018 it’s okay, as there is a packed winter/spring lineup for FWEA! Next year, the Air Quality Committee had planned a seminar for February 21, and the Water Resources, Reuse, and Resiliency Committee (WR3) will present one on February 22, just in time to grab your professional development hours before license renewal. S
mental Services, has announce that the United States Patent and Trademark Office has granted him Patent Number 9988290 for his invention of a method and apparatus for operation of aerobic biological digesters, to be known as the WDM Submerged Supernation System (trademark pending). The purpose of the invention is to improve the operation of aerobic biological solids digesters in aerobic wastewater treatment plants. This new process will significantly reduce the solids handling cost for wastewater treatment plants and reduce heavy metals loading to residuals land-application sites, thus extending their useful life spans, as well as eliminate odors associated with the digester supernation process and land application of poorly oxidized sludge. This system allows for the continuous removal of water re-
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
leased during the aerobic digestion of bioresiduals, eliminating the normal supernation process and eliminating the possibility of odor production and release during the start-up of digesters normally shut down for the settling/supernation process. This allows for the continuous aeration and digestion of the waste biological residuals from an aerobic biological activated sludge wastewater treatment plant, which eliminates the possibility of odor production when a digester is restarted after settling and supernation. The system is also designed to reduce the volume residual solids removed for land application when the aerobic digestion system no longer settles and no longer produces supernatant, as it eventually fails to do as part of normal operating practice. Benefits of the system include
savings in residuals disposal and hauling, and improved relations with neighboring communities by the elimination of odor problems routinely associated with digester operation, as well as reducing the mass of metals in sludge applied to local land-disposal sites. The system is easy to install and expand, and the operation is automated for minimal operator attention. McGowan began his career with the St. Augustine Utility Department, rising to the position of water and wastewater chemist in the 1970s. His experience with the digestor systems in St. Augustine early on convinced him of the need to improve digester operation to reduce costs to the utility and the impact of digestor operation on the community and local land-application sites. S
Project Measures Water, Nutrients, and Energy Recovered by U.S. Utilities The first-ever analysis of resource recovery by water utilities in the United States shows significant progress in using biosolids and generating energy, and large growth opportunities exist in water reuse and nutrient capture. Led by the Water Environment Federation (WEF), the ReNEW Water Project utilizes data from national and state databases, publications, and a utility survey, which represents about 25 percent of municipal wastewater flow and about 20 percent of the biosolids produced in the U.S. The NEW in the project name stands for nutrients, energy, and water. “With each passing year, more water utilities are engaging in resource recovery, both for the environmental benefits and the economic opportunities that emerge,” said Eileen O’Neill, executive director of WEF. “Establishing metrics on resource recovery is crucial to moving into a more circular economy that ensures sustainability for future generations. We’re proud to launch this project to monitor and accelerate the rate of water reuse, nutrient capture, and energy generation by facilities.” The current data showed the following levels of recovery of available resources: S Water Reuse - 2.2 billion gallons per year, for a 7 percent recovery rate. This water primarily is for nonpotable uses, such as irrigation and groundwater replenishment. S Biosolids - 3.4 million dry metric tons per year, for a 51 percent recovery rate. Recovered biosolids are land-applied for fertilizer, com-
posted, and used for other beneficial purposes. S Phosphorus - 68,220 dry metric tons per year, for a 21 percent recovery rate. Phosphorus is used in land-applied biosolids, captured in fertilizer, and the recycled water used for irrigation. S Nitrogen - 172,400 dry metric tons per year, for an 11 percent recovery rate. This nitrogen is mostly used in land-applied biosolids and the recycled water used for irrigation. S Energy - 350 megawatts of biogas per year, for a 41 percent recovery rate. Facilities produce biogas, recover heat from the treatment process, and generate electricity.
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
The project was launched to create a bold, aspirational, and public call to action to accelerate resource recovery. The first step was establishing the baseline for current resource recovery practices and WEF will announce goals for water utilities to increase resource recovery from those baseline levels. New data will be collected on a biannual basis and expanded to Canadian water facilities. Aging infrastructure, population pressures, climate change, and funding limitations strain water resources and call for sustainable management solutions. Wastewater treatment plants cannot operate merely as disposal facilities any longer; instead, resource recovery must become a cornerstone of facility operation, producing water for reuse, recovering nutrients, and reducing fossil fuel consumption by using the energy in wastewater. To help guide utilities and sector decision makers, WEF offers resource recovery roadmaps. The goal of the roadmaps is to develop a high-level approach to help guide utilities and industry decision makers in issues to consider when considering the NEW paradigm. The roadmaps are brief and meant to be accessible to all types of stakeholders, including public officials, utility managers, operators, engineers, and regulators. They do not “reinvent the wheel,” with all of the great technical resources that are available; rather, the focus is to help decision makers quickly understand the strategic issues inherent in water reuse efforts. Supporting organizations for the project include Association of Clean Water Administrators, National Association of Clean Water Agencies, Water Research Foundation, and WateReuse Association, as well as Réseau Environnement in Quebec. For more information, visit www.wef.org/ReNEW. S
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 Distribution and Collection. 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!
