Business Office: 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711
Web: www.fwrj.com
General Manager: Michael Delaney
Editor: Rick Harmon
Graphic Design Manager: Patrick Delaney
Mailing Coordinator: 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: Joe Paterniti (FWEA) Clay County Utility Authority
Treasurer: Rim Bishop (FWPCOA) Seacoast Utility Authority
Secretary: Mish Clark Mish Agency
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 changes@fwrj.com or mail to Florida Water Resources Journal, 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711
Membership Questions
FSAWWA: Casey Cumiskey – 407-979-4806 or fsawwa.casey@gmail.com
FWEA: Laura Cooley, 407-574-3318, admin@fwea.org
FWPCOA: Darin Bishop – 561-840-0340
Training Questions
FSAWWA: Donna Metherall – 407-979-4805 or fsawwa.donna@gmail.com
FWPCOA: Shirley Reaves – 321-383-9690
For Other Information
FDEP 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, oho@fwpcoa.org
FWEA: Laura Cooley, 407-574-3318, admin@fwea.org
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
News and Features
Alternative Water Sources and Supplies: Addressing Florida’s Water Challenges
Technical Articles
Assessing Reverse Osmosis Membranes for Treating a Brackish Feedwater of Increasing Salinity—Christopher R. Hagglund and Steven J. Duranceau
Education
and
Training
Columns
Departments
Water Sector Organizations Partner on Innovative Generative AI Research Project
The American Water Works Association (AWWA), Water Environment Federation (WEF), Water Research Foundation (WRF), and Karmous Edwards Consulting (KEC) have launched a project on the role of generative artificial intelligence (GedAI) for the global water sector.
The research will establish a foundational understanding of GenAI’s role for water utilities, develop and share best practices and case studies for GenAI applications in water, and establish a research roadmap for advancing future applications of this innovative technology in the water sector.
“Generative AI is a game changer that will transform the water community in ways we cannot yet fully imagine,” said David LaFrance, AWWA chief executive officer. “The amazing members of the project team will lay the foundation to bring unimagined possibilities into our daily strategic operations, and AWWA is proud to be part of this groundbreaking exploration.”
Working with a diverse group of global water utilities—including utilities from South Korea and the United Kingdom—under the technical leadership of KEC, the project will explore the application of GenAI to address critical water sector challenges, such as infrastructure management, water resource and
environmental resilience, and public engagement and understanding of the value of water.
“While digital transformation of the water sector has been underway for several years, the emergence of GenAI technologies represents a significant opportunity to further transform the water sector by providing powerful, accessible solutions for utilities of all sizes,” said Ralph Exton, WEF executive director.
The ability of GenAI to analyze and generate insights from vast datasets— structured and unstructured—can help utilities uncover trends, optimize resource allocation, and support data-driven decision making at all levels and in all roles. Significantly, GenAI has the potential to augment human resources rather than replace them, enabling water sector professionals to focus on higher-value tasks, make more-informed decisions, and drive innovation.
“Together, we aim to leverage the costeffective yet sophisticated capabilities of generative AI to enhance utility operations, bridge the digital divide among utilities of all sizes, and establish a research roadmap that will propel global digital transformation in the water sector,” said Gigi Karmous-Edwards, principal of KEC.
Project outcomes will serve to define new approaches to leverage GenAI technologies, mitigate risks, and advance digital transformation in water to enhance utility capacity to address current and future water challenges.
“This exciting project will gather insights and lessons learned from utilities that already have experience implementing GenAI strategies,” said Dr. Peter Grevatt, WRF chief executive officer. “These case studies will help
Tnemec Announces 2024 Water Tank of the Year Winners; Tank in Clearwater is a
Tnemec Company Inc., the protective coatings manufacturer, has announced the 2024 Tank of the Year and other winners.
A newly built water tank in Grand Prairie, Texas, took home the top prize for the contest among 12 tanks that “truly hold water.”
Tnemec has been carrying out the annual awards program since 2006, celebrating the innovative and creative uses of its coatings on water tanks throughout the United States and Canada.
Contest Rules
The rules for the contest are:
S Tanks must be coated with Tnemec products.
S New construction and renovation projects are welcome.
S All potable water tank styles are eligible.
S Tanks must have been completed by Sept. 27, 2024.
S Projects must not be more than two years old and not submitted for previous Tank of the Year contests.
S A high-quality photo of the completed tank must be submitted.
2024 Tank of the Year
The Grand Prairie, Texas, water tank features a three-part mural by artist Eric Henn, depicting local attractions in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. These include horse racing at Lone Star Park, Joe Pool Lake, and amusement center Epic Central.
Structures, along with Freese and Nichols, Gulf States Protective Coatings, and the owner of the tank, the City of Grand Prairie.
Located off Highway 161, this water tank reportedly serves as both a functional and artistic centerpiece in the city. Tnemec’s Series 700 HydroFlon coating was used for the project to ensure the vibrant art will shine for years to come.
Runner-Up Designation for Clearwater Tank
In an area known for its arts scene, this ground storage tank in Clearwater beautifully immerses onlookers in Florida’s vibrant coastal ecosystem. The mural, titled “Tailing,” showcases two Red Drum fish gracefully navigating a mangrove environment, highlighting the area’s connection to nature.
This project was run by the City of Clearwater and was the recipient of a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts. Artist Christian Stanley spent about two weeks and used more than 50 colors of Tnemec high-performance water-based coatings to make this mural come to life.
Other Finalists
Other water tanks, along with the ones in Grand Prairie and Clearwater, are among the finalists for 2024 and are in the following cities:
S Annandale, Minn.
S Birchwood, Wis. Cawker City, Kan.
Runner-Up
S Chehalis Village, Wash.
S Emporia, Kan.
S Hillsboro, Texas
S Sault Ste. Marie, Mich.
S Sheldon, Iowa
S Topsail, N.C.
About Tnemec
Tnemec Co. Inc. specializes in protecting surfaces and structures from corrosion with high-performance coatings and linings. Founded in 1921, it’s one of the largest privately held protective coatings manufacturers in North America.
Since 2006, Tnemec has celebrated the innovative and creative uses of its coatings on water tanks with the annual Tank of the Year and People’s Choice contests. Each year, potable water tanks of all varieties are narrowed down to determine the most impressive coatings projects in the water tank industry.
Over 320 water tanks were nominated in 2024, with over 46,000 online People’s Choice votes cast. The Tank of the Year winner is selected by a panel of water tank enthusiasts based on criteria such as artistic value, the significance of the tank to the community, and challenges encountered during the project.
The Tank of the Year is featured as the month of January in Tnemec’s 2025 water tank calendar. All finalists and nominees will be included in the following months of the calendar.
To request a free 2024 Tank of the Year calendar, visit tankoftheyear.com. S
The Tank of the Year in Grand Prairie, Texas. The water tank in Clearwater.
SIX STEPS. SMALL FOOTPRINT. SMART PROCESS.
Fill, mix, aerate, settle, decant and waste sludge in a single, compact basin. Lakeside Sequencing Batch Reactors (SBRs) are backed by 60 years of biological treatment expertise. Our fully automated systems offer flexible options for general water treatment as well as high-level nitrogen and phosphorous removal. There’s no need for external clarifiers or return-activated sludge pumping. Integrated controls make the process easy, while the modular design allows your operation room to grow. Lakeside SBRs are the eco-friendly, cost-effective way to produce consistent high-quality effluent without foam or scum.
Cleaner Water for a Brighter Future®
Speak to one of our experts at 630.837.5640, email us at sales@lakeside-equipment.com, or visit www.lakeside-equipment.com for more product information.
CLR Process
Magna Rotor Aerators & Accessories
Sequencing Batch Reactors
Package Treatment Plants
Submersible Mixers & Recirculation Pumps
Roadmap to a Secure and Resilient Water and Wastewater Sector: 2024 Update
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
As directed by the Water Sector Coordinating Council (WSCC) and the Water Government Coordinating Council (WGCC), the Water and Wastewater Sector Strategic Roadmap Work Group updated the May 2017 Roadmap to a Secure and Resilient Water and Wastewater Sector to reflect sector progress and changes in conditions since 2017. The work group members devoted a significant amount of time, energy, and effort to the creation of the roadmap.
The water and wastewater sector (sector) has engaged in a considerable effort to expand mutual aid and assistance; develop critical security standards; enhance local, state, and federal partnerships; address cybersecurity concerns; provide research and studies; and release new risk assessment tools designed to enhance sector preparedness and resilience. The sector has approached these risk reduction and response preparedness activities through a partnership that spans the full range of sector participants, including federal and state governments, individual drinking water and wastewater utilities, and national water associations. These partners assist in improving resilience by identifying joint priorities and engaging in coordinated action. As the understanding of risk and the sector’s preparedness and resilience capabilities continue to evolve, the sector partnership must regularly review progress and revise its priorities to reflect the current environment. This 2024 roadmap
updates priority activity areas for the partnership based on a five-year outlook.
In 2009, the WSCC and WGCC released the first roadmap, which identified the joint priority activity areas needed to improve water and wastewater resilience and meet the sector’s shared vision:
The water and wastewater sector’s vision is a secure and resilient drinking water and wastewater infrastructure that provides clean and safe water as an integral part of daily life, ensuring the economic vitality of and public confidence in the nation’s drinking water and wastewater services through a layered defense of effective preparedness and security practices in the sector.
`The WSCC and WGCC produced updated roadmaps in 2013 and 2017 that provided a review of major sector accomplishments since the publication of the original roadmap in 2009 and identified priority activity areas and associated near- and midterm actions in support of a more resilient water and wastewater sector.
In May of 2023, the WSCC and WGCC chartered the work group to undertake an update of the 2017 roadmap. This 2024 roadmap reflects the work group’s efforts to review key threats and vulnerabilities of the water and wastewater sector, identify gaps in water and wastewater sector capabilities relative to the key threats and
vulnerabilities, and formulate priority activity areas and associated near- and midterm actions to address those gaps. The work group convened on July 31 and Aug. 1, 2023, for a two-day meeting to review progress, identify evolving threat areas and priority activity areas, and formulate necessary actions. This 2024 roadmap update describes those priority activity areas and related recommended actions.
The WGCC is chaired by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security as a vicechair, and consists of representatives from federal, regional, state, local, and tribal government programs. The WSCC members include municipaland investor-owned water and wastewater utilities, associations, and regional organizations. Together, these coordinating councils form the publicprivate water and wastewater sector partnership through which security partners collaborate to plan and implement programs aimed at achieving a common vision.
Roadmap Development
Purpose
The purpose of the roadmap is to establish a strategic framework that achieves the following:
S Articulates the priorities of industry and government in the water and wastewater sector to manage and reduce risk.
S Produces an actionable path forward for the WGCC, WSCC, and security and response partners to improve the security and resilience of the water and wastewater sector over the near term (within two years) and midterm (within five years).
S Guides sector partners in developing new products and services and formulating budgets.
S Creates a shared understanding of and collectively advocate for sector priorities while recognizing institutional constraints and different accountabilities of the sector partners.
S Encourages extensive engagement among all key stakeholders to strengthen public-private partnerships and reduce risk throughout the water and wastewater sector.
How the Roadmap is Used
The roadmap was developed primarily for the WSCC and WGCC to support collaboration and leverage resources among the sector’s partners, as well as ensure that joint activities contribute to a common vision. Water and wastewater utility owners and operators, associations, and
Continued on page 10
1. POLYMER REDUCTION: P6 PolyMix® Systems reduce polymer consumption by providing complete polymer/sludge mixing in a shear-sensitive manner. This patented mixing process allows long-strand polymer chains to remain intact and unbroken and wastewater floc to remain intact and unsheared. Typical applications result in a 25-50% REDUCTION IN POLYMER CONSUMPTION, thus saving the customer thousands of dollars in polymer expenses. By not breaking up the polymer chains, the dewatering equipment will experience less fouling, providing more reliability and reducing equipment cleaning costs.
2. DRIER CAKE SOLIDS: P6 PolyMix® technology optimizes the polymer and sludge mixing process, allowing INCREASE DEWATERED SOLIDS CONCENTRATION and INCREASED PERCENT SOLIDS CAPTURED. This unique mixing process results in more efficient sludge hauling, allowing customers to transport less water and more dewatered cake off-site.
3. ELIMINATION OF PUMP MAINTENANCE: P6 PolyMix® technology reduces pump parts and maintenance by utilizing the abrasion-resistant Discflo pumping principles of Boundary Layer/Viscous Drag. This principle can save the customer thousands of dollars in parts and maintenance over the lifetime of the equipment. All P6 PolyMix® systems in the municipal market include a 10-YEAR (extendable to 20 years) 100% WET END WEAR WARRANTY, No other pump manufacturer in the industry provides a wear warranty, let alone a 20-year wear warranty!
4. PUMPS & MIXES: P6 PolyMix® technology uses the unique principles of Boundary Layer/Viscous Drag for mixing polymer versus a mixer/check valve; this, paired with its unique InjeX™ polymer injection mixing chamber, is designed for MINIMAL POLYMER DEGRIDATION, allowing for maximum polymer savings. The hydraulic shear forces within the mixing pump provide a complete homogeneous wastewater polymer slurry fed to the dewatering equipment without breaking the long chain polymers or reducing floc size.
5. LOWER OPERATING PRESSURE AND INSTALLED HORESPOWER: P6 PolyMix® technology dramatically reduces the operating pressure by reducing back pressure within the piping system due to eliminating mixer/check valves. In some applications, customers have had a 75% REDUCTION IN PRESSURE Lower pressure allows the feed pump to operate at lower horsepower. HORSEPOWER SAVINGS OF UP TO 50% OR MORE are possible by installing a P6 PolyMix® system. Customers can see substantial long-term energy savings and reduced upfront capital costs associated with lower installed horsepower.
6. HOW IS IT APPLIED: P6 PolyMix® systems entirely replace bulky, expensive, outdated traditional sludge feed pumps. You can now replace thousands of dollars in equipment and regain valuable real estate space by switching to P6 PolyMix® and utilizing its unique compact design, patented process for eliminating mixer/check valves, and ultra-efficient polymer mixing process. Contact us to learn how P6 PolyMix® can revolutionize the efficiency of your BELT FILTER PRESSES, GRAVITY BELT THICKENERS, ROTARY THICKENERS, SCREW PRESSES, AND CRENTIFUGES.
government agencies can also use the roadmap as a reference to support their planning processes. The priority activity areas contain actions that address key gaps in the water and wastewater sector’s capabilities relative to key threats to the operation of water and wastewater sector utilities. These actions should ultimately serve to improve the water and wastewater sector’s resilience, not only to the highest priority threats, but also to any hazard that jeopardizes the environmental and public health mission of the sector.
2024 Updates
The 2024 roadmap was revised using a similar process and format to its predecessors, the 2009, 2013, and 2017 roadmaps. The most notable changes in the 2024 update include the revision of
the priority threat areas and the priority activity areas. The 2024 roadmap maintains the top activity areas from the 2017 roadmap, while also adding three new activity areas.
Water and Wastewater Sector Partnerships
The water and wastewater sector coordinates planning and response among a broad scope of partners, including primary actors, such as the WSCC, WGCC, local partners to water and wastewater utilities, along with federal, state, and regional partners that regularly engage in one or more facets of the water and wastewater sector. Other sector partners, such as manufacturers and vendors, also play an important role in the sector. Over the past 15 years, the water and wastewater sector has worked to include and engage all stakeholders.
Threats Addressed
`The 2024 work group identified six categories of threats:
S Supply Chain Risk Management
S Extreme Weather and Natural Disasters
S Physical and Workforce Security
S Contamination Incidents
S Infrastructure Degradation
S Cybersecurity and Cyber Risk Management
These six threat categories together drive consideration of priority activity areas for the water and wastewater sector over the next two to five years.
Supply Chain Risk Management
The supply chain crisis became prominent during the COVID-19 pandemic due to a combination of factors, including labor shortages, shipping issues, and changes in supply and demand. Geopolitical factors continue to put pressure on supply chains, including those serving the water and wastewater sector. Building awareness of the worldwide issues creating market conditions that impact treatment chemicals and equipment manufacturing is critically important in anticipating potential supply chain disruptions.
Extreme Weather and Natural Disasters
Both acute and chronic extreme weather events and natural disasters are identified as a significant risk in this roadmap. The focus remains on “acute” events, such as floods, hurricanes, and earthquakes, and is expanded to include “chronic” hazards, such as drought and sea level rise. This approach reflects the work group’s interest in building long-term strategic considerations into the sector’s thinking. The roadmap stresses the importance of incorporating projections for hydrologic change and extreme weather into risk and resilience planning and pursuing funding opportunities for increasing resilience to these events when they occur.
Physical and Workforce Security
The water and wastewater sector is vulnerable to an evolving range of security threats and must remain flexible and adaptable to defend against these threats. Developing a security culture involves effective training, exercises, guidance, and commitment from utility leadership and employees. The work group expressed the importance of expanding security initiatives to include workforce safety and physical security, both within the confines of the utility and in the field.
Contamination Incidents
The work group identified contamination incidents as a continuing critical priority
threat area. High-profile contamination incidents, including Elk River, W.Va.; Corpus Christi, Texas; Toledo, Ohio; Potomac River, National Capital Region (Virginia, Maryland, and Washington, D.C.); and Philadelphia, Pa., have diminished and challenged public confidence in the safety of drinking water and have highlighted gaps in capabilities in both source water protection/preparedness and the emergency response and recovery framework.
Infrastructure Degradation
The work group identified infrastructure degradation and its implications as a significant risk. The focus of addressing this threat is on the water quality and operational reliability aspects of aging and failing infrastructure, as well as reflecting the effects that economic pressures within a community (e.g., loss of economic base, an aging population) can have on the operational capacity of utilities. The work group acknowledges this is an endemic sector problem, not specific to water security considerations.
Cybersecurity and Cyber Risk Management
Cyber events continue to be identified as a significant risk due to the increasing use of and reliance on technology systems including process control systems, industrial internet, cloud services, and other connected technology. As a result, the sector has experienced a related increase in cyber threats, cyber vulnerabilities, and capabilities of malicious actors. This roadmap emphasizes the importance of established technology systems, while also recognizing that the adoption of new technologies (e.g., artificial intelligence [AI]) represents both benefits and increasing challenges to the sector.
2024 Priority Activity Areas
The work group identified seven priority activity areas based on a review of the 2017 roadmap and related accomplishments, as well as the consideration of recent water and wastewater sector incidents. These priority activity areas are:
S Support the water and wastewater sector’s vision and goals as stated in the 2015 sectorspecific plan.
S Reflect a cohesive, near-term (within two years) and midterm (within five years) approach to advance the capabilities and resilience of the water and wastewater sector.
S Identify practical efforts that, if implemented, will meaningfully address the key threat areas.
S Fall within the capabilities of WSCC and WGCC associations and agencies (e.g., resources, authorities, span of control).
In addition to three emerging priority activity areas identified by the work group,
the four priority activity areas from the 2017 roadmap remain relevant to the 2024 roadmap. The work group agreed that these priority activity areas must be pursued to enhance the resilience of the water and wastewater sector.
The priority activity areas are listed and summarized.
Priority Activity Areas for the Water and Wastewater Sector
Emerging
S Promote planning and resilience of water and wastewater sector supply chain risk management.
S Mitigate the effects of hydrologic change and extreme weather.
S Improve training on physical and workforce security for utility operations.
Continuing
S Establish the critical lifeline status of the water and wastewater sector and translate that definition into strong support for the sector’s needs and capabilities.
S Improve detection of, response to, and recovery from contamination incidents.
S Advance preparedness and improve capabilities of the water and wastewater sector for areawide loss of water and power.
S Advance recognition of vulnerabilities and adopt response measures related to cyber risk management.
The roadmap’s priority activity areas share many common challenges to implementation,
particularly overcoming limited resources. Resilience projects may be left out of increasingly lean utility budgets. The work group emphasized the critical need to enable utilities to more easily identify and access grant funding opportunities to implement roadmap actions.
One new and very important roadmap priority is engaging with small and medium utilities in rural and underserved communities to assist them in pursuing funding for projects and initiatives that cut across all priority activity areas.
Roles and Responsibilities
Roadmap contributors defined the following roles and responsibilities for implementing each priority activity area:
Coordination Lead
The WSCC and WGCC are responsible for providing direction and guidance to keep the activity on track, establishing work groups when needed, and bringing in other organizations and experts to help implement the activity.
Principal Partner
Sector associations and government agencies are responsible for initiating and managing activity plans, contributing the necessary financial and technical resources, encouraging active stakeholder participation, collaborating with coordination leads to stay on track, and delivering tangible results.
For the full report, go to www.epa.gov. S
2025 FWPCOA OFFICERS AND COMMITTEE CHAIRS
For more information on officers and committee chairs, visit the association website at www.fwpcoa.org.
CORPORATE OFFICERS
• President Kevin Shropshire (321) 221-7540 president@fwpcoa.org
• Vice President Scott Ruland vice-pres@fwpcoa.org
• Secretary-Treasurer Rim Bishop (561) 627-2900, ext. 314 sec-treas@fwpcoa.org
• Training Coordinator Shirley Reaves (321) 383-9690 training@fwpcoa.org
• Webmaster Robbie Duarte webmaster@fwpcoa.org
FWRC/FWRJ BOARD APPOINTMENTS
• Trustee Kevin Shropshire president@fwpcoa.org
• Trustee Patrick Murphy pmurphy@plantcitygov.com
• Trustee Scott Ruland vice-pres@fwpcoa.org
• Member Rim Bishop (561) 627-2900, ext. 314 sec-treas@fwpcoa.org
May 4-7, 2025 @ West Palm Beach Convention Center
MONDAY MAY 5, 2025 AFTERNOON
*Subject to Change
Lisa Wilson-Davis Chair, FSAWWA
As water professionals, we know the critical role our industry plays in ensuring public health, environmental sustainability, and community resilience. At the 2024 FSAWWA Fall Conference, I had the privilege of involving our incredible attendees in a collaborative activity to spark creativity for my series of columns in this magazine.
Using Mentimeter, which is an app that can create presentations with real-time feedback from participants, we generated industry-related words starting with the vowels A, E, I, O, U, and Y—yes, including Y, as I needed six!
It’s now my pleasure—and creative challenge—to weave these contributions into meaningful reflections on our work.
Beginning With “A”
The drinking water industry is a vital part of our infrastructure, ensuring our communities have access to clean, safe, and amazing water every day. Behind every drop
FSAWWA SPEAKING OUT
“A” is for . . .
of aqua, a complex network of technology, science, and innovation is at work. For “A,” three words stood out to me:
S Action
S Adaptation
S Advocacy
These words encapsulate the essence of our shared mission in the water sector.
Action
Every day, water professionals across Florida take decisive steps to maintain and improve infrastructure, protect water quality, and respond to emergencies. Whether it’s tackling aging infrastructure or implementing innovative technologies, our work is grounded in proactive and purposeful action.
Adaptation
With changing climates and evolving regulations, adaptation is no longer optional— it’s essential. Our ability to pivot and develop forward-thinking solutions ensures we meet the challenges of tomorrow while delivering the reliability our communities expect.
Advocacy
We also serve as advocates—not only for the resources we manage, but for the people we serve. Whether it’s engaging with policymakers or educating the public, our voices are powerful tools in driving positive change for water systems statewide.
Other Attendee Contributions
Here are some other “A” words that struck a chord with our attendees.
Awareness
Industry leaders like us continually take steps to improve water quality and promote public awareness about water safety, sustainability, and conservation. Whether it’s tackling contaminants or developing new processes, action combined with education ensures communities stay informed.
Advanced Technologies: From Activated Carbon to Artificial Intelligence
Advanced technologies are revolutionizing our water treatment processes. Activated carbon plays a critical role in removing organic contaminants, while processes like advanced oxidation address pollutants that are difficult to eliminate.
Additionally, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) is accelerating advancements in the industry. The AI-powered systems provide accurate data analysis, optimize treatment processes, and predict potential issues before they arise. These advancements ensure the availability of clean drinking water while maintaining accountability in our system operations.
Balancing Alkalinity, Acidity, and Removing Contaminants
Water chemistry is central to our treatment processes. Balancing alkalinity and acid levels ensures that water is safe and acceptable for consumption. We also work diligently to eliminate and manage harmful substances, such as arsenic and ammonia. While we may be experts in drinking water treatment, should we be removing alcohol from drinking water? Now some would say that’s just taking the “fun” out of fundamental chemistry!
Protecting the Aquifer and the Aqueous Environment
Safeguarding our natural resources, such as our aquifers, is essential to maintaining sustainable supplies of drinking water. Clean aqueous systems are critical to preserving ecosystems while providing a reliable drinking water source for our communities. Advocating for environmental protection aligns our industry’s goals with sustainability, also emphasizing the need for alignment between technology and nature.
Affordability
Ensuring water remains affordable, while keeping pace with growing demands, requires adaptability. Our industry’s ability to innovate with cost-effective solutions demonstrates its amazing flexibility. From smart actuators that optimize treatment systems to proactive approaches for water availability and creative rate structures, we can ensure resilience in the face of challenges.
Accountability
At the heart of our industry lies our commitment to accountability. We work tirelessly to meet stringent standards and uphold public trust. As leaders we also advocate for policies and funding that support advancements in water treatment and delivery.
Advancement in Excellence
With advancements in technology and dedication, the drinking water industry continues to evolve. Whether it’s addressing contaminants, achieving precise chemical balances, or deploying cutting-edge technologies, our sector proves its commitment to delivering high-quality drinking water.
From the alkalinity of water to advanced filtration processes, our efforts are nothing short of awesome! With ongoing innovation, adaptability, and accountability, the future of clean drinking water is bright, sustainable, and dependable.
Words Have Meaning
So, this is just the beginning of our journey through the vowels in the alphabet. I hope this series inspires you to think about the meaningful connections we share in this industry and the impact we create together. Each of us plays a vital role in shaping the future of water resources, and it’s through our collective efforts that we ensure clean, reliable water for generations to come. Stay tuned next month as I spotlight our regional volunteers, and then, we’ll dive into the letter “E.”
Remember: The words we choose—and the actions we take—define the legacy we leave behind.
the
Exhibiting
word “action,” FSAWWA members participate in breakout groups during the third annual FSAWWA Water Utility Community Innovation, Technology, and Financial Workshop: Vision to Victory! It was facilitated by the FL2051 Committee and held at the Orlando Convention Center on Aug. 16, 2024.
Exhibiting the word “advocacy,” members of the FSAWWA Water Utility Council in Washington, D.C., hang out on the front steps of the U.S. Capitol. In the front row: Monica Wallis and Sarah Burns; second row: Michelle Duggan, Peggy Guingona, Kim Kowalski, and Lisa Wilson-Davis; third row: Matt Wotowiec.
In Memoriam Amber Balester
1989 - 2024
Amber Balester was born on Dec. 27, 1989, and died on October 20, 2024. At the time of her passing she was aftermarket sales manager with GOVAPEX in Cocoa, a provider of odor control equipment for the municipal wastewater treatment industry.
Friends and colleagues provided the following thoughts and stories about Amber.
A Collection of Tributes for Amber
I write this with immense sadness over the unimaginable and sudden loss of my dear friend, Amber Balester. She was only 34, vibrant, full of life, and a remarkable person whose spirit could brighten even the darkest of days. I still vividly remember the first time I met her. It was only three years ago, and even though we exchanged just a few short words, I knew right away she was someone special. In my career, I’ve met thousands of people, but she was unlike anyone else. There was an immediate connection like we had known each other our entire lives. It was at that instant that a bond between us would grow into one of the most cherished friendships of my life.
Her open heart and genuine spirit made it easy for our friendship to blossom. Our weekly Taco Tuesdays and Thursday lunch outings became routine, and they were simple yet cherished moments. We had our favorite spots, but we were always open to trying new ones, eager to make memories and share stories. Over time, I got to know her outside of work; she introduced me to her family, and I introduced mine to hers. We both shared a love for all things Disney, and soon, our families were creating special traditions:
visiting gingerbread houses at Christmas, colorful Easter egg displays at Disney Resorts, and other theme parks became some of the best memories we shared together.
She was particularly passionate about Disney World, and her love for the movie character Stitch was something truly special. Her world revolved around that lovable blue alien, and it was a joy to see her light up whenever she talked about him. But more than just Disney, Amber’s heart was filled with love for her family. Every evening, she would gather with her grandmother and loved ones for dinner. She made family time a priority, whether it was planning a trip to Disney or organizing a getaway to Tennessee. She had a way of making everyone feel included—no one was ever left out of her plans or her heart.
Professionally, she approached her work with diligence, compassion, and determination. She was always willing to tackle any task, big or small, and if she didn’t know how to solve a problem, she would find the answer. Her dedication allowed her to rise quickly within our organization, taking on numerous responsibilities. We all came to rely on her. She also found joy in joining outside organizations, where she was welcomed with open arms, quickly earning the respect of professionals beyond our company. She once told me she never could have imagined how much she would grow in her career, and it’s true. She had only just begun to show the world what she was capable of. I have no doubt she would have continued to inspire and lead for many years to come.
Amber, I am so proud and honored to have been a part of your life, even if for such a short time. I will forever cherish the memories we made
together: the lunches, the laughter, and of course, your magnetic smile. Your heart was full of light, and your spirit will never be forgotten.
I believe her outlook on life can best be summed up by a lyric from a song in a DIsney movie: “No matter how your heart is grieving, if you keep on believing, the dream that you wish will come true.” I take comfort in knowing that your dreams, Amber, are now a part of the stars, shining brightly for all of us to see. I’ll see you again, my friend. Until then, you will always have a place in my heart.