Steven J. Duranceau, Angela B. Rodriguez, Carlyn J. Higgins, Rebecca Wilder, Samantha Myers-O’Farrell, Samantha J. Black, and Benjamin A. Yoakum (Article 1: CEU = 0.1 DW/DS)
1. A principal disadvantage of the “cook and look” method for evaluating corrosion is a. its cost. b. its unreliability. c. the specialized analytical equipment required. d. the length of time required. 2. Research cited by the authors notes that _______________ is typically used to protect against scale formation. a. polyphosphates b. orthophosphates c. silicates d. calcium hydroxide 3. Which of the following is not listed as a factor in water distribution system corrosion? a. Nitrification b. Dissolved oxygen c. Flow velocity d. pH 4. In the distribution system infrastructure corrosion control example cited, conversion to chlorine disinfection significantly increased the rate of ____________ corrosion. a. mild steel b. carbonate film c. lead d. copper 5. The use of precorroded samples allows completion of linear polarization probe corrosion control studies in as little as a. two days. b. one week. c. one month. d. 10 weeks.
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)
Contact FWPCOA at firstname.lastname@example.org or at 561-840-0340. Articles from past issues can be viewed on the Journal website, www.fwrj.com.
Use of Precorroded Linear Polarization Probes and Coupons for Conducting Corrosion Control Studies
____________________________________ (Expiration Date)
The Secure Interconnect: Securing Remote Access and Data Exchange for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems Bob George (Article 2: CEU = 0.1 WW/DW/DS)
1. The only security control that protects a company’s most vital asset is the organization’s a. firewall. b. cybersecurity policy. c. passwords. d. information technology department. 2. For security planning purposes, “any asset without which the organization incurs significant operational, compliance, or safety liability” defines which of the following? a. Critical b. Secured c. Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) component d. Industrial control system (ICS) component 3. Collapsing tradition servers, storage, and networking into a single rack is called a. bundling. b. virtualization. c. segmentation. d. hyperconvergence. 4. The life cycle of a typical SCADA/ICS system is ___ years. a. Five to 10 b. 10 to 15 c. 15 to 20 d. 20 to 25 5. Which of the following is not identified as contributing to an increasing threat to SCADA/ICS security? a. Operator malfeasance b. Internet of Things c. Cloud-based technology d. Mobile access
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Tank Engineering And Management
Engineering • Inspection Aboveground Storage Tank Specialists Mulberry, Florida • Since 1983
EQUIPMENT & SERVICES DIRECTORY
EQUIPMENT & SERVICES DIRECTORY
Motor & Utility Services, LLC
Showcase Your Company in the Engineering or Equipment & Services Directory Contact Mike Delaney at
CEC Motor & Utility Services, LLC 1751 12th Street East Palmetto, FL. 34221 Phone - 941-845-1030 Fax – 941-845-1049 email@example.com • Motor & Pump Services Test Loaded up to 4000HP, 4160-Volts • Premier Distributor for Worldwide Hyundai Motors up to 35,000HP • Specialists in rebuilding motors, pumps, blowers, & drives • UL 508A Panel Shop, engineer/design/build/install/commission • Lift Station Rehabilitation Services, GC License # CGC1520078 • Predictive Maintenance Services, vibration, IR, oil sampling • Authorized Sales & Service for Aurora Vertical Hollow Shaft Motors
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. firstname.lastname@example.org
Pos i ti o ns Ava i l a b l e
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: Business Development Leader – Tampa Area Client Services Manager Water Process Discipline Leader Senior Water/Wastewater Project Manager Wastewater Process Senior Engineer Project Engineer (Multiple Openings, 0-15 yrs. exp.) To view position details and submit your resume: www.reisseng.com
CITY OF WINTER GARDEN – POSITIONS AVAILABLE The City of Winter Garden is currently accepting applications for the following positions: EXPERIENCED & TRAINEES/LABORERS - Solid Waste Worker I, II & III - Collection Field Tech – I, II, & III - Distribution Field Tech – I, II, & III - Public Service Worker II - Stormwater
Engineering Inspector II & Senior Engineering Inspector Involves highly technical work in the field of civil engineering construction inspection including responsibility for inspecting a variety of construction projects for conformance with engineering plans and specifications. Projects involve roadways, stormwater facilities, portable water distribution systems, sanitary pump stations, gravity sewer collection systems, reclaimed water distribution systems, portable water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities. Salary is DOQ. The City of Winter Garden is an EOE/DFWP that encourages and promotes a diverse workforce. Please apply at http://www.cwgdn.com. Position Requirements: Possession of the following or the ability to obtain within 6 months of hire: (1) Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Stormwater Certification and an (2) Orange County Underground Utility Competency Card. A valid Florida Driver’s License is required. • Inspector II: High School Diploma or equivalent and 7 years of progressively responsible experience in construction inspection or testing of capital improvement and private development projects. • Senior Inspector: Associate’s Degree in Civil Engineering Technology or Construction Management and 10 years of progressively responsible experience, of which 5 years are in at a supervisory level.