–With love, Rick Dias
Amber was such a remarkable person. I still remember my first week in the office when she shared that her dad had just returned from a fishing trip in the Bahamas. To my surprise, she brough me some of the fresh catch to take back home to Kansas! We tucked the fish into the freezer that morning and as the day went on, we hadn’t thought through how to keep it cool for the journey home. Our plan was to buy dry ice, only to discover that flying with dry ice was prohibited! Amber improvised and crafted homemade ice packs to wrap around the fish and even lent me her own cooler to transport
When Amber first joined our company, she may not have had the required skills, experience, or formal education, but what she brought was an incredible attitude, boundless enthusiasm, and a determination to learn and succeed. She thrived on challenges and never backed down from mastering any task set before her. Her genuine smile and positive energy were infectious, making a lasting impact on everyone around her. In just three years, this remarkable individual, initially hired as an administrative assistant, became a valued member of my leadership team. Amber’s contributions will be deeply missed by me and all who had the pleasure of working with her.
–Robert
Jeyaseelan
I had only been working for the company for a few months so I didn’t know Amber for very long. When I first met her, I knew right away the person she was: cheerful, authentic, and very kind. Her happy spirit brightened the most challenging of days. She was never too busy to stop what she was doing to help me with whatever silly questions I had. She left an indelible mark on me, and I will always remember her kindness. The office is a lot
with Amber. One particularly fun time was when we traveled to Chicago last summer for a training conference. The event was fine and informative, but the time Amber and I spent together was really special. We both share an appreciation for travel and good food. We walked all over the city, taking in the beautiful architecture and parks. Every evening, we carefully chose a restaurant to enjoy great Chicago cuisine. What I enjoyed was watching Amber experience these sites and taking numerous photos. I appreciated her zest for life. She always had a positive attitude—even when GPS got us lost in the middle of the city! We walked several blocks in the wrong direction before realizing we were lost. We both couldn’t help but laugh that two grown, intelligent women got lost and we ended up calling an Uber to take us to our destination. We said we would never tell anyone how “dumb” we both felt. I share it here because it will always be a great memory for me of that time together.
Amber had an amazing work ethic. She was also fun, thoughtful, and a good friend. I miss talking to her daily and her positive energy. I will always be grateful for the time I was blessed to have her in my life.
–Stephanie Coppedge
Amber was not only an asset to our FWEA Students and Young Professionals Committee, but she was also an amazing person with a kind heart and a bright mind. She will truly be missed. May she rest in peace and live on forever in our memories.
–Jissell Muir
Amber was so quick to share; she was outgoing, kind, and knew how to make someone laugh. I will keep her and her family in my prayers and always treasure the time we got to spend together.
–Zachary Loeb
Amber was such a delightful and driven person, and she will be deeply missed.
–Olga Mikhalchishina
Amber was such a nice person. I only met her once, but she was super easy to talk to and cared a lot about the work that we do.
–Senuda Rajapakse
Dear friend, thank you for sharing your light with us. We will forever celebrate you! S
Assessing Reverse Osmosis Membranes for Treating a Brackish Feedwater of Increasing Salinity
Christopher R. Hagglund and Steven J. Duranceau
Pressure-driven reverse osmosis (RO) membranes are commonly employed to separate contaminants (such as chloride) from water supplies using a semipermeable thinfilm composite structure, whose performance can be described as a solution-diffusion mechanism [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. Treatment of brackish groundwater using RO membranes in the state of Florida is common, with over 140 desalination facilities currently operating along the state’s coastline treating brackish water supplies [6]. Increasing salinity in the coastal regions of Florida [7, 8] is a growing concern to utilities operating brackish water RO plants because of possible impacts on productivity and permeate quality.
Brackish water RO membranes are typically manufactured in a spiral wound thin-film composite configuration and are commonly arranged in multiple stages with a decreasing number of elements in each subsequent stage to achieve a particular water recovery that would minimize fouling conditions [9, 10]. The overall recovery for brackish processes typically ranges between 75 and 85 percent, depending on the feedwater chemistry. Membrane performance can be evaluated by using pilot plants that simulate full-scale operating conditions to investigate membrane productivity, permeate, and concentrate quality to determine RO processes under actual operating conditions [11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Mass transfer coefficients (MTCs) for water (kw) and solutes (ks) are especially useful values in assessing permeate productivity and aid in identifying if fouling conditions are present. Changes in source water chemistries upstream of a RO membrane process can be effectively monitored at the pilot scale, providing an opportunity for operators to forecast how altered feed conditions may impact full-scale operations [17, 18]
To prepare for possible changes in feedwater conditions, where coastal salinity increases are of concern, a pilot-scale RO process was employed to assess the performance of three different membrane manufacturer’s brackish elements when exposed to an increasing feed salinity by comparing kw and k s values and considering operation and maintenance (O&M) impacts.
Methods and Materials
Mass Transfer Analysis
The k w and k s were calculated using the homogenous solution diffusion model (HSDM) [1]. The HSDM is an extension of the NernstPlanck equation in which solvent transport occurs due to convection caused by an applied pressure gradient and solute transport occurs due to diffusion produced by a pressure gradient, as displayed in Equation 1 and Equation 2, respectively [2, 9, 19, 20] The net driving pressure (NDP) was used to calculate the kw as shown in Equation 3, which relates the available feed concentrate, permeate, and osmotic pressure values needed to produce a permeate stream [9, 21]
1
2
3
Where:
k w = water mass transfer coefficient (L3/M-t)
Jw = solvent permeate flux (L3/L2-t)
NDP = net driving pressure (M/L2)
Qp = permeate flow (L3/t)
A = membrane surface area (L2)
k s = solute mass transfer coefficient (L3/L2-t)
Js = solute permeate flux (M/L2-t)
DC = concentration gradient (M/L3)
Pfc = feed-concentrate pressure (M/L2)
P p = applied pressure (M/L2)
P osm = osmotic pressure (M/L2)
Testing Procedure
In this study, a testing protocol was established based on the steps provided by Kumar and colleagues [12], in addition to guidelines suggested by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) [11, 22, 23] and the Information Collection Rule (ICR) [24], and are listed henceforth:
1. Collect physical data corresponding with the manufacturers’ membrane elements. The selection of membranes to pilot-test
Christopher R. Hagglund, doctoral candidate, and Steven J. Duranceau, Ph.D., P.E., professor of environmental engineering, are in the department of civil, environmental, and construction engineering at the University of Central Florida in Orlando.
was based on similarities to elements used at an existing full-scale RO plant. Three study phases (Phases 1, 2, and 3) were used to evaluate membrane performance under current and simulated increased salinity feedwater conditions based on brackish well quality data [25]. Study Phase 1 is based on existing conditions. Two additional phases simulating increased salinity conditions were included in the testing.
2. Assess the feedwater quality, address fouling concerns, and evaluate scale precipitation potential using computer software for each testing phase.
3. Sequentially pilot-test three preselected membranes, designated A, B, and C, under current conditions using the brackish groundwater supply used in the full-scale RO process. Once the baseline conditions have been established (Phase 1), increase the salinity of the feedwater’s total dissolved solids (TDS) using concentrate bypassed to the pilot. Two additional salinities were tested (Phase 2 and Phase 3).
4. Analyze the performance of the three pilottested membranes in terms of k w and k s (using Equations 1-3) for each phase of testing. Statistically compare the performance of the examined membranes using a 95 percent confidence interval (CI) one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and 95 percent CI Tukey’s test (Tukey).
5. Evaluate O&M costs for the pilot-tested membranes using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) work breakdown structure (WBS) model for RO drinking water treatment plants [26]
6. Rank test membranes in terms of kw, ks, and O&M opinions of probable cost (OPC).
Study Information
The research was conducted using a 22-galper-minute RO pilot unit located at the water treatment campus in the Town of Jupiter, Fla. (utility). The pilot unit flow diagram is illustrated in Figure 1 and is comprised of three, three- and four-element vessels and contains a pretreatment system that includes 5-micron cartridge filters (CFs) and a scale inhibitor addition (provided by American Water Chemicals, Plant City, Fla.). The pilot unit is fitted with a water quality sampling panel and supervisory control and data acquisition control system. Utility staff connected the full-scale concentrate pipeline to the pilot plant feed line to allow for a slip stream operation to increase the salinity for Phase 2 and 3 testing activities.
The pilot-scale study was conducted over a two-year period in which three manufacturers’ membranes were tested for a minimum of 2,100 runtime hours each. The target feedwater TDS for Phases 1, 2, and 3 were 5,500 mg/L, 7,500 mg/L, and 8,500 mg/L, respectively. Figure 2 displays the approximate runtime for each examined membrane across the three testing phases.
Membrane Information
Prior to pilot testing, membrane information was collected and compared, as suggested by Kumar and others [12]. Table 1 summarizes key information for the examined elements. It was observed that membranes A, B, and C were similar in terms of material and configuration; however, the feed spacer size and membrane area were found to vary. Note that variations in feed channel spacers have been documented to have a significant impact on membrane performance, with the larger size corresponding to an increase in feed pressure [27]. Membrane C exhibited the smaller area (85 ft2) and feed spacer (28 mil) relative to A (87 ft2 area and 31 mil spacer). Conversely, it was found that membrane A had the larger documented
minimum salt rejection (99.7 percent) when compared to membranes B and C. It is important to note that membrane B required 5 pounds per sq in. (psi) of backpressure in Phases 2 and 3 to meet the average recommended flux and
recoveries by stage. Additionally, membrane C required 5 psi of backpressure in Phase 2 and 10 psi in Phase 3 to meet the average recommended flux and recoveries by stage. Membrane A did
Continued on page 24
Phase 1 (5,500
*Assuming the listed testing conditions: 2,000 parts per mil (ppm) NaCl, 225 psi, 25°C, 15% recovery, and pH 7.
**Assuming the listed testing conditions: 2,000 ppm NaCl, 225 psi, 25°C, 15% recovery, and pH 8.
†Assuming the listed testing conditions: 2,000 ppm NaCl, 150 psi, 25°C, 15% recovery, and pH 8.
Figure 1. Pilot-scale reverse osmosis membrane process schematic.
Figure 2. Approximate runtime for each membrane across the three phases.
Table 1. Pilot-Tested Membrane Data Comparison
Continued from page 23
not require additional backpressure over the three study phases. The NDP calculated in this work accounted for the additional backpressure required for membranes B and C.
Feedwater Quality
Brackish groundwater served as the feedwater for the pilot-scale study. The composition of the feed was predominantly comprised of chloride and sodium ions due to the brackish nature of the source water. The chemical manufacturer software, American Water Chemicals (AWC) Proton, was used to evaluate the precipitation potential of the feedwater over the three study phases. It appeared that calcium-related salts had the highest precipitation potential for the brackish groundwater feed with varying salinities; however, note the addition of a scale inhibitor (also referred to as antiscalant) did not exceed sparingly salt saturation indexes for carbonatebased salts. Furthermore, the antiscalant precipitation index indicated that a calcium- and magnesium-related scale may form if the scale-
inhibitor dosage is not maintained at the target level [28]. Table 2 presents the average feedwater quality for a number of parameters during each phase of the study.
Water Quality and Operational Performance Analysis
Water samples were collected from the pilot sampling panel for the feed, permeate, and concentrate streams and were analyzed in accordance with “Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater” and ASTM D4195 [22, 29]. Typically, water quality was collected once every other week, such that a minimum of nine data points were relied on to evaluate each membrane’s performance; conductivity was typically collected once a day. The water quality parameters that were routinely monitored included pH, temperature, conductivity, TDS, chloride, bromide, sulfate, calcium, strontium, sodium, silica, magnesium, and potassium.
Operation data were typically collected three times a day and analyzed in accordance with ASTM D4516-19A and D4472-08 [11, 23]; the first- and second-stage permeate, concentrate,
and feed flows and pressures were also collected. Operation data from the first week of each study phase were excluded due to the expected membrane compaction that occurs upon startup. Operation and water quality data were used to obtain the following membrane performance parameters: normalized permeate flow (NPF), differential pressure (ΔP), normalized salt passage (NSP), kW, ks, and NDP. Note that the ks was calculated for TDS in this study.
Results and Discussion
Mass Transfer Findings
Figure 3 and Table 3 present the average solvent and solute mass transfer values for the pilot-tested membranes and are in agreement with AWWA M46, “Manual of Water Supply Practice” [9], which indicates membranes with a higher kw and lower k s correspond to lower permeate TDS and OPC.
Throughout the three phases, membrane C (0.121 – 0.163 gal per sq ft per day (gfd)/ psi [2.98 – 4.01 liters per sq meter per hour
Continued on page 26
Figure 3. Average total system (a)
Table 2. Average Feedwater Quality for Phase 1, 2, and 3
Table 3. Average Total System kw and k s Values for the Three Examined Membranes Over the Three Phases
Continued from page 24
(LMH)/bar]) exhibited the highest kw in the total system compared to membranes A and B. This observation for membrane C is consistent with previous research, which showed that elements with lower NDP and higher NPF tend to have greater kw [12]. The feed pressure and NDP for membrane C across the phases were lower than membranes A and B, which is attributed to its smaller feed channel spacer size and is supported by findings by Koutsou
and colleagues [27]. Additional investigations are recommended to understand the impact feed spacer geometry has on the kw values for the membranes examined in this work. A 95 percent CI one-way ANOVA test was initially performed in which the k w for the three membranes was deemed statistically significant over the three phases, as the p-value, shown in Table 4, was less than 0.05. Under projected future conditions (Phase 3), however, membranes A and C were found to be statistically similar, as supported by
Figure 4. Relationship between feed total dissolved solids, kw, and ks for the three examined membranes.
the 95 percent CI Tukey findings displayed in Table 4. As the feedwater TDS increased from Phases 2 to 3, the kw for membrane A increased, as presented in Figures 4 and 5A. This trend was not observed for the other two examined membranes and shows that membrane A is likely less susceptible to performance decline as the feedwater TDS increases. These findings suggest that the performance of membrane A, in terms of kw, is comparable to that of membrane C under the projected future conditions and both are beneficial due to their potential for higher water production rates.
Moreover, membrane A demonstrated the lowest k s among the three pilot-tested elements, which corresponded with the lowest NSP. The AWWA M46 [9] indicates that the permeate concentration, and thus, NSP, is proportional to ks; conversely, membrane C exhibited the highest k s across the three study phases, corresponding to a higher NSP. The statistical analyses, shown in Table 4, confirm that the ks for membrane A was significantly different from those of membranes B and C. Membrane A demonstrated the highest TDS rejection and typically demonstrated the superior permeate water quality relative to membranes B and C, which further supports the k s findings. Additionally, membrane A exhibited the lowest ΔP in the first and second stages, suggesting it may have been less susceptible to fouling as compared to elements B and C. In the context of selecting a brackish water
Table 4. Phase 3 Analysis of Variance and Tukey Findings for kw and k s
RO membrane suitable for increased feedwater salinity, membrane A showed superior performance in ks compared to membranes B and C, while also demonstrating comparable k w values to membrane C. Alternatively, the performance of membrane B, as measured by ks and kw, was inadequate relative to membranes A and C, respectively. These findings underscore the potential of membrane A for applications requiring high salt rejection and efficient water permeability, particularly under future conditions with increased feedwater salinity. The consistent performance of membrane C in kw, despite the higher ks, also highlights its effectiveness in specific scenarios where water permeability is prioritized over salt rejection, potentially under current conditions in which permeate water quality is less impacted by the projected increase in feedwater salinity.
Figure 5A illustrates the kw over the study runtime. The absolute percent difference (APD), based on initial and final values for the three pilot-tested membranes, fluctuated as the feedwater TDS increased. Membranes B and C exhibited a more notable decrease in k w over the runtime, with APD values of 29.4 and 33.3 percent, respectively. Similar findings were observed by Goosen and colleagues in which the authors noted a decrease in water flux occurred as the operating pressure and salinity increased, likely due to a buildup of solutes on the membrane active layer [30]. This
is further supported by the ΔP findings in which the values for membranes B and C were statistically larger (95 percent CI ANOVA and Tukey) than membrane A. The APD value for membrane A was 11.8 percent, suggesting that the element was more consistent in k w compared to membranes B and C. The APD results and overall k w trend for membrane A indicate that it would be better equipped for handling future conditions relative to membranes B and C. In terms of ks, membrane A demonstrated a greater APD (13.3 percent) compared to membranes B and C, likely because the values were statistically lower across the three phases, as visualized in Figure 5B. The increasing feed TDS appeared to minimally affect membranes B and C, as supported by an APD lower than 10 percent.
In summary, the consistent performance of membrane A in terms of k w and its ability to handle increased feedwater salinity make it the preferred element for projected future conditions. The lower k s values for membrane A, shown in Figure 3 and Figure 5B, further support the use of k s to project feedwater conditions.
Operation and Maintenance Opinion of Probable Cost
Table 5 displays the O&M OPC and APD findings for the examined membranes across the three phases. Recall that the O&M OPC was assessed using the EPA WBS model for RO drinking water treatment [25] and note that
minimal changes were made to the model used in this study. It was assumed that the maximum and daily flows were 13.7 and 8.9 mil gal per day, respectively. Membrane information was inputted into the model with water flux, kw, and k s values derived from the pilot-scale testing. The fouling index, a coefficient used to account for a loss in permeability, was modified based on the k w APD and ΔP results, such that membrane A, B, and C corresponded to values of 90, 87, and 85 percent, respectively. The APD was calculated for pairs of membranes (A and B, A and C, B and C) to compare the relative O&M OPC performance. Membrane pairs were considered similar if their APD values were under 3 percent. The O&M OPC typically increased proportionally to the feedwater TDS for the three examined membranes as shown in Table 5. Across the three phases, membrane C marginally had the lower O&M OPC relative to membranes A and B; however, membrane A was deemed similar to membrane C across the three phases as supported by the APD findings, especially in Phase 3 (0.166 percent). Additionally, membrane A exhibited a lesser increase in O&M OPC from Phase 1 to 3 compared to membranes B and C, which suggests it is more adept to varying feedwater conditions and corroborates the k w and k s findings. Conversely, the APD findings involving membrane B showed that the element
Continued on page 28
Figure 5. Relationship between runtime and (a) kw or (b) ks
Table 5. Operation and Maintenance Opinions of Probable Cost and Absolute Percent Difference for Membranes A, B, and C
requires a higher O&M OPC compared to membranes A and C. A secondary analysis was performed for membrane A to include a 5 percent bypass, such that the corresponding projected permeate TDS was similar to that of membrane C. In this analysis, O&M OPC decreased by approximately 8.1 to 9.1 percent for membrane A, which translated to 0.222 –0.274 $/gal (58.7 – 72.3 $/m3).
Figure 6 shows the O&M OPC breakdown for the three examined membranes. It was found that the energy cost ($1.08 – 1.84 million) due to the feed and booster pumps contributed to the O&M OPC more than the other examined parameters across the phases. As the feed pressure increased proportionally to the feedwater salinity, the pump energy required,
and thus, the overall O&M OPC, rose. Others have noted that membranes with a higher kw tend to have a lower energy consumption and cost, which explains the lower energy OPC for membrane C relative to membranes A and B [13, 16]; however, implementation of the bypass for membrane A decreased energy cost from $1.54 to $1.01 million and thus overall O&M OPC in Phase 3. It is recommended that additional evaluations are performed to address the frequency and OPC of membrane replacement and chemical cleanings, which was not discussed in this work.
Figure 7 displays the overall results of the evaluation using a simple ranking regiment that assesses process operation, water quality, and cost performance for the three pilot-tested membranes. In this summary, a
ranking value of one (“1”) indicated that the membrane outperformed the other two pilottested membranes for that specific parameter. Membranes deemed statistically similar with respect to an analyzed parameter were given the same ranking value. The ranking regiment findings showed that membranes A and C performed adequately in Phase 1 and 2; however, membrane A was demonstrated to outperform membranes B and C in Phase 3, indicating it is the preferred element for processing existing conditions, as well as the salinity conditions evaluated in this research.
Findings
This study was conducted to investigate the impact of possible future brackish groundwater salinity increases on RO membrane process performance. Productivity was evaluated using k w and k s mass transfer coefficients derived from the homogenous solution-diffusion model. Membrane A was found to be ideal for existing and projected feedwater conditions, as it excelled in k w (0.100 to 0.123 gfd/psi) and ks (0.086 to 0.098 gfd). The membrane A O&M OPC was determined to approximate 0.298 $/gal and 0.274 $/gal with and without bypass, respectively. The presented work showcased a successful RO pilot-testing study used to compare the relative performance of three different membranes. Water utilities concerned about an increase in their brackish groundwater salinity may find the demonstrated findings of this current work beneficial in selecting a RO membrane for full-scale implementation to prepare for changes in future feedwater conditions.
Figure 6. Operation and maintenance opinions of probable cost breakdown for the three examined membranes.
Acknowledgments
Figure 7. Ranking of membranes A, B, and C over the three phases. Note that a value of 1 indicates that the membrane performed at a better level than the other two compared membranes for that parameter. Membranes corresponding to the same ranking value were deemed statistically similar.
This work was funded by Jupiter Water Utilities (210 Military Trail, Jupiter, Fla. 33458) and coordinated by Kimley-Horn & Assoc. Inc. (1920 Wekiva Way, Suite 200, West Palm Beach, Fla. 33411) as Project GR107529, with Dr. Duranceau serving as the principal investigator. Additional support was provided by UCF’s Jones Edmunds Research Fund (Project GR104195). The authors acknowledge the utility staff, especially Amanda Barnes, Allyson Felsburg, Chris McKenzie, Daniel Reid, and Rebecca Wilder, for their help and support. The authors would also like to acknowledge and thank the utility operators who helped in coordinating the work and data collection assistance, without which this work would not have been possible. The efforts of UCF’s water quality engineering research group were greatly appreciated and contributed to the success of this research. The authors would like to thank Jason
Lee and John Potts of KHA and Ian C. Watson of RosTek Services Inc. for their support of this project. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply UCF’s endorsement, approval, or recommendation by UCF or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of Jupiter Water Utilities, KHA, RosTek, UCF, or any agency thereof.
References
[1] S.J. Duranceau, “Modeling the Permeate Transient Response to Perturbations from Steady State in a Nanofiltration Process,” Desalination and Water Treatment, 1(1-3), vol. 1, pp. 7-16, 2009.
[2] S.J. Duranceau and J.S. Taylor, “Chapter 11 Membrane Processes,” in Water Quality & Treatment, 6th Edition. Ed. J.K. Edzwald. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; p. 11-1 to 11-106, 2011.
[3] K.J. Howe, D.W. Hand, J.C. Crittenden, R.R. Trussel and G. Tchobanoglous, Principles of Water Treatment, Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2012.
[4] D. Hasson, Elements of Membrane Separation Processes, Hopkinton, MA: Balaban Desalination Publications, 2021.
[5] Y. Lim, K. Goh and R. Wang, “The coming of age of water channels for separation membranes: from biological to biomimetic to synthetic,” Chemical Society Reviews, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 4537-4582, 2022.
[6] Florida Department of Environmental Protection, “Alternative Water Supply,” Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 26 July 2024. [Online]. Available: https:// floridadep.gov/owper/water-policy/content/ alternative-water-supply#:~:text=In%20addition%20to%20the%20use,stormwater%20 as%20fresh%20water%20sources.. [Accessed 4 November 2024].
[7] P. Barlow and E. Reichard, “Saltwater Intrusion in Coastal Regions of North America,” Hydrogeology Journal, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 247260, 2010.
[8] R. Speechler, “The Relation Between Structure and Saltwater Intrusion in the Floridan Aquifer System, Northeastern Florida,” in US Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, St. Petersburg, FL, USA, 2001.
[9] American Water Works Association, Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Manual of Water Supply Water Supply Practices, AWWA Manual M46, Second Edition, Denver, CO: American Water Works Association, 2007.
[10] B. Van Der Bruggen and C. Vandecasteele,
“Removal of Pollutants from Surface Water and Groundwater by Nanofiltration: Overview of Possible Applications in the Drinking Water Industry,” Environmental pollution, vol. 122, no. 3, pp. 435-445, 2003.
[11] ASTM Method D4516-19a, “Standard Practice for Standardizing Reverse Osmosis Performance Data,” American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2022.
[12] M. Kumar, S. Adham and W. Pearce, “Developing a Protocol to Evaluate NewGeneration Membranes for Desalinating Brackish Groundwater,” Journal-American Water Works Association, vol. 98, no. 4, pp. 122-132, 2006.
[13] C. Bellona, J.E. Drewes, G. Oelker, J. Luna, G. Filteau and G. Amy, “Comparing Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis for Drinking Water Augmentation,” JournalAmerican Water Works Association, vol. 100, no. 9, pp. 102-116, 2008.
[14] J. Ketharani, M. Hansima, S. Indika, D. Samarajeewa, M. Makehelwala, K. Jinadasa, S. Weragoda, R. Rathnayake, K. Nanayakkara, Y. Wei, S. Schensul and R. Weerasooriya, “A Comparative Study of Community Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Systems for Total Hardness Removal in Groundwater,” Groundwater for Sustainable Development, vol. 18, 2022.
[15] E. Kurt, D.Y. Koseoglu-Imer, N. Dizge, S. Chellam and I. Koyuncu, “Pilot-Scale Evaluation of Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis for Process Reuse of Segregated Textile Dyewash Wastewater,” Desalination, vol. 302, pp. 24-32, 2012.
[16] R. Burk, M. Dixon, D. Kim-Hak and P. Vega, “A Comparison of Three Reverse Osmosis Membranes at La Chimba Desalination Plant, Antofagasta, Chile,” in The International Desalination Association World Congress on Desalination and Water Reuse, Tianjin, China, 2013.
[17] S.J. Duranceau and J. Tharamapalan, “Optimizing a Community’s Fresh and Brackish Water Supplies With an Aeration, Ion-Exchange, and Reverse Osmosis Treatment Portfolio,” Florida Water Resources Journal, vol. 9, pp. 24-30, 2013.
[18] C.R. Hagglund and S.J. Duranceau, “Screening the Performance of a Reverse Osmosis PilotScale Process That Treats Blended Feedwater Containing a Nanofiltration Concentrate and Brackish Groundwater,” Membranes, vol. 14, no. 8, p. 164, 2024.
[19] A. Ruiz-García and I. Nuez, “Long-Term Performance Decline in a Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis Desalination Plant. Predictive Model for the Water Permeability
Coefficient,” Desalination, vol. 397, pp. 101107, 2016.
[20] M. Kargol and A. Kargol, “Mechanistic Equations for Membrane Substance Transport and Their Identity with Kedem-Katchalsky Equations,” Biophysical Chemistry, vol. 103, no. 2, pp. 117-127, 2003.
[21] Y. Zhao and J. Taylor, “Assessment of ASTM D 4516 for Evaluation of Reverse Osmosis Membrane Performance,” Desalination, vol. 180, pp. 231-244, 2005.
[22] ASTM Method D4195, “Standard Guide for Water Analysis for Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Application,” American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2022.
[23] ASTM Method D4472-08, “Standard Guide for Recordkeeping for Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Systems,” American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2022.
[24] Information Collection Rule, “ICR Manual for Bench and Pilot-Scale Treatment Studies,” Technical Support Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, 1996.
[25] Town of Jupiter Utilities Department, “10-year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan,” Town of Jupiter Utilities Department, Jupiter, Fla, USA, 2019.
[26] United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Work Breakdown Structure-Based Cost Model for Reverse Osmosis/Nanofiltration Drinking Water Treatment,” United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C., USA, 2023.
[27] C. Koustsou, A. Karabelas and M. Kostoglou, “Membrane Desalination Under Constant Water Recovery - The Effect of Module Design Parameters on System Performance,” Separation and Purification Technology, vol. 147, pp. 90-113, 2015.
[28] American Water Chemicals, “PROTON®: The World’s Most Powerful Membrane Antiscalant Software,” American Water Chemicals, [Online]. Available: https://www.membranechemicals.com/services/proton-antiscalant-software/.
[29] American Public Health Association; American Water Works Association; Water Environment Federation; Lipps, W.C.; Braun-Howard, E.B., Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, Wasington, D.C., USA: APHA Press, 2023.
[30] M. Goosen, S. Sablani, S. Al-Maskari, R. Al-Belushi and M. Wilf, “Effect of Feed Temperature on Permeate Flux and Mass Transfer Coefficient in Spiral-Wound Reverse Osmosis Systems,” Desalination, vol. 144, no. 1-3, pp. 367-372, 2002. S
People Flock to Florida: Will They Have Enough Water?
Sachi Kitajima Mulkey and Ayurella Horn-Muller
While wading through wetlands in the headwaters of the Everglades, where tall, serrated grasses shelter alligators and water moccasins, agroecologist Elizabeth Boughton described one of Florida’s biggest environmental problems: There’s either too much water, or too little.
An intensifying climate, overexploitation of groundwater, and a development boom have catalyzed a looming water supply shortage— something that once seemed impossible for the rainy peninsula.
“It’s becoming more of an issue that everyone’s aware of,” said Boughton, who studies ecosystems at the Archbold Biological Station, a research facility in Highlands County that manages Buck Island Ranch. The ranch—a sprawling 10,500 acres of pasture lands and wildlife habitats across south-central Florida— conserves water through land restoration while also draining it as a working cattle ranch. “You kind of take water for granted until you realize, ‘Oh my gosh, this is something that is in danger of being lost.’”