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
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.
WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR Utilities, Inc. of Florida is seeking a Water Operator for the Pasco/Pinellas County area. Applicant must have a minimum Class C FDEP Water license. A dual license is preferred. Applicant must have a HS Diploma or GED & a valid Florida driver’s license with a clean record. To view complete job description & apply for the position please visit our web site, www.myuiflorida.com, select the Employment Opportunities tab. Search the Operations & FL, Holiday categories.
Water Treatment Plant - Chief Operator Manatee County Government is hiring now for a Water Treatment Plant - Chief Operator! Qualified candidates must have a minimum of 5 years industry experience, plus 2 years supervisory experience. Possession of a current FDEP “A” Water Operator License required, prior to appointment. Equivalent combinations of education and experience will be considered. Work with us & enjoy an excellent benefits package, generous paid time off, pension & more! To apply, visit: www.mymanatee.org/jobs Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
MAINTENANCE TECHNICIANS 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 pluming 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
City of Tampa - Distribution Technician II Accepting applications for Distribution Technician II. College degree preferred. Backflow Tester Certification Required. See full details at www.tampagov.net/jobs.
Utilities Storm Water Foreman $49,348 - $69,436/yr.
Utilities Treatment Plant Operator II $49,348 - $69,436/yr.
Town of Davie
Utilities Treatment Plant Operator I/Trainee $42,628 - $66,130/yr.
Assistant Utilities Director
Utilities System Operator II & III
$85,491.54 - $120,295.34 / yr.
$40,598 - $57,127 / $42,628 - $66,130/yr. Apply Online At: http://pompanobeachfl.gov Open until filled.
Project Manager (Utilities) $80,544.88 - $93,240.58 / yr.
Utilities Plant Operator I – Water
City of Titusville – Senior Utility Engineer
$40,393 - $48,018/ yr.
Competitive salaries. Great Team. www.titusville.com
Utilities Plant Operator I –Wastewater $40,393 - $48,018/ yr.
Utilities Electro - Technician $50,724 – $60,296 / yr. Please visit our website at http://www.davie-fl.gov for complete job descriptions and to apply. Open until filled.
City of Largo - ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Leadership position within the City's Environmental Services Department with responsibility for overseeing daily operation of the City's wastewater utility including an advanced A2O Wastewater Reclamation Facility, Wastewater Collections, Environmental Control and Reclaimed Water. When you decide that you are ready for the next step in your career, consider becoming part of our team! For more details, please go to: www.largo.com/jobs The City of Largo - Naturally A Great Place to Work!
City of Tarpon Springs Water Distribution Technician I $33,344-$53,719/yr.
Water Distribution Tech III $36,762-$59,224/yr.
Wastewater Plant Operator C $35,012-56,405/yr.
Water Plant Operator B $36,672 - $59.224/ yr.
Water Plant Operator C $35,012-$56,405/yr. Apply online at: http://www.ctsfl.us/jobs.htm Open until filled.
December 2018 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Broward County Water and Wastewater Services Engineering Division Expansion Project Administrator Broward County Water and Wastewater Engineering Division is seeking a highly motivated individual to fill the position of Expansion Project Administrator - Wastewater Expansion Projects. Salary: $76,855.79 - $122,662.18 yearly. Vacancy advertised until a sufficient number of applicants have applied. For more details and to apply, please visit: https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/broward/jobs/2246632/expansion-project-administrator-water-wastewater-engineering
Onsite Wastewater Management Lift station mechanic needed Growing company is looking for an experienced lift station mechanic with knowledge in pumps, electrical and controls Available to rotate on-call emergency response. Offering a benefit package to include vac time, holidays, medical and a 401K. Contact: Onsite Wastewater Mgmt 561-6016516 or email@example.com
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.