Like many places worldwide, the dwindling freshwater availability in Florida is being exacerbated by a warming atmosphere. Sea levels in the state’s coastal regions have already risen dramatically in the last few decades, pushing salt water into the groundwater and creating an impotable brackish mixture that is costly to treat. A report released last summer
by the Florida Office of Demographic Research found that the state may experience a water shortage as soon as 2025—this year—with the problem escalating in the coming decades.
Sources—and Depletion— of Supply
Florida’s groundwater supply is the primary source of drinking water for roughly 90 percent of the state’s 23 million inhabitants, and is vital for agricultural irrigation and power generation. Public use by households, municipalities, and businesses accounts for the largest depletion of groundwater in Florida, while agriculture is responsible for at least a quarter of withdrawals.
Virtually all of Florida’s groundwater comes from the state’s expansive network of aquifers, a porous layer of sediment that underlies the peninsula. When it rains, water soaks into the ground and gets trapped in gaps in the rock formation providing an underground reserve of fresh water that humans can tap into with wells and pumps.
Most Floridians, however, live near large population centers—like Miami and Tampa— where the freshest aquifer water is too deep to access or too salty to be readily used. With nearly 900 people moving to Florida every day, the Sunshine State is only continuing to grow, fueling a thirsty rush for new housing and commercial developments.
The future of the state’s water has long looked bleak, and a ballooning population is
ramping up an already-fraught situation. As leading policymakers push predevelopment agendas and parcels of agricultural land are sold to the highest bidder, districts are grappling with political demands to advance water permits— often at the cost of conservation.
A report from the Florida Office of Demographic Research found that the conservation, infrastructure, and restoration projects necessary to tackle the incoming water deficit will cost some $3.3 billion by 2040, with the state footing over $500 million of that bill. According to Florida TaxWatch, a governmentaccountability nonprofit, current water projects and sources of funding aren’t coordinated or comprehensive enough to sustain the state’s population growth.
Global warming has changed the nature of rainfall in Florida, increasing the likelihood of extreme rain events in swaths of the state, but even torrential bouts of rain won’t replenish drained aquifers. Intensified hurricanes are primed to overwhelm wastewater systems, forcing sewage dumps that contaminate the water supply, while rising sea levels and floods further damage public water infrastructure. Higher temperatures that drive prolonged droughts also contribute to groundwater scarcity: Florida has experienced at least one severe drought per decade since the onset of the 20th century.
Such climate-borne crises are already playing out across the United States—and beyond. Roughly 53 percent of the nation’s aquifers are drying up as global water systems
An entrance to Buck Island Ranch, a 10,500-acre working cattle farm in Highlands County. (photo: Ayurella Horn-Muller/Grist)
Agroecologist Elizabeth Boughton gestures in a grassy field of bluestems and sedges on Buck Island Ranch in December 2024. (photo: Ayurella Horn-Muller/Grist)
confront the warming of the planet. Compared to places where groundwater is already severely depleted, like California, Mexico, and Arizona, Florida has one of the highest-producing aquifers in the world, and more time to prepare for a dearth of supply.
Still, adaptation will be necessary nearly everywhere as the Earth’s total terrestrial water storage, including groundwater, continues to decline. Record-breaking temperatures and crippling droughts wrought havoc on the world’s water cycle last year, according to the 2024 Global Water Monitor Report.
Tampa: Learning to Adapt
Sarah Burns, planning manager for the City of Tampa, which is home to half a million people on the Gulf Coast, expects water supplies will continue to face a number of climate pressures, like drought and rising sea levels. One of the biggest factors in the city’s looming water crisis is population growth— and a hard-to-shake abundance mindset.
“It’s all a challenging paradigm shift,” Burns said, noting that many Floridians take pride in lush, landscaped lawns, and an influx of new homes are coming to market with waterintensive irrigation systems pre-installed. This can be seen in Tampa, where roughly 18 percent of residents use 45 percent of the city’s water.
Tampa already exceeds the 82-milliongallon-per-year limit that it can directly provide, without paying for more from the regional provider at a higher cost to residents. In November 2023, the Southwest Florida Water Management District instituted a once-a-week lawn-watering restriction for households in the 16 counties it oversees, including Tampa. In August 2024, the Tampa City Council voted to adopt the measure indefinitely—a move that has already saved billions of gallons of water.
As newcomers flock to affordable housing within commuting distance of Tampa, oncerural areas are also feeling the squeeze. The nearby city of Zephyrhills—known for a namesake bottled water brand—has temporarily banned new developments after it grew too quickly for its water permit.
“Water is the hidden problem that really forced our hand,” said Steven Spina, a member of the Zephyrhills City Council who proposed the restriction. “It’s ironic that we’ve been known as the ‘City of Pure Water’ and then we’re in this predicament.”
Polk County: Urban Versus Rural Use
Perhaps nowhere in Florida is more at the crux of water issues than Polk County,
Continued on page 32
The United States is finally curbing floodplain development, new research shows. (photo: Jake Bittle/Grist)
Three-quarters of the world’s land is drying out, redefining life on Earth. (photo: Ayurella Horn-Muller/Grist)
Florida is on the brink of a major water shortage. (graphic: Clayton Aldern/Grist)
located in the center of the state. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2023, more people moved to the former citrus capital than anywhere else in the U.S., with subdivisions “springing up right and left.” The growth the county is seeing “has created a need to find additional water supplies,” said Eric DeHaven, the executive director of Polk Regional Water Cooperative. The entity was created in 2017 after the county’s worries became so acute it prompted more than a dozen local governments to assemble to protect their future water supplies.
Between 2002 and 2015, Polk County’s farm bureau reported 100,000 acres—about a third of the county’s total agricultural land—had been converted for development. Florida farms are a crucial part of the U.S. food system, but struggles from extreme
weather, citrus diseases, and economic issues are driving farmers out of the industry. By 2040, an estimated 500,000 additional acres of developed land could take the place of farms. This would further magnify Florida’s water supply issues—in 2020, public utilities were estimated to have overtaken farming as the biggest drain on groundwater resources.
“Imagine if you own this land,” said Boughton, the agroecologist. “Farmers are hard-pressed to refuse offers as high as six figures per acre from developers. There’s so much pressure from urban development; that opportunity is hard to pass up.”
Water Supply:
What’s the Tipping Point?
“Things are definitely altering because of climate change, but it’s also because of this,”
said Merrillee Malwitz-Jipson, gesturing to new houses built across the road from her home in Columbia County, which is in the northern part of the state. As the founder of the nonprofit Our Santa Fe River, MalwitzJipson has spent the last two decades fighting to save the crystal-blue springs that feed it.
Collectively, the state’s springs have lost over a third of their historic flow levels, while 80 percent are severely polluted. Last year, Blue Springs, a locally beloved landmark, collapsed entirely. Because these springs are directly connected to the aquifer, says Malwitz-Jipson, such signs are omens of declining groundwater health.
It wasn’t long ago that she devoted years to try and prevent the renewal of a controversial 1-million-gallon-per-day permit for bottled water for BlueTriton—formerly a subsidiary of Nestlé—in nearby Ginnie Springs. When the effort failed, she switched gears and now advocates for adding conservation conditions to water-use permits. A 2019 report from the Florida Springs Institute found that restoring springs to 95 percent of their former flow levels would require curbing regional groundwater extractions by half.
Matt Cohen, a hydrologist who leads the University of Florida’s Water Institute, says the “devil is in the details” when it comes to permitting. “It’s very much where the implementation of those kinds of sustainability measures would be realized,” Cohen said, adding that authorities at the state water management districts (WMDs) often convince applicants to use “substantially less” water. Other measures include offering alternatives to groundwater, like using reclaimed wastewater and surface water supplies.
Coordinating such conservation efforts across Florida’s five WMDs and 67 counties will take a concerted statewide approach. In November of last year, the state unveiled its 2024 Florida Water Plan, which includes expanding conservation of agricultural lands and investing millions into infrastructure and restoration projects, such as Buck Island Ranch, among other measures.
Still, in the face of the population boom, advocates like Malwitz-Jipson wonder if it will be enough. “I don’t know why the state of Florida keeps issuing all these permits,” she said. “We are not ready, y’all. We do not have enough water for this.”
This article was originally published by Grist (www.grist.org).
Sachi Kitajima Mulkey is the 2024-2025 Grist climate news reporting fellow. Ayurella HornMuller is a staff writer for Grist. S
A farmworker checks the irrigation lines in an orange grove in Polk County in 2022. (photo: Paul Hennessy/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images/Grist)
Local water conservation activist Merrillee Malwitz-Jipson points to watermarks on a tree on the banks of the Santa Fe River near her home in Florida. (photo: Sachi Kitajima Mulkey/Grist)
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 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 Water Supply and Alternative Sources. 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, or scan and email a copy to memfwpcoa@ gmail.com. 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!
Assessing Reverse Osmosis Membranes for Treating a Brackish Feedwater of Increasing Salinity
Christopher R. Hagglund and Steven J. Duranceau (Article 1: CEU = 0.1 DS/DW02015448)
1. What is the primary purpose of reverse osmosis (RO) membranes?
a) To separate contaminants from water supplies
b) To increase water salinity
c) To add minerals to water
d) To reduce water temperature
2. What is the typical recovery range for brackish water RO processes?
a) 50 to 60 percent
b) 60 to 70 percent
c) 70 to 80 percent
d) 75 to 85 percent
3. What model was used to calculate the mass transfer coefficients for water (kw) and solutes (ks)?
a) Nernst-Planck model
b) Homogenous solution diffusion model (HSDM)
c) Darcy’s law
d) Bernoulli’s equation
4. What is the primary concern for utilities operating brackish water RO plants in coastal regions of Florida?
a) Decreasing water temperature
b) Increasing salinity
c) Reducing water pressure
d) Increasing water flow
5. What is the primary component of the feedwater used in the pilot-scale study?
a) Calcium ions
b Magnesium ions
c) Chloride and sodium ions
d) Potassium ions
Proclamation
(Name of county/city entity) (Location)
WHEREAS, water is a basic and essential need of every living creature; and
WHEREAS, the state of Florida, water management districts, and (your city or county name) are working together to increase awareness about the importance of water conservation; and
WHEREAS, (your city or county name) and the state of Florida have designated April, typically a dry month when water demands are most acute, as Florida’s Water Conservation Month, to educate citizens about how they can help save Florida’s precious water resources; and
WHEREAS, (your city or county name) has always encouraged and supported water conservation, through various educational programs and special events; and
WHEREAS, every business, industry, school, and citizen can make a difference when it comes to conserving water; and
WHEREAS, every business, industry, school, and citizen can help by saving water and thus promote a healthy economy and community; and
WHEREAS, outdoor irrigation comprises a large portion of water use, (your city or county name) will encourage citizens and businesses to focus on improving outdoor irrigation efficiency;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that by virtue of the authority vested in me as (chairman, mayor, etc.) of (your city or county name) and (commissioners or councilmembers, etc.) do hereby proclaim the month of April as
Water Conservation Month
(your city or county name), Florida is calling upon each citizen and business to help protect our precious resource by practicing water saving measures and becoming more aware of the need to save water. For this, the 27th year of Water Conservation Month, there will be a special focus on improving irrigation system evaluations.
Celebrate Water Conservation Month!
Cassidy Hampton
April is Water Conservation Month in Florida
This year is the 27th anniversary of April first being established as Water Conservation Month in Florida. During this time, we have made great strides toward understanding the impacts of water efficiency and water conservation programs. To recognize these efforts, the Florida Section AWWA (FSAWWA), in coordination with Florida’s water management districts and Florida Department of Environmental Protection, are once again asking local governments, water utilities, and other organizations to adopt a resolution or proclamation declaring April as Water Conservation Month. Now, more than ever, water conservation is becoming extremely important across our great state, and what better way to spread the word than encouraging your organization
to proclaim April as Water Conservation Month.
Make Your Voice Heard
It’s important that you add your Water Conservation Month proclamation to the statewide list. Each year, FSAWWA works with the state governor and cabinet to proclaim “April as Water Conservation Month.” By adopting Water Conservation Month and adding your proclamation to the Florida list, you are letting our elected officials know just how important water efficiency and water conservation practices are to local governments, water utilities, and other organizations in the state.
We are asking that utilities throughout Florida adopt this proclamation and get your efforts in water conservation recognized! For this, the 27th year of bringing attention to water conservation, FSAWWA is again including a theme, which
for 2025 is “Irrigation System Evaluations.”
We are asking utilities and local governments to include an emphasis on this theme as an important action for conserving this precious resource of water.
To add your proclamation to the statewide list of entities proclaiming Water Conservation Month this year, please email your proclamation and its adoption date to Jenny Arguello at jenny@fsawwa.org.
The due date for the proclamations is March 31, 2025.
Your continued support of water conservation and water use efficiency in Florida through participation in this 27th annual event is appreciated!
Other Florida Water Conservation Activities
Water Conservation Awards for Excellence
This annual awards program of the FSAWWA Water Use Efficiency Division (WUED) recognizes innovative and outstanding achievements in water efficiency throughout Florida.
Entries will be evaluated based on the following:
S Defined goal and objective(s)
S Identification and quantification of key result(s)
S Description of any “lessons learned”
S Future plans for results and “lessons learned”
S Innovation within the field of water efficiency or the population served
Water Use Efficiency Division
Belonging to a group of dedicated conservation professionals can assist public water supply utilities in implementing costeffective demand management programs. The WUED of FSAWWA offers that opportunity. Study after study has shown that properly planned implementation of water conservation best management practices can enhance a utility’s water supply at costs far below that of other alternative water supplies.
Water Means Everything!
For our future generations, we need to conserve today. Be a responsible steward of our water community: educate, empower, inform, and enlighten!
For more information go to the section website at www.fsawwa.org.
Cassidy Hampton is chair of the FSAWWA Water Use Efficiency Division. S
Resolve to Improve Yourself and Your Career
Kevin Shopshire President, FWPCOA
appy February! How are you doing on your New Year’s resolutions? If you read my column last month, did you reflect on your work style? Did you consider improving your knowledge in your career field?
If you haven’t already, now is the time to enroll in the FWPCOA Spring Short School. Advance your knowledge—and possibly your career—while attending class with colleagues from around the state (and sometimes beyond). We have a long list of courses available, all taught by colleagues with many years of experience.
Benefits of In-Person Training
I understand columns and articles like these are written almost on an annual basis, encouraging you to attend our short school and listing all the benefits of attending inperson training versus online training. I am going to continue to sound that horn. Seven of my certifications were obtained at in-person training events. If you can get approval from the bosses (both at work and at home!) to travel for a week, it’s well worth the experience. You get face-to-face time with your instructor, someone in your field,
who is there to share their experiences and answer your questions, and also listen to your experiences. You have the opportunity to learn from your classmate colleagues through their experiences as well.
You may even make a new friendship or business opportunity, with someone from a different part of Florida, outside of your normal circles. This is your chance to make an impression on people who may have never met you. You can make a name for yourself, potentially statewide, just by your contributions to the class and/or the conversations afterward.
Online courses and written continuing education unit courses have their place and are excellent learning opportunities, but not much beats the experience of in-person learning.
Whichever class you decide to take, please remember our committee members and teachers are all volunteers, giving their time to help improve the knowledge of their colleagues and students.
Board of Directors Meeting
If you’re interested in the nuts and bolts of the FWPCOA organization, come to the board of directors meeting the Sunday morning prior to the short school. All of the regions statewide are represented, as well as committee chairs, executive board members, and interested volunteers. It’s another chance to get involved and improve your knowledge through that involvement. You can be a “fly on the wall” and no one
will put you on the spot while you listen and learn.
You may find yourself striking up a conversation with someone new to your field, or someone who happens to have 40 years of experience. Our board meetings can easily contain over five hundred years of combined experience in one room! You may even discover that you might fit right in, and consider helping a committee in your career field. We are a group of volunteers, always looking for interested individuals.
Committees
If you are not able to attend this next short school, but are interested in expanding your horizons by joining one of the committees, please see the officer and committee listings in this month’s edition of the Journal and at www.fwpcoa.org. We’ve reviewed and updated all of the information for our committee chairs. If you have any questions, please reach out to any one of us. See you next month! S
FWRJ READER PROFILE
maintenance management, wastewater collection, water distribution systems, and groundwater and surface water treatment in Florida and Illinois.
What does your job entail?
In my current role, I work with 20 great water and wastewater operators (15 are duallicensed) dedicated to public health and safety by producing excellent water quality. I manage the utilities operations department for the city. This role gets me involved in most every aspect of the utility business. I like working with treatment operations, permit compliance, water quality sampling, treatment plant capital improvement projects, budgeting, and problem solving. I work with a great staff here in Plant City that helps keep our drinking water safe and our wastewater effluent in compliance with all environmental regulations. Being a mentor to our young operators and providing training as a growth path forward for their success is a big part of my job as well.
Probably the most important thing for me is being a public servant to our customers and providing servant leadership to the staff I work with. You can be successful when you really care about your staff and your customers and know how to respond and
What education and training have you had?
My education in water operations and maintenance started from day one by taking classes at night and on-the-job training during the day at the surface water treatment plant where I worked. It all starts
with getting your hands dirty! Daily task and work problems hone your skill sets. This is the foundation for a basis of knowledge as you move forward in your career and add on classwork and training.
I have a bachelor’s degree in business economics from Eastern Illinois University. While I was working as an operator, I also received an associate degree in environmental engineering from the College of Lake County, specializing in water and wastewater treatment technologies.
I’ve taken a ton of classes from FWPCOA, AWWA, and FWEA in my career. Also, I truly enjoy learning at the Florida Water Resources Conference (FWRC) ever year; the topics and seminars are the best! My goal is to try to learn something new every day. All these organizations have excellent continuing education unit and certificate training.
What do you like best about your job?
I really enjoy working with the people at the city. I work with a great operations team and two very-well-known water professionals in our industry: Lynn Spivey and Patrick Murphy. They make work enjoyable and are true visionaries for the future of Plant City. We are working on infrastructure projects to make our water even better and other projects to improve our facility and make it more sustainable for the future. We have successfully piloted our direct potable reuse process and we’re now working on a design
The famous Plant City strawberry water tower.
all are excellent organizations.
I’m a past president of FWPCOA and currently the Legislative Committee chair for the association. It’s exciting to read the new regulations and try to figure out how to implement them. There is a lot to be learned from the folks involved in FWPCOA (the organization is based on learning) as they have diverse knowledge and backgrounds. It’s great to network with the professionals in our industry; knowledge is passed from one to another and this is what the operator’s association does best.
How have the organizations helped your career?
Besides all the excellent training, FWPCOA, FSAWWA, and FWEA have come together from different professional disciplines to make our industry more productive and responsible to the public.
One way is by helping to jointly produce the Florida Water Resource Journal, which is a premier publication for the industry nationally. It’s great that it’s included in your membership. I have continued to learn from the countless articles, columns, and features in the magazine.
Another way is attending the annual FWRC; the educational seminars and networking will enhance your knowledge of what’s in the forefront of our industry. The networking there with other operators, engineers, scientists, and managers to find new ideas and knowledge is second to none.
What do you like best about the industry?
What I like best is serving the public. We work with a resource that is needed for a good
the background and mostly unnoticed, but our efforts are felt every day. I like working behind the scenes to preserve and deliver our precious resource for the public.
What do you do when you’re not working?
I enjoy being on the water fishing and spending time with my family; I guess water is always something I like to be around. I enjoy boating and fishing with my wife. I also really like playing hockey on frozen water. We all enjoy going to games watching the Tampa Bay Lightning—Go Bolts! S
Mike with a big catch.
Plant City One Water “Deja Brew” tasting at Keel Farms. Shown (left to right) are Lynn Spivey, Jay Kwag, Patrick Murphy, Carlyn Higgins-Hazen, and Mike.
Mike and his family enjoying time together.
Mike with Patrick “Murf” Murphy.
Plant City One Water Logo.
Sarasota’s Bee Ridge Water Reclamation Facility Earns Award for Sustainable Infrastructure
Innovative plant expansion to deliver enhanced environmental protection and resilience via advanced treatment technology
The Bee Ridge Water Reclamation Facility expansion and conversion to advanced wastewater treatment (AWT) project in Sarasota County has earned an Envision® Gold Award from the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure.
This recognition underscores the county’s commitment to sustainability and its positive impact on the growing Sarasota community.
The Envision framework provides a comprehensive set of criteria for assessing infrastructure sustainability. The project earned gold recognition for excellence in several key areas:
S Environmental stewardship. Rehabilitation of onsite wetlands and reduction of nutrient discharges to protect local water bodies and ecosystems.
S Climate resilience. Design features to
withstand sea level rise and increased storm intensity.
S Resource efficiency. Implementation of robust water reuse systems and beneficial use of construction waste.
S Community benefits. Continuous community engagement and greater availability of reclaimed water to support population growth and economic development.
The 140-acre facility, originally constructed in the 1990s, is being transformed into a stateof-the-art water reclamation facility. The project will increase treatment capacity by 50 percent— from 12 to 18 million gallons per day based on maximum monthly flows—while implementing advanced wastewater treatment technologies, including biological nutrient removal basins
and Florida’s largest membrane bioreactor system. These upgrades will significantly reduce nitrogen and phosphorus discharges, which are two pollutants that can contribute to algae growth in waterways, and produce highquality water to reduce groundwater withdrawal impacts.
The project’s highly technical scope required innovative approaches to engineering design and financing. To minimize the financial impact on its customers, the county successfully acquired a $105 million low-interest loan from the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act . This federal funding support helps utilities deliver critical infrastructure improvements while maintaining affordable utility rates.
The project also incorporates comprehensive resilience features to protect against extreme
Rendering of the Bee Ridge Water Reclamation Facility in Sarasota County.
weather events while maintaining operational continuity. These include:
S Enhanced flood protection through additional stormwater basins and elevated facilities one foot above the 100-year flood elevation.
S Hurricane-resistant construction designed to withstand Category 5 sustained winds.
S Advanced supervisory control and data acquisition network upgrades to enable automated and remote operation.
S Integrated real-time monitoring systems with automated alarms for immediate operator response.
S Redundant power supplies with uninterrupted backup systems for continuous operation during utility failures.
The project is a collaborative effort involving several key partners. As the project owner, the county has driven this vital infrastructure upgrade. It has retained Carollo Engineers as the primary designer, supported by Garney Construction as the construction manager at risk. This alternative project delivery structure was selected to expedite the schedule and meet the county’s goal of planning, designing, and building the enhanced facility by the end of 2025.
Gregory Rouse, assistant utility director for Sarasota County Public Utilities, emphasized the significance of the award by stating, “The prestigious Envision Gold Award—a first for a Florida wastewater treatment facility—reflects the vision and leadership of the county’s board of commissioners and the strong support of our community in prioritizing sustainable infrastructure. This recognition underscores the county’s dedication to essential services and creates a lasting legacy for future generations. We are deeply proud of our commitment to environmental stewardship and extend our gratitude to the design and construction teams whose collaborative efforts made this achievement possible.”
With improved effluent quality, the county can confidently comply with current and future regulations while gaining flexibility in its water reuse options, including the sustainable use of reclaimed water for irrigation, local aquifer recharge, and the potential for future indirect potable reuse.
Jody Barksdale, project manager at Carollo, commented, “Sarasota County’s achievement of this award highlights its pioneering approach to sustainable infrastructure development. This project goes beyond expanding capacity; it sets a new benchmark for sustainable water management and environmental stewardship. It exemplifies how innovative engineering and a commitment to sustainability can create a facility that meets current demands and paves the way for a resilient and adaptive water future for decades to come.”
What Do You Know About Residual Solids Management? Test Yourself
Charlie Lee Martin Jr., Ph.D.
1. The bacterial cells that are removed from the wastewater process stream are called
a. initial sludge.
b. primary sludge.
c. secondary sludge.
d. tertiary sludge.
2. In general, secondary sludges consist of
a. 75 to 80 percent volatile matter.
b. 55 to 70 percent volatile matter.
c. 45 to 60 percent volatile matter.
d. none of the above.
3. Solids that are produced within a wastewater treatment plant that are suitable for some beneficial use may be referred to as
a. biosolids.
b. sludge.
c. solids.
d. cold sludge.
4. The quantity of primary sludge generated within a wastewater treatment facility depends on
a. the concentration of the influent settable suspended solids.
b. the influent wastewater flow.
c. the efficiency of the primary sedimentation basin.
d. all of the above.
5. In general, for every pound of organic matter oxidized by the bacterial cells
a. 0.30 to 0.50 pound of new bacterial cells is produced.
b. 0.30 to 0.70 pound of new bacterial cells is produced.
c. 0.50 to 1 pound of new bacterial cells is produced.
d. 0.70 to 1 pound of new bacterial cells is produced.
6. The quantity of secondary sludge produced within a wastewater treatment facility depends on
a. influent organic load.
b. the removal efficiency of removing organic matter.
c. the influent flow to the biological system. d. all of the above.
7. The sludge process responsible for thickening the sludge is a. drying.
b. composting.
c. chemical.
d. filtration.
8. The process by which water is removed from the sludge mass is a. thickening. b. stabilization. c. conditioning. d. dewatering.
9. The process by which sludge moisture and volume is reduced to allow economical disposal is a. conditioning.
b. disposal.
c. dewatering.
d. volume reduction.
10. The process by which the odor-causing portion of sludge solids is converted to nonodorous end products is a. thickening. b. disposal.
c. stabilization d. dewatering.
Answers on page 62
References used for this quiz:
• CSUS Advanced Waste Treatment Fifth Edition
Alternative Water Sources and Supplies: Addressing Florida’s Water Challenges
Until 1980, surface water was the largest source of freshwater in Florida; after 1980, groundwater became the largest source of freshwater in the state. In the future, groundwater withdrawals are expected to level off as this source reaches its sustainable limit. New demand will increasingly be met by alternative water supplies.
The Future Demand for Water
The demand projections in the most recent water management district’s regional water supply plans indicate water use will continue to increase over the next 20 years. Between 2020 and 2040, population in Florida is expected to grow by 23 percent (4.8 million people) to 26.4 million, while water demands are expected to increase from 866 million gallons per day (mgd) to 7,302 mgd.
Public supply (water used for residential and commercial uses) has been projected to surpass agriculture as the largest user of water in Florida. By 2040, the public supply’s statewide water demand is projected to increase by 22 percent to 3,166 mgd, and is expected to account for 43 percent of the total water demand. By contrast, agriculture is predicted to grow by only 1 percent (33 mgd) statewide during the same period.
Analyses conducted by the water management districts indicate that groundwater resources are insufficient to fully meet future demands in large areas of the state. To rely on groundwater alone would result in unacceptable environmental impacts, including saltwater intrusion, reduction in spring flows, lowered lake levels, and loss of wetlands. Consequently, steps are being taken now, and actions planned, to reduce the state’s reliance on fresh groundwater through the use of alternative water sources.
Development of other water supplies has benefits beyond supplementing traditional water sources. Diversification creates a water supply system that is more reliable than a system that relies on a single source and is an important tool in building drought resilience, increasing water supply reliability, and protecting Florida’s natural environment.
What Are Alternative Water Supplies?
Alternative water supplies include seawater, brackish groundwater, surface water, stormwater, reclaimed water, aquifer storage and recovery projects, and any other nontraditional supply source identified in a regional water supply plan.
These sources are frequently more expensive to develop and operate than traditional sources.
Seawater and Brackish Groundwater
Brackish groundwater and seawater can be converted to freshwater through a process called desalination. Water desalination can be accomplished by distillation, ion exchange, freezing, and use of membrane technology. In Florida, reverse osmosis (RO), a membrane technology, is the most common method of desalination. The RO process uses pressure to force salty water through a semipermeable membrane that keeps the salt on one side and allows pure water to pass through to the other side. This process creates a salty brine product that must be safely managed to protect the environment.
Reclaimed Water
Reclaimed water is domestic wastewater that has received advanced treatment and is reused for beneficial, nonpotable purposes. In some states, reclaimed water is called “recycled water,” and the use of reclaimed water is called “reuse.” Reclaimed water is used for agricultural irrigation, groundwater recharge, industrial processes, and irrigation of lawns, landscapes, cemeteries, and golf courses. The use of reclaimed water is widely beneficial to Floridians because it preserves drinking water quality sources for potable uses, helps the environment by reducing treated wastewater discharges into rivers and streams, and recharges aquifers.
Aquifer Storage and Recovery
Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) refers to the process of recharge, storage, and recovery of water in an aquifer. Many ASR facilities have been used in Florida and throughout the United States. Surface water is collected when water is plentiful (typically during the wet season), treated to meet applicable water standards, and then pumped into an aquifer through a well. Water can be stored and subsequently recovered and distributed for purposes such as water supply or ecosystem restoration.
Currently, there are over thirty ASR systems operating in the state, utilizing approximately 100 wells. Most ASR facilities in Florida store water in the Upper Floridan aquifer, primarily in areas where the aquifer is brackish or somewhat salty.
Rainwater
Rainwater harvesting is the collection of
rainwater from rooftops or other covered surfaces to divert and store for later use. Harvested rainwater is commonly used for nonpotable applications, often to irrigate landscaping. Other common uses include wash applications, cooling tower makeup, and dust suppression.
Harvesting rainwater can provide stormwater management by decreasing the amount of runoff flow and, in turn, runoff velocity, which reduces flooding and erosion since slower runoff soaks into the ground and reduced runoff avoids soil saturation—an option to turn stormwater problems into water supply assets. Less runoff also means less contamination of surface water from sediment, fertilizers, pesticides, and other pollutants potentially transported in rainfall runoff.