Test Yourself Answer Key From page 30 1. C) Quarterly or in accordance with a written flushing program established by the supplier of water. Per FDEP’s Requirements for Community Public Drinking Water Systems, “Deadend water mains conveying finished drinking water shall be flushed quarterly or in accordance with a written flushing program established by the supplier of water; additionally, dead-end or other water mains conveying finished water shall be flushed as necessary whenever legitimate water quality complaints are received.”
2. B) map of the distribution system. Per FDEP’s Requirements for Community Public Drinking Water Systems, “Suppliers of water who own or operate a community water system serving, or designed to serve, 350 or more persons or 150 or more service connections shall have, and thereafter maintain, an up-to-date map of their drinking water distribution system. Such a map shall show the location and size of water mains if known; the location of valves and fire hydrants; and the location of any pressure zone boundaries, pumping facilities, storage tanks, and interconnections with other public water systems [62-555.350(14)].”
3. A) Each day the supplier serves water to the public or at least five days per week, whichever is less. Per FDEP’s Requirements for Community Public Drinking Water Systems, “Each supplier of water serving 3,300 or more persons shall take at least one grab sample each day the supplier serves water to the public or at least five days per week, whichever is less, at a point in the water supplier's distribution system reflecting maximum residence time after disinfectant addition; shall measure the residual disinfectant concentration; and shall record the residual disinfectant concentration in the O&M logs and monthly operation reports.”
4. B) electronic signature for each operator. Per FAC 62-602.650(5), “. . . The water distribution system O&M log shall be maintained in a hard-bound book with consecutive page numbering, or alternatively, part or all of the water distribution system O&M log may be maintained electronically upon written request by the supplier of water and written approval by the appropriate department district office or approved county health department (ACHD). Department district offices and ACHDs shall approve partial or complete electronic water distribution system O&M logs if the supplier of water demonstrates that adequate data storage capacity and data backup will be provided; that entries made by recording equipment will be date/time stamped; and that entries made by an operator will be date/time stamped and accompanied by an electronic signature unique to, and under the sole control of, the operator.”
5. B) Within five service connections Per FAC 62-550.518(6)(c), Microbiological Monitoring Requirements, “The system shall collect at least one repeat distribution system sample from the sampling tap where the original total-coliform-positive sample was taken, at least one repeat distribution system sample at a tap within five service connections upstream of the original sampling site, and at least one repeat distribution system sample at a tap within five service connections downstream of the original sampling site. If a totalcoliform-positive sample is at the beginning or end of the distribution system, or one service connection away from the beginning or end of the distribution system, the system need not collect a repeat sample upstream or downstream of the original sampling site, whichever is applicable, but still must collect the total number of repeat samples specified in paragraph (b).”
6. C) 10 ft Per FAC 62-604.400(2)(g), Design/Performance Considerations, “. . . sewers and force mains shall be laid at least 10 ft (outside to outside) horizontally from water mains. Provided the applicant demonstrates there is no reasonable alternative, the department shall approve smaller horizontal separation distances for sewers if one of the following conditions is met: 1. The top of the sewer is installed at least 18 in. below the bottom of the potable water line. 2. The sewer is encased in watertight carrier pipe or concrete. 3. Both the sewer and the water main are constructed of slip-on or mechanical joint pipe complying with public water supply design standards and pressure tested to 150 pounds per sq in. (psi) to assure watertightness. 4. The applicant provides documentation accompanying the permit application showing that another alternative will result in an equivalent level of reliability and public health protection.”
7. B) Permittee must submit request for approval from FDEP to place the system in use and await clearance. Per FAC 62-604.700(2), Placing Collection/Transmission System Into Operation, “Upon completion of construction of the collection/transmission system, and before placing the facilities into operation for any purpose other than testing for leaks or testing equipment operation, the permittee shall submit to the appropriate district office, Form 62-604.300(8)(b), Request for Approval to Place a Domestic Wastewater Collection/Transmission System into Operation, effective Nov. 6, 2003.”
8. C) 25-year flood Per FAC 62-604.400(2)(e), Design/Performance Considerations, “In areas with high water tables, the pump station shall be designed to include measures to withstand flotation forces when empty. The potential for damage or interruption of operation because of flooding shall be considered by the permittee when siting new pumping stations. The electrical and mechanical equipment shall be protected from physical damage by the 100-year flood. The pumping station shall be designed to remain fully operational and accessible during the 25-year flood; lesser flood levels may be designed for, dependent on local conditions, but in no case shall less than a 10year flood be used.”