The level of treatment required for harvested rainwater depends on how the water will be used. Minimal treatment is required for irrigation because rainwater is typically free of salts and other harmful minerals. More treatment may be required for other nonpotable applications such as cooling tower makeup and toilet flushing. Rainwater can be further treated to potable standards and used throughout a building for all end uses; however, the system will require comprehensive treatment and disinfection to meet safe drinking water standards.
In a typical potable harvested rainwater system, a strainer basket separates debris from the collection system. Water is disinfected at regular intervals with ozone by an ozone generator or ultraviolet light systems. Pumps push water through filter cartridges to break tanks, where chlorine or similar chemical treatments are injected as a final step in the treatment process before the water is returned to the building or sent to another end use.
Rainwater harvesting is not regulated by the federal government; individual states regulate the collection and use of rainwater. The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) has an interactive rainwater harvesting tool that visually represents the state-level rainwater harvesting regulations across the U.S. and offers general information about the applicable state programs. The tool also depicts the range of rainwater available for harvesting for year-round applications and landscape irrigation across the U.S. There is also a FEMP-developed rainwater harvesting calculator, which estimates the amount of monthly rainfall that can be harvested.
Maps are available that can be used to quickly discern where rainwater harvesting is supported and regulated by a state.
Stormwater
Stormwater is precipitation runoff over ground-level surfaces that has not infiltrated into the ground and has not entered a waterway, such as a stream or lake. Stormwater is typically treated to nonpotable levels when used in nonpotable applications. Common uses of harvested stormwater include irrigation, wash applications, cooling tower makeup or process water, and dust suppression, among others.
Harvesting stormwater differs from harvesting rainwater in that runoff is collected from ground-level hard surfaces rather than from roofs. Benefits of stormwater harvesting include reduction of pollutants and potential flooding from large water events that flow to surface water. Other benefits include reduction of stream bank erosion, sewer overflows, and infrastructure damage.
Stormwater is generally collected onsite from hard surfaces such as sidewalks, streets, and parking lots before it enters a waterway. After being diverted, it’s stored temporarily in retention ponds or tanks. The characteristics of stormwater harvesting and reuse systems vary considerably by project, but most systems include collection, storage, treatment, and distribution.
Captured stormwater normally requires more treatment than captured rainwater because it’s exposed to additional pollutants from drainage systems and surfaces that may have hydrocarbons or other miscellaneous debris and chemicals. Treatment options to reduce pathogens and pollution levels include the use of constructed wetlands, sand and membrane filters, and disinfection techniques, including chlorination and ultraviolet radiation. The degree of treatment required depends on the proposed use and the level of public exposure.
Stormwater that’s diverted for reuse may impact the amount of water available for other consumers downstream from the diversion point. Water utilities and municipalities may charge augmentation fees to recover costs associated with
augmenting water to the watershed to maintain enough supply for downstream customers.
Reclaimed Wastewater
Reclaimed wastewater is water that is discharged from buildings and processes, treated at a wastewater treatment facility, and then reused in applications such as irrigation and industrial processes. Federal sites that treat wastewater onsite can potentially reclaim wastewater, and it’s becoming more common for local municipalities to reclaim wastewater and sell it to customers to help lower the community’s demand for freshwater. This water can sometimes be available at a lower cost than otherwise purchased potable water. An interactive map is available from FEMP showing water utilities that supply reclaimed wastewater to their customers.
Reclaimed wastewater is typically treated to nonpotable levels and used in nonpotable applications, such as irrigation and cooling tower makeup. This water is distributed through a separate distribution system, commonly referred to as purple pipe (denoting the color of the pipes). Nonpotable reclaimed wastewater typically requires secondary treatment, such as additional filtration and disinfection to further remove contaminants and particulates to ensure the water is safe for nonpotable applications.
Although uncommon, reclaimed wastewater can also be treated to potable standards. There are two general types of potable reclaimed wastewater systems:
S Direct potable reuse (DPR)
S Indirect potable reuse (IPR)
The DPR introduces treated reclaimed wastewater directly into a potable water treatment plant and then through the potable distribution system. The IPR introduces reclaimed wastewater into a natural watershed (e.g., groundwater aquifer or reservoir) acting as an environmental buffer, where water can subsequently be withdrawn and treated to potable standards.
An efficient and successful reclaimed water project requires a reliable source of wastewater of adequate quantity and quality to meet the water needs. These projects may be more economically viable when the cost of freshwater is high and there is a lack of highquality freshwater, or there are future supply risks due to conditions such as drought.
Graywater
Graywater is lightly contaminated water that is generated by bathroom sinks, showers, and clothes washing machines; it does not include wastewater from toilets, urinals, or kitchens. Graywater is typically used in nonpotable applications, most commonly to flush toilets and urinals, irrigate landscape, and supply water for ornamental ponds and makeup water in cooling towers. Graywater use offers several benefits as it can reduce the water withdrawn from freshwater sources, the energy and chemicals used to treat water to potable standards, and the volume of wastewater being sent to wastewater treatment facilities.
A graywater reuse system diverts water that normally is discharged to a municipal sewage treatment to use within the same building. Graywater effluent is collected, treated, and distributed for reuse, usually within the same building, and requires retrofitting the plumbing system for existing buildings. Graywater will often contain detergents, dissolved and suspended solids, and pathogens.
Basic graywater treatment consists of removing suspended solids from the water, while sophisticated treatment may consist of biological treatment with membrane filtration, activated carbon, and ultraviolet light or ozone disinfection to destroy pathogens. Sophisticated treatment may be required if used in public locations and depending on the source of the water. Water for outdoor (subsurface irrigation) uses may be less treated than water for indoor uses.
Continued on page 52
Continued from page 51
The major components of a graywater reuse system include:
S Plumbing that collects graywater from sinks, showers, and laundry.
S Water storage tanks, which should be closed to minimize contact.
S A treatment system to filter and disinfect water if required; regulations can vary by state and local ordinances.
S Secondary plumbing (called dual plumbing) that supplies applications with graywater, such as irrigation or toilet flushing, that is colorcoded to identify piping as a graywater source.
S Pumps to transport the water.
Other Alternative Water Sources
Captured Condensate
Water condenses on the cooling coils of mechanical equipment, such as packaged or rooftop units, dedicated outdoor air units, and air handling units when humid air contacts these cool surfaces. A large amount of condensate can form on cooling coils in areas with hot, humid summers, such as in Florida and other parts of the southeastern U.S.
Water that collects on the cooling coils must be drained to prevent damage to the equipment or the building from water buildup. Typically, the condensate is collected in a central location and discharged to a sewer drain. In a condensatecapturing system, the condensate is directed to a central storage tank or basin and then distributed for reuse.
Makeup water for cooling towers can be an ideal use of captured air handler condensate. Cooling tower makeup water is needed the most during the hot summer months, when the largest amount of air handler condensate can be collected. Originating from the air, condensate water starts off very pure with a very low dissolved mineral content, which is ideal for cooling towers; however, condensate
can potentially grow bacteria during the storage phase, requiring disinfection to avoid introducing bacteria-contaminated water to the cooling tower system. Condensate can also acquire heavy metals because of contact with cooling coils, and treatment to remove these heavy metals may be required. To limit this contamination cleaning, water should not enter the condensate capture system.
A map is available from FEMP that depicts the potential for condensate capture from air conditioning systems across the U.S. It shows an estimate of how much water can be collected and provides an initial assessment of the feasibility of implementing condensate capture from air conditioning systems at a given location.
Atmospheric Water Generation
Atmospheric water generation (AWG), also called “air water harvesting,” is where a device is used to extract water vapor directly from the air, in the form of humidity, by using condensation of cooling surfaces (as explained in the captured condensate section), desiccant capture, or gas separation using membrane technologies. Water is extracted from air via condensation or pressurization. As air passes over cooled coils or the pressure is increased, the moisture content changes from vapor to liquid, or “condenses,” which is then possible to capture and store for later use.
Temperature and humidity of a location will affect how much water can be extracted from the air. Other considerations include the costs and energy requirements of the systems. Colder, humid environments require more energy than warmer, humid conditions.
Makeup water for cooling towers can be an ideal use of AWG, similar to captured condensate. By nature, water originating from AWG is very pure with very low dissolved mineral content, which is ideal for cooling towers, but stored water can potentially grow bacteria during the storage phase, requiring disinfection to avoid introducing bacteria-contaminated water to the
cooling tower system. The AWG can be used in other nonpotable applications, depending on how much water can be collected. With the proper air filtration and water disinfection, AWG can produce potable water.
Water Purification System Discharge Water
Water purification systems, such as RO, remove impurities from a water supply for processes that require ultrapure water. Some of the water supplied to the system is purified, while the remaining water, containing the filtered impurities, is rejected from the system. The ratio of purified water to the total supply water is called the recovery rate. A common recovery rate of a water purification system is between 50 and 75 percent. This equates to 25 to 50 percent of the total water supplied being rejected, which can be a significant amount of water discharged from the system. Discharge water, or reject water, from these systems can be recovered and reused for nonpotable applications.
The discharge water will likely be high in dissolved solids since this is the end product of the water purification system, so it’s important to choose applications where elevated dissolved solids will not cause harm and are properly managed. Appropriate uses of discharge water are toilet and urinal flushing, cooling tower makeup water, irrigation, and vehicle wash. For cooling tower makeup, the total dissolved solids of the discharge water should be less than the solids set point of the cooling tower. If discharge water is used for landscape irrigation, the landscape plants should have a high tolerance for salinity.
Foundation Water
Buildings may have issues with water that collects around the foundation and basement/ crawlspaces from groundwater or drainage from stormwater runoff. This alternative water type is also referred to as “sump pump” water because the foundation water is typically pumped away from the foundation using a sump pump to
prevent flooding. This water normally goes directly into a storm or sewer system; however, it can be recovered and reused, similar to harvested stormwater. Applications for this water include toilet and urinal flushing, cooling tower makeup water, irrigation, and vehicle washing.
Blowdown Water
Blowdown water is water that is drained from cooling equipment and boilers to remove mineral buildup that develops during water evaporation cooling or steam production; as the water evaporates, the concentration of minerals increases, necessitating removal of minerals from the system. Systems that may require blowdown include cooling towers, evaporative condensers, evaporative coolers, evaporative cooled air conditioners, and central boilers. Blowdown water normally is discharged directly into the sewer system; however, it can be recovered and reused for other applications. Blowdown water may be used for irrigation, but there are some considerations to keep in mind. Blowdown water may have high levels of minerals that may not be appropriate for irrigation or could be diluted with another source of water before being used
for irrigation. Plant species that prefer acidic soils (e.g., pine trees) should not be watered with blowdown water. Other applications of blowdown water can be considered, but the high mineral content of the water may damage equipment by causing mineral buildup, so it might be necessary to dilute the water with another source.
Desalinated Water
Desalinated water is brackish water or seawater from which the dissolved minerals, salts, and other contaminants have been removed. Most desalination processes use either multistage flash or RO to remove the salts from the water. The multistage flash method rapidly boils the brackish water or seawater multiple times to collect the freshwater and remove the salts. The RO works by moving this at high pressure across a semipermeable membrane that the salts cannot pass through. The desalination process typically is designed to produce potable water, which can be used for drinking water or other applications that need high water quality (e.g., steam boilers). Desalination is costly because it consumes a large amount of energy and requires significant maintenance. In addition,
the process produces brine, a concentrated salt byproduct, that requires proper disposal.
Florida Noted for its Use of Alternative Water Supplies
During the past 20 years, Florida has been recognized as a national leader (along with California) in water reuse. According to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida uses approximately 769 mgd of reclaimed water for beneficial purposes, making it a leader in water reuse.
Florida’s seawater desalination plant in the Tampa Bay area is the largest such facility in North America. In addition to the use of seawater, more than 140 facilities use desalination technology to treat brackish water. Florida is also increasing its use of surface and stormwater as freshwater sources.
Still, these ongoing efforts alone will not meet the projected demand. More alternative supplies, as well as increased water conservation, are still needed for the state to continue its residential and commercial growth.
For more information go to www.epa.gov and www.energy.gov. S
FWEA FOCUS
Water Supply: Alternative (Nontraditional) Sources
AJoe Paterniti, P.E. President, FWEA
s we all know, Florida primarily relies on groundwater as its source of potable water. It’s reported that groundwater withdrawals are expected to level off as current sources reach their sustainable limit. Florida’s demand for clean, affordable water continues to grow and water supply planning is an essential process to meet the projected needs. Alternate
(nonconventional) water supplies are being developed to meet new demands.
Alternative water supplies include seawater, brackish groundwater, surface water, stormwater, reclaimed water, aquifer storage and recovery projects, and other nontraditional sources identified in a regional water supply plan (RWSP).
The RWSPs are updated every five years. These plans include two main components:
S Water supply development component. This considers how water conservation and alternative water supply sources are used to augment the traditional water supply sources.
S Water resource development component. This is where regional water resource management is formulated and implemented.
Without these planning efforts, the state’s water management districts are projecting that existing water sources are inadequate to meet Floridians’ reasonable-beneficial needs for the next 20 years.
In some cases, multijurisdictional plans are developed, such as those of the Central Florida Water Initiative and the North Florida Regional Water Supply Partnership. These collaborative planning processes ensure natural resource protection and sustainable water supplies.
Water Reuse
Beneficial use of reclaimed water, also known as reuse, has been utilized for several decades to offset the use of treated groundwater and surface water. The benefits of utilizing reclaimed water, where feasible, are reduced demands on Florida’s valuable surface and groundwater sources, elimination of surface water discharges, recharged groundwater, and deferring costly investment for the development of new water sources and supplies.
Direct Potable Water Reuse
Potable reuse takes this reuse source to the next level. Potable reuse is highly treated reclaimed water that can be used for drinking, cooking, and bathing. Recycled water in this fashion is part of the One Water Florida Plan developed in 2021 to educate stakeholders and Floridians on expanding the use of recycled water in the state to meet the growing water demand.
With input from the FWEA Utility Council (www.fweautilitycouncil.org), the Florida Department of Environmental Protection developed Chapter 62-565, F.A.C., to establish the following:
S Procedures to obtain a permit and construct, modify, operate, and maintain an advanced treatment water facility (ATWF).
S Requirements for monitoring and reporting once a permit for an ATWF is issued.
S Requirements for the proper operation of potable reuse systems.
Several utilities have developed pilot facilities to test treatment processes and train staff. The Clay County Utility Authority (CCUA), with the St. Johns River Water Management District, Carollo Engineers, and Wharton Smith, has commissioned our pilot facility and is collecting
operational data to confirm that the process produces water quality meeting and exceeding regulatory standards.
The CCUA evaluated two treatment process options: reverse osmosis- and carbon-based.
The evaluation included the ability of the process to meet treatment goals and a net present value cost of total ownership comparison. Results from the cost evaluation indicated that with smaller facilities (sizes below 3 million gallons per day) the carbon-based system has a clear cost advantage. Additionally, CCUA compared several additional considerations: operational complexity, operator safety, waste stream/water loss, and regulatory permeability.
The results of the evaluation led CCUA to construct a carbon-based pilot treatment facility. Wharton Smith completed the construction of the pilot facility in August 2024.
Carollo Engineers is providing operational support to CCUA staff. The facility is fully operational and is delivering high-quality potable water.
In addition to confirming that the process can reliably provide high-quality potable water, CCUA is utilizing the facility as an education center to gain public acceptance of the direct potable treatment process. The CCUA continues to provide access to other utilities to tour the facility and learn about the carbon-based treatment process.
Several field trips are scheduled with local public schools to teach students about the four parts of the water cycle, where our drinking water comes from, and how utilities treat wastewater.
This is just one example of how our industry identifies critical issues and develops innovative solutions to meet the growing demand for highquality drinking water.
The FWEA and our entire industry will continue to share this message to inspire the next generation of engineers, regulators, contractors, and water quality professionals. S
Clay County Utility Authority’s project quench pilot and educational facility. Carollo Engineers providing operational support.
JEA employees visiting the facility.
St. John’s County Utility employees visit the facility.
A school field trip at the facility.
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.
Know What’s Below and Connect to 811 Before You Dig!
You’ve seen these headlines before:
S For the second time in a week, the fire department had to evacuate residents.
S A construction crew ruptured a 2-inch gas line.
S 20,000 customers were out of phone service for 11 hours.
All of these instances involved someone digging into underground utilities.
Unfortunately, across the United States these types of incidents occur thousands of times every year because excavators or utility workers did not check with their local locating service, such as Dig Alert or One Call, ahead of time. Sometimes these digs result in serious injury or even death caused by fires, explosions, and electrocutions.
Remember also that it’s becoming more commonplace for many utilities to be laid in the same trench, so if you’re looking for your water lines, you may also find gas, electric, and communication lines.
Can You Dig It? Connect to 811
It’s easy to avoid digging into other utility lines. All it takes is a call to 811 (or
use the 811 website) from anywhere in the U.S. and you will automatically be connected to your local underground service operator.
The name of the service may change from community to community, but its function is
the same: to protect you, your coworkers, and the public.
It’s imperative that this call or website visit be made before beginning any excavation. It’s important, even for utilities, to use this service because as-built maps and charts are often inaccurate or out of date.
The Five Critical Steps to Safe Digging
Take these critical steps before digging and save time and money—and maybe a life.
Survey and Mark the Site
Survey the proposed excavation areas and mark the dig sites in paint or chalk.
Call or Go Online Before You Dig
Communicate with your local utility locator service before you begin any digging, including common projects like planting trees and shrubs or installing fencing or other posts. You’ll need to know the address of where you plan to dig, including the county and nearest cross streets; the type of project you’re completing; and the exact area on
Continued on page 58
The HUBER Multi-Rake Bar Screen RakeMax CF is an innovative variant of the well-proven RakeMax system with a center flow screen. The model impresses with its hydraulic throughput capacity by means of a U-shaped bar rack, even with small bar spacings and in narrow channels. It offers an optimal hydraulic utilization of existing channels and the screen is unsusceptible to grit, gravel, and stones. Due to its different design options, the RakeMax CF covers a wide range of applications, allowing the company to respond to the individual needs of customers and to specific constructional and hydraulic site conditions.
With thousands of installations all around the world, the product is already well established in the market due to its versatility. The bar rack is arranged in parallel to the flow direction of the wastewater. The solids retained on the bar rack lead to gradual blinding of the bar rack surface, which has an impact on the level difference in the channel.
Cleaning of the screen bars starts at a defined water level in the channel upstream of the screen. At the end of the bar rack cleaning cycle the cleaning elements are positively cleaned by a pivoted comb that reliably discharges the removed screenings into a downstream transport or disposal unit. The drive unit, easy to access and maintain, is installed above the channel. Due to the screen’s
Continued from page 56
the property where you’re planning to dig. Whether you call 811 or make your request online, you’ll need the same information.
Wait the Required Time
You usually have to allow two working days to have the lines located and marked. You need to wait to allow utilities to respond to your request and ensure that all utilities have indeed responded to you before breaking ground. The specific amount of advance notice that you’re required to provide varies by state. Once all utilities have marked their buried lines, you should dig carefully around any utility marks and consider relocating projects that are close to buried utilities.
Respect the Marks
Maintain the marks and follow them when digging. Make sure all of the workers are aware of the marks before any digging begins.
Dig With Care
Hand excavate within 24 inches of each
NEW PRODUCTS
compact design its height above the floor is very low.
The main benefits of the product include:
• Proven technology of two screen designs combined into one
• High hydraulic throughput capacity due to U-shaped bar rack
• No submerged moving parts
• Very little space required due to vertical installation makes it ideal for narrow spaces and deep channels
• Rake tines fully engaging with the bar rack
• Screen rake engaging above the bar rack/ water surface
• Increased separation efficiency through flow deflection in the bar rack
• An optionally integrable emergency overflow eliminates the need for an emergency bypass construction
This new development maintains the positive characteristics of the proven MultiRake Bar Screen RakeMax, such as high screenings discharge capacity due to a variable number of rake tines, automatic scraper device without use of process water, etc.
The RakeMax CF has successfully proven its functionality in daily operation over a long period of time in a large wastewater treatment plant. Due to positive experiences in practical operation it was possible to create
side of the lines. Make sure to always dig carefully around the marks, not on them. Some utility lines may be buried at a shallow depth, and an unintended shovel thrust can bring you right back to square one— facing potentially costly and/or dangerous consequences. Don’t forget that erosion or root structure growth may shift the locations of the utility lines, so remember to check again each time you are planning a digging job.
Resources
For more information about specific requirements by state check out the Common Ground Alliance website at www.call811.com.
It’s easy to connect before work begins. If you hit an underground utility line, you—and others—could be hurt or killed. You may also be liable to the other utilities for costly damages and lost service.
So be safe and check before you dig! S
and implement another innovation in the field of mechanical wastewater treatment. (www. huber.com)
R
The Lovibond TB 350 WL portable turbidimeter offers simplistic operation combined with intelligent instrument engineering to provide an unparalleled level of accuracy in turbidity measurement. Ideal for field and environmental testing, this instrument delivers the most reliable measurements for low- to high-range samples without sacrificing accuracy. Featuring the patent-pending Multipath 90-degree BLAC sensor technology, the optical system is engineered with dual detectors to deliver a ratio reading that mitigates common measurement stability issues. The intuitive, touchscreen interface makes it easy to perform procedures and interpret results. This user interface helps eliminate common frustrations and prevents errors. The data logging capabilities allow recording of the testing location, operator’s identification, and time and date, along with the measurement. Stored data can be transferred to a computer via USB. It’s EPA-compliant for reporting purposes, and all units are supplied ready-to-use with sample cells, silicone oil, and calibration standards in the carrying case. (www.lovibond.com) S
JEA is hiring dedicated professionals to operate a state-of-the art membrane purification facility as part of JEA’s H2.O Purification Program.
Be a part of Florida’s operational history by joining our team today.
Please visit www.jea.com/careers and look for Advanced Treatment Water Facility (ATWF) positions for more details.
WHY Choose US
• Top-tier Operator Pay Scale
• Excellent Benefits
• Advancement Opportunities
• Award-winning Facilities and Operations Team
THE Center
JEA is constructing a 1.0 MGD membrane-based Advanced Treatment Water facility as part of the H2.O Purification Program. “The Center” is designed to exceed water quality goals needed for aquifer replenishment. Operational processes include membrane filtration, reverse osmosis and UV advanced oxidation.
CLASSIFIED
ADVERTISING RATES
C L A S S I F I E D S
- Classified ads are $22 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. ads@fwrj.com
POSITIONS AVAILABLE
Water Treatment Plant Operators
The Water Treatment Plant at the Village of Wellington is currently accepting applications for a full-time WATER OPERATOR and an INSTRUMENT TECH/OPERATOR positions. Apply online. Job postings and applications are available on our website: https://wellingtonfl.munisselfservice.com/employees/ EmploymentOpportunities/
We are located in Palm Beach County, Florida. The Village of Wellington offers great benefits. For further information, call Human Resources at (561) 753-2585.
City of Wildwood – Utilities Engineer
Looking to enjoy sunshine and green grass 12 months a year? The City of Wildwood, Florida is searching for a Utilities Engineer to manage our municipal utility engineering projects. PE or EIT certification preferred plus 5 years experience. Salary range: $89,900 – $98,800. Please apply online at www.wildwood-fl.gov or contact Marc Correnti at mcorrenti@wildwood-fl.gov
Wastewater Operator
The City of Leesburg is currently accepting applications for fulltime licensed WASTEWATER OPERATORS.
Wastewater Operator C – $20.33-$29.48 per hour
Wastewater Operator B – $21.99-$31.89 per hour
Wastewater Operator A – $24.73-$35.88 per hour
** All interested applicants must complete an employment application to be considered for the position. You may apply online at https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/leesburgflorida **
Utilities Field Tech Trainee or Utilities Field Tech I
$40,352/yr or $42,452 – $46,862/yr
Apply Online At: https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/davie Open until filled.
Performs professional engineering work coordinating, planning, developing, drafting, reviewing, inspecting, and managing assigned water, wastewater, and reclaimed water projects.
REQUIREMENTS: Bachelor’s or Master’s degree in, Environmental Engineering or Civil Engineering from an Accredited Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET) accredited college or university.
Engineer III: Five (5) years of professional experience in engineering related to water and wastewater and which includes two (2) years of post-registration experience.
Engineer II: Five (5) years of experience in engineering related to water and wastewater.
Engineer I: A Board of Professional Engineers (BPE) Certification as an Engineer Intern (EI) or Engineer in Training (EIT) is preferred.
Apply at https://career8.successfactors.com/ career?company=brevardcou
Water Chief Operator Sr. Operations Specialist
Orange County Government is an employer of choice, embracing innovation, collaboration and inclusion. Orange County shines as a place to both live and work, with an abundance of world class golf courses, lakes, miles of trails and year-round sunshine - all with the sparkling backdrop of nightly fireworks from world-famous tourist attractions. Orange County continues to build a thriving economy and a welcoming community that works for everyone.
Orange County Utilities is one of the largest utility service providers in Florida and has been recognized nationally and locally for outstanding operations, efficiencies, innovations, education programs and customer focus. We provide water, wastewater, and reclaimed water services to a population of over 800,000 citizens; operate the largest publicly owned landfill in the state; and manage in excess of a billion dollars of infrastructure assets. Our focus is on excellent quality, customer service, innovation, sustainability, and a commitment to employee development. Join us to find more than a job - find a career.
The Water Division is seeking a highly qualified individual to fill the position of “Water Chief Operator” (Sr. Operations Specialist). This position is responsible for:
· Leading day-to-day water production;
· Troubleshooting operational problems using available data;
· Following the proper course of action to meet plant operating objectives;
· Providing leadership to staff;
· Coordinating, directing, and training operation staff to achieve efficient operations in compliance with environmental regulations;
· Responding immediately to emergency situations to correct operating problems during normal work hours, after-hours, and on call; and
· Protecting the environment and public health through monitoring and attention to process operations.
This position may also assist with budget recommendations, and is responsible for meeting budget objectives and approving minor budget expenditures. Work requires a great deal of independent judgement under the general supervision of a designated supervisor.
Chief Operator (Sr. Operations Specialist), Water Division Annual Salary
$58,656 Min - $93,808 Max
Starting salary of external candidates is based on qualifications.
Apply online at: http://www.ocfl.net/careers
Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority
– Job Opportunities
The Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority (Authority) is a regional public water supplier that currently provides 30 million gallons of wholesale drinking water per day to approximately 1,000,000 people in a rapidly growing region of southwest Florida. We have the following openings:
Water Treatment Plant Operator A, B, C or Trainee
Project Manager I, II or III, depending on qualifications and experience Project Engineer I, II or III, depending on qualifications and experience
To learn more details about these positions or to apply, visit regionalwater.org/careers.
Januar y 2016 Januar y 2016
Editorial Calendar
January
February
March
Efficiency; Environmental Stewardship
April ............. Conservation and Reuse
May .............. Operations and Utilities Management
June ............. Biosolids Management and Bioenergy Production
July .............. Stormwater Management; Emerging Technologies
August ......... Disinfection; Water Quality
September... Emerging Issues; Water Resources Management
October ....... New Facilities, Expansions, and Upgrades
November.... Water Treatment
December .... Distribution and Collection
Technical articles are usually scheduled several months in advance and are due 60 days before the issue month (for example, January 1 for the March issue).
The closing date for display ad and directory card reservations, notices, announcements, upcoming events, and everything else including classified ads, is 30 days before the issue month (for example, September 1 for the October issue).
For further information on submittal requirements, guidelines for writers, advertising rates and conditions, and ad dimensions, as well as the most recent notices, announcements, and classified advertisements, go to www.fwrj.com or call 352-241-6006.
Test Yourself Answer Key
Continued from page 43
1. C) secondary sludge.
The bacterial cells that are removed from the wastewater process stream are called secondary sludge.
2. A) 75 to 80 percent volatile matter. In general, secondary sludges consist of 75 to 80 percent volatile matter.
3. A) biosolids.
Solids that are produced within a wastewater treatment plant that are suitable for some beneficial use may be referred as biosolids.
4. D) all of the above.
The quantity of primary sludge generated within a wastewater treatment facility depends on the concentration of the influent settable suspended solids, the influent wastewater flow, and the efficiency of the primary sedimentation basin.
5. B) 0.30 to 0.70 pound of new bacterial cells is produced. In general, for every pound of organic matter oxidized by the bacterial cells 0.30 to 0.70 pound of new bacterial cells is produced.
6. D) all of the above.
The quantity of secondary sludge produced within a wastewater treatment facility depends on the influent organic load, the removal efficiency of removing organic matter, and the influent flow to the biological system.
7. D) filtration.
The sludge process responsible for thickening the sludge is filtration.
8. A) thickening.
The process by which water is removed from the sludge mass is thickening.
9. C) dewatering.
The process by which sludge moisture and volume is reduced to allow economical disposal is dewatering.
10. C) stabilization
The process by which the odorcausing portion of sludge solids is converted to nonordorous end products is stabilization.
The Flygt 4320 submersible mixer’s revolutionary design couples a high-efficiency mixer with an integrated variable frequency eliminates the need for an external VFD. A variety of ratings and propeller options meet a broad range of thrust requirements.
Premium Efficiency IE4 levels and fully adjustable speed, the Flygt 4320 delivers the lowest life cycle mixing energy costs.
Superior mixing with adjustability and simplicity, for unsurpassed energy savings.
For more information contact your local Xylem product sales professional. Xylem Products 455 Harvest Time Dr. Sanford, FL 32771 407-880 -2900