9. D) proactively prevent and respond to sanitary sewer overflows. Per EPA’s Guide for Evaluating Capacity, Management, Operation, and Maintenance (CMOM) Programs at Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems, Section 1.5 Purpose of CMOM Programs, “CMOM programs incorporate many of the standard O&M activities that are routinely implemented by the owner or operator with a new set of information management requirements in order to: • Better manage, operate, and maintain collection systems • Investigate capacity constrained areas of the collection system • Proactively prevent sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) • Respond to SSO events.”
10. D) smoke testing. Per EPA’s Guide for Evaluating Capacity, Management, Operation, and Maintenance (CMOM) Programs at Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems, Section 2.4.2 Sewer System Testing, “Smoke testing is a relatively inexpensive and quick method of detecting sources of inflow in sewer systems, such as down spouts, or driveway and yard drains, and works best for detecting cross connections and point source inflow leaks. Smoke testing is not typically used on a routine basis, but rather when evidence of excessive infiltration/inflow (I/I) already exists. With each end of the sewer of interest plugged, smoke is introduced into the test section, usually via a manhole. Sources of inflow can then be identified when smoke escapes through them.”
Florida Water Resources Journal • December 2018
Editorial Calendar January ..........Wastewater Treatment February..........Water Supply; Alternative Sources March..............Energy Efficiency; Environmental Stewardship April ................Conservation and Reuse; Florida Water Resources Conference May ..................Operations and Utilities Management June ................Biosolids Management and Bioenergy Production July....................Stormwater Management; Emerging Technologies; FWRC Review 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 AWWA/AMTA Membrane Technology Conference ................................35 Blue Planet ............................................................................................63 CEU Challenge ........................................................................................55 Florida Aquastore ..................................................................................47 FSAWWA Membership Awards ..............................................................13 FSAWWA Training ..................................................................................14 FSAWWA Water Equation Program........................................................15 FWPCOA Online Training ........................................................................53 FWPCOA Training ..................................................................................21 FWRC ......................................................................................................41 Grundfos ................................................................................................17 Heyward ................................................................................................54 Hudson Pump ........................................................................................33 Hydro International ..................................................................................5 Infosense................................................................................................51 Lakeside Engineering ..............................................................................7 R&M Service Solutions ..........................................................................25 Reiss Engineering ..................................................................................49 Stacon ......................................................................................................2 UF Treeo..................................................................................................31 Xylem......................................................................................................64
December 2018 â€˘ Florida Water Resources Journal
Glossary of Common Terms in This Publication ASR ....................aquifer storage and recovery AWT....................advanced water treatment AWWT ..............advanced wastewater treatment AWWA ..............American Water Works Association BOD ..................5-day biochemical oxygen demand BODx..................BOD test based on other than 5 days CBOD ................5-day carbonaceous BOD COD ..................chemical oxygen demand cfm ....................cubic feet per minute cfs ......................cubic feet per second CWA ..................Clean Water Act EIS......................Environmental Impact Statement EPA ....................U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FAC ....................Florida Administrative Code FDEP ..................Fla. Dept. of Environmental Protection fps ......................feet per second FSAWWA............Florida Section of AWWA FWEA ................Florida Water Environment Association FWPCOA ..........Florida Water & Pollution Control Operators Association GIS ....................Geographic Information System gpcd ..................gallons per capita per day gpd ....................gallons per day gpm ..................gallons per minute hp ......................horsepower I/I ........................infiltration/inflow mgd ..................million gallons per day mg/L ..................milligrams per liter MLSS ................mixed liquor suspended solids MLTSS................mixed liquor total suspended solids NPDES ..............Nat. Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NTU ....................nephelometric turbidity units ORP....................oxidation reduction potential POTW ................public-owned treatment works ppm ....................parts per million ppb ....................parts per billion PSC ....................Public Service Commission psi ......................pounds per square inch PVC ....................polyvinyl chloride RO ......................reverse osmosis SCADA................supervisory control and data acquisition SJRWMD............St. Johns River Water Mangement Dist. SFWMD ..............South Florida Water Management Dist. SRWMD..............Suwannee River Water Management District SSO ....................sanitary sewer overflow SWFWMD ..........Southwest Fla. Water Management Dist. TDS ....................total dissolved solids TMDL..................total maximum daily load TOC ....................total organic carbon TSS ....................total suspended solids USGS ................United States Geological Survey WEF....................Water Environment Federation WRF ..................water reclamation facility WTP....................water treatment plant WWTP ................wastewater treatment plant
Distribution and Collection